Yes, not sure about Ganguly but certainly remember reading about Tendulkar going there to which Lillee gave him the priceless advice to concentrate on his batting. This being said, Tendulkar does occasionally amaze me by producing some tremendously late swing both ways.

On the topic of the MRF Pace Foundation, it truly is a same that the BCCI have not made it an official organisation because the MRF Pace Foundation have offered many times and even in its current unofficial position, it still holds a place as the conveyor belt of Indian 'fast' bowlers.

Gillespie's lack of pace has been his main failing, along with continually bowling too short for English pitches. He's economic, but just not threatening. Hasn't taken more than three wickets in an innings over here since the 2006 season

In his early days with Australia he was quick.

I was talking about recently

Since Gibson took over I have noticed that Broad and Anderson have been bowling faster. Broad's top speed was about 88 but in these ODIs at least half a dozen times a match he has reached 90mph. Anderson has also been reaching 92-93 about two or three times a match. In previous years his fastest was 92 which I had only seen about once. Last year he might have reached 90 about once or twice.

I wonder if Gibson has tightened up their actions. Sidebottom I hear didn't bowl fast in county cricket because there was so much of it. Just restricted to England bowling he has been able to bowl faster and has reached 90 a couple of times but I wonder if that has caused his two side strains that he has had especially if he hasn't been used to it. Then there is Tremlett who used to bowl about 85 who is also much faster and he reaches 90 as well.

Also we have the commentators saying that Wright is a medium pacer when he bowls at 85 and can get up to 88.

Or maybe Ian Pont's been busy since his brief time here!

I wouldn't trust those speed measurements 100%...it also depends on the length that a bowler will bowl. 88mph full is quicker than 88mph short.

Interesting article on bowling

http://content-www.cricinfo.com/ci/c...ry/140418.html

and Brett Lee on bowling fast

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2002...icket.features

Hey! This is indeed very interesting!

I have done a recount on no balls.

Flintoff 317 no balls (68 Tests)
Hoggard 214 (67)
Harmison 119 (57)
Anderson 7 (27)
Jones 43 (18)
Sidebottom 7 (17)
Plunkett 28 (9)
Mahmood 6 (8)

That's 53 extra overs Flintoff has had to bowl because of his no balls.

How many miles would he have bowled (not counting his no balls). Say he runs in 20 yards x 20,023 (first class balls) = 227.5 miles.

Caddick 648 miles. :)

Flintoff is an all-rounder, you'd need to add in the miles he's run between the wickets as well.

:D

Add another 106 miles to that then.

When selecting a new bowler there is hope that the bowler will be fairly injury free and play for 10 years or more and get 400+ wickets. Even though Australia select their batsmen in the late twenties early thirties their bowlers have been much younger. That looks like it might change with Clark, and if Bollinger and Noffke get their chances. Clark is 33 and has 82 wickets. His career average is 22.06 but the last 3 matches it's 38.33. It is unlikely that he will reach 200 wickets.

Some bowlers retire and some are retired by the selectors. Pollock probably had another two years but SA had a number of young promising bowlers and wanted Pollock as a reserve if there were injuries so he retired. Caddick would have still been bowling if he hadn't been dropped. Gough came back too early from a knee injury, and would have had a much longer career but for injuries. I can't see Harmison going on until he is 38. I think he will probably retire before he is 33. So as a selector do you pick a promising young bowler in their early twenties for someone in their thirties who is the finished article. Morkel or Clark? Sharma or Sidebottom? Either could get injuries. Nearly all of the bowlers below were picked young.

When did they retire?

Ambrose - Debut 24-37
98 Tests - Career average 20.99
Last 10 Tests - 36 wickets at 17.66

Walsh - Debut 22 - 38
132 Tests - Career average 24.44
Last 10 Tests - 36 wickets at 27.02

Donald - Debut 25 - 35
72 Tests - Career average 22.25
Last 10 Tests - 33 wickets at 28.15

Pollock - Debut 22 - 34
108 Tests - Career average 23.11
Last 10 Tests - 34 wickets at 24.73

Akram - Debut 18 - 35
104 Tests - Career average 23.62
Last 10 Tests - 27 wickets at 28.44

Younis - Debut 20 - 33
87 Tests - Career average 23.56
Last 10 Tests - 25 at 35.20

McGrath - Debut 23 - 36
124 Tests - Career average 21.64
Last 10 Tests - 38 wickets at 26.78

Lillee - Debut 21 - 34
70 Tests - Career average 23.92
Last 10 Tests - 34 wickets at 32.58

Gough - Debut 23 - 32
58 Tests - Career average 28.39
Last 10 Tests - 37 wickets at 32.64

Willis - Debut 21 - 35
90 Tests - Career average 25.20
Last 10 Tests - 34 wickets at 27.14

Hadlee - Debut 21 - 39
86 Tests - Career average 22.29
Last 10 Tests - 43 wickets at 25.11

Srinath - Debut 22 - 38
67 Tests - Career average 30.49
Last 10 Tests - 20 wickets at 40.95

Ambrose is the only one who seems to have been getting better in his last 10 tests.

Ambrose left in Aug 00 probably wanted to spend more time with his band and Walsh April 01 who must have missed his bowling partner. They were a fantastic pair of bowlers.

Waqar Younis's last few tests were rather sad to watch. By this stage he had lost a heck of a lot of pace and a slightly round arm slingy action meant he wasn't going to get a lot of bounce once his pace departed and that his reverse swingers would swing rather earlier and slower in flight. All other bowlers apart from Srinath, whose decline was accelerated as a result of having very little pace support at the other end for much of his career actually stand up reasonably well in terms of value up until the end.

It was sad to see Goughy's last couple of tests, he ended up with a respectable career average, but it would have been around 27 if he hadn't played those last two tests, high class.

You pick whichever of the two is likely to get the most wickets in the match you are selecting for.

How do you tell if both of them haven't played Test cricket before? It's hard to tell even from the established bowlers who will get the most wickets in a Test. A new bowler might not get the wickets in the match they are being selected for but that could change in the next Tests. I think you have to look further than the one match and maybe look at the series. .

Australia have decided on the younger Siddle to the more experienced Bollinger. Siddle took 2 wickets at 52.50 in a warm up game. Probably chosen because Bollinger hadn't had any match practice. At one stage there was talk that Johnson's place was in doubt and that Bollinger would take it but it was Siddle that got the warm up game.

The rationale may have been that Siddle isn't rubbish and Bollinger is.

Bowlers on debut Test getting Tendulkar's wicket. Tendulkar as their first wicket in bold.

Younis - Nov 89
Williams - Aug 90
Reiffel - Feb 92
Ranchod - Mar 93
Kalpage - Jul 93
Ealham - July 96
Rose - Mar 97
Dale - Mar 98
Johnson - Oct 98
Johnson - Oct 98
Rahman - Nov 00 (14 players made their debut in this Test :cheesy: )
Lawson - Oct 02
Oram - Dec 02
Hauritz - Nov 04
Panesar - Mar 06
Harris - Jan 07
Prasad - Aug 08
White - Oct 08
Siddle - Oct 08