Cricket 24/7  

Welcome to the Cricket 24/7.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. There are also more forums available to members, such as the Lounge - where members chat about just about anything under the sun except cricket!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   Cricket 24/7 > Cricket Discussion Forums > England
Register FAQDonate Members List Calendar Casino Articles Terms of Use Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 31st July 2015, 12:36   #41
draexem
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 981
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
A 2 foot higher bounce with only a small difference in angle?

You cannot be serious.

I'll stick with what dynamics and trigonometry tell us.
Considering the length the ball travels, and depending on where the ball pitches, it's nothing too special. Also recall Malinga had a very slingy action, whereas McGrath releases very high, so some estimates put that at about a 2 foot difference in release point to start.

Basic trigonometry will back up everything I say.
draexem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 12:39   #42
Summer of '77
Legendary
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 8,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by draexem View Post
No. I'm saying only a minor difference at the angle of incidence is needed to have a profound effect on a batsman less than 6 feet when the ball is travelling 22 yards.

And no, we're not dealing with "things being equal." So once again, there's a misunderstanding in SOL's post.
'SOL"? have you turned me into 'Summer of Love' or summat? Outrageous.
Summer of '77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 12:41   #43
draexem
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summer of '77 View Post
'SOL"? have you turned me into 'Summer of Love' or summat? Outrageous.
Oh dear, what have I done :P
draexem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 12:44   #44
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 7,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by draexem View Post
Considering the length the ball travels, and depending on where the ball pitches, it's nothing too special. Also recall Malinga had a very slingy action, whereas McGrath releases very high, so some estimates put that at about a 2 foot difference in release point to start.

Basic trigonometry will back up everything I say.
"Nothing too special" has a little less meaning than my use of "significant", which you took issue with, I reckon.

The trigonometry of it all is s a fairly simple concept which you seem to rather over-complicate and to which you add a few "red herrings", dare I say?
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 12:44   #45
Summer of '77
Legendary
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 8,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by draexem View Post
Oh dear, what have I done :P
You've lumped me in with filthy bearded types.

Which reminds me, is Lyon out yet?
Summer of '77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 12:48   #46
draexem
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summer of '77 View Post
Which reminds me, is Lyon out yet?


Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
The trigonometry of it all is s a fairly simple concept which you seem to rather over-complicate and to which you add a few "red herrings", dare I say?
Just the recognition of real world concerns. Applied science you could call it. It's fairly silly to argue that a small angle of incidence matters overly when deviations of inches are pretty substantial to the batsman actually facing the ball.
draexem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 12:53   #47
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 7,640
That was not the argument, though. The point made was that the height from which the ball is delivered is far from the most significant factor in the bounce achieved.

You seem to be discussing a different matter.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 12:55   #48
draexem
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 981
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
That was not the argument, though. The point made was that the height from which the ball is delivered is far from the most significant factor in the bounce achieved.
And considering I've shown that height does matter, and you have yet to show that pace matters equally, height is clearly in the lead :P

But this is all redundant. If you had watched Tait and McGrath bowl, Tait who bowled at 160 k's but had a very slingy action and McGrath who was old at the time and bowled considerably slower, you would know the answer.
draexem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 13:05   #49
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 7,640
Best leave you to discuss your own topic with yourself.

Perhaps someone else will address the original one.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 13:09   #50
slowest_bowler
Established International
 
slowest_bowler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Notts, England
Posts: 3,400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summer of '77 View Post
You've lumped me in with filthy bearded types.

Which reminds me, is Lyon out yet?
Excuse me! I am bearded but clean. I had a shower this morning.
__________________
"The essential ingredient of our success. The strength and support of 65 million people willing us to make it happen." Our PM ignoring the 48% as usual, despite having supposedly been one of them.
slowest_bowler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 13:24   #51
slowest_bowler
Established International
 
slowest_bowler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Notts, England
Posts: 3,400
Supposing the ball pitches two thirds of the way down the pitch, and is not spinning at all. If the ball collides perfectly elastically with the pitch, the height of the ball when it reaches the batsman's crease will be half the height at which it was released. Thus releasing the ball a foot higher will result in the ball reaching the batsman's crease 6 inches higher. If that's not significant to a batsman facing a fast bowler, I don't know what is.

