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 30th July 2015, 17:34   #21
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,946
The only thing other than the three other things? Very good.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th July 2015, 17:59   #22
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,073
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
The only thing other than the three other things? Very good.
I think upswing and downswing are generally unpredictable and usually negligible; hard to do deliberately with a normal bowling action. I only mentioned them because I used to imagine that Malinga might be a proponent of those kinds of swing more naturally than he would be of inswing and outswing; but that would be at the expense of a good deal of release-point height. So if we think about a ball pitching in a certain place, it's really only the height of the delivery point that can affect the angle of incidence. But as you say, that effect would seem to be negligible in relative terms. Perhaps part of the reason why tall bowlers seem to get more bounce off the same length delivery is because the release occurs at a point slightly further through the action, so there is a bit more backspin on the ball. Longer fingers and a longer distance between wrist and fingertip would make a difference there too. In any case, I don't think it's a myth that taller bowlers tend to get more bounce from the same length (and speed) of delivery. That may not be what you were talking about, though. How tall are you, incidentally, if you don't mind my asking?
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th July 2015, 18:17   #23
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,946
If one imagines a right-angled triangle with one side representing the height from which the ball is delivered, the base being the horizontal distance covered by the ball before it pitches and the hypotenuse being the approximate path of the ball in flight, in terms of the angle at which the ball hits the pitch, the horizontal length of the base of the triangle tends to make a few inches added to the shortest side of the triangle fairly insignificant.

4 foot 3.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th July 2015, 18:22   #24
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,285
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
If one imagines a right-angled triangle with one side representing the height from which the ball is delivered, the base being the horizontal distance covered by the ball before it pitches and the hypotenuse being the approximate path of the ball in flight, in terms of the angle at which the ball hits the pitch, the horizontal length of the base of the triangle tends to make a few inches added to the shortest side of the triangle fairly insignificant.

4 foot 3.
Sum up fairly insignificant mathematically for us? Only the difference in angle of incidence doesn't need to be very great when a cm or so in the bounce can be the difference between nailing a pull shot and top edging it to deep backward square.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th July 2015, 18:28   #25
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,946
True, but the same bowler will achieve that sort of variation. The discussion, of course, has been about bowlers of different heights seemingly getting consistently and significantly different degrees of bounce and the theory that this is due primarily to those differences.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th July 2015, 20:07   #26
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,073
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
True, but the same bowler will achieve that sort of variation. The discussion, of course, has been about bowlers of different heights seemingly getting consistently and significantly different degrees of bounce and the theory that this is due primarily to those differences.
So what's your position? Is it that because you can't imagine that the extra height of the bowler makes the angle of incidence significantly greater, it must be a myth that taller bowlers generally get more bounce?
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 01:21   #27
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 17,059
How much is it to do with actual trajectory compared to release point and perception by the batsman?
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 01:44   #28
slop
Posting God
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cambridge
Team(s): South Africa
Age: 41
Posts: 18,805
Morkel's length deliveries bounce higher than other bowlers, meaning he gets fewer lbw decisions and has to bowl fuller to make them play. That can't just be batsman's perception.
slop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 08:08   #29
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 17,059
Very true, but I'm not arguing height makes no difference to trajectory.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 10:05   #30
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,946
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
Very true, but I'm not arguing height makes no difference to trajectory.