Of course there's a lot more to it than the very simplistic assumptions I have used. Where the ball pitches makes a lot of difference, as does the behaviour of the pitch. What the batsman has to do is to judge how high the ball will bounce based on his observation of the length; this isn't easy, especially when facing an exceptionally tall bowler.
__________________
"The essential ingredient of our success. The strength and support of 65 million people willing us to make it happen." Our PM ignoring the 48% as usual, despite having supposedly been one of them.
slowest_bowler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 13:28   #52
draexem
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 981
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowest_bowler View Post
Supposing the ball pitches two thirds of the way down the pitch, and is not spinning at all. If the ball collides perfectly elastically with the pitch, the height of the ball when it reaches the batsman's crease will be half the height at which it was released. Thus releasing the ball a foot higher will result in the ball reaching the batsman's crease 6 inches higher. If that's not significant to a batsman facing a fast bowler, I don't know what is.
Indeed. And if you look at the difference between McGrath and Malinga, it was estimated that McGrath brought the ball down from 7.5 feet and Maling 5.5 feet. Now assuming fairly ideal conditions, if they bowled short of a good length (say 9 yards from the stumps, a good length being from 6 to 8) there would be a 22 inch difference upon arrival at the batsman. Practically 2 feet. That's enormous.
draexem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 13:32   #53
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 18,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
A 2 foot higher bounce with only a small difference in angle?

You cannot be serious.

I'll stick with what dynamics and trigonometry tell us.
Fine, except you've not actually said what they tell us but an assumption based upon what you think they tell us.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 13:34   #54
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by draexem View Post
Indeed. And if you look at the difference between McGrath and Malinga, it was estimated that McGrath brought the ball down from 7.5 feet and Maling 5.5 feet. Now assuming fairly ideal conditions, if they bowled short of a good length (say 9 yards from the stumps, a good length being from 6 to 8) there would be a 22 inch difference upon arrival at the batsman. Practically 2 feet. That's enormous.
While this is probably all true, you are making a couple of extremely basic errors in your reasoning: firstly that DL is trying to say anything that has any interest in a cricketing context as he appears to have just admitted that he isn't and secondly that when he claimed that a bowler's height didn't make a significant difference to the angle at which the ball struck the wicket, he meant to use the word significant to mean a significant effect in his head as opposed to having a significant effect on the game of cricket.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 13:57   #55
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
Caused, of course, by the angle of incidence. Do try to keep up.
I think that's only one of several factors. In any case, I don't have any intention of trying to keep up with you, since you seem concerned only to make the same point again and again in an unbearably patronising fashion, while the discussion proceeds apace all around you. As I actually have an interest in the topic under discussion rather than seeking to use it as a flimsy pretext for asserting my superiority, forgive me if I reach for the "ignore" function. Can anyone remind me how that works?
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 14:16   #56
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
I think that's only one of several factors. In any case, I don't have any intention of trying to keep up with you, since you seem concerned only to make the same point again and again in an unbearably patronising fashion, while the discussion proceeds apace all around you. As I actually have an interest in the topic under discussion rather than seeking to use it as a flimsy pretext for asserting my superiority, forgive me if I reach for the "ignore" function. Can anyone remind me how that works?
Do you not find the comedy of the inverse correlation between the grasp of the subject and the degree of the patronisation diverting? If not, click on his name and there's a set of options just under his name and which thread he's viewing, in the middle of the blue bar that includes ignore.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 14:25   #57
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 7,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
I think that's only one of several factors. In any case, I don't have any intention of trying to keep up with you, since you seem concerned only to make the same point again and again in an unbearably patronising fashion, while the discussion proceeds apace all around you. As I actually have an interest in the topic under discussion rather than seeking to use it as a flimsy pretext for asserting my superiority, forgive me if I reach for the "ignore" function. Can anyone remind me how that works?
You're forgiven. It's not something I'd use myself, so I suppose I'll still be seeing some of your sanctimonious twaddle from time to time.

I see the board's resident fantasist has chipped in too. It was only a matter of time, I suppose.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 14:30   #58
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
Do you not find the comedy of the inverse correlation between the grasp of the subject and the degree of the patronisation diverting? If not, click on his name and there's a set of options just under his name and which thread he's viewing, in the middle of the blue bar that includes ignore.
Many thanks. I wanted to check, as I thought that that was what Slop had said a while ago, but I hadn't been able to do it that way. I still can't, for some reason (there's a buddy list option, but I don't want that), but I've done it another way by going through "User CP" at the top left of the page.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 15:00   #59
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
Many thanks. I wanted to check, as I thought that that was what Slop had said a while ago, but I hadn't been able to do it that way. I still can't, for some reason (there's a buddy list option, but I don't want that), but I've done it another way by going through "User CP" at the top left of the page.
Sorry, forgot to mention you need to select public profile. You'll know next time, when you decide to ignore me.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 15:07   #60
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
Sorry, forgot to mention you need to select public profile. You'll know next time, when you decide to ignore me.
I was doing that already, wasn't I? Over and out ...
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:36.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Cricket247.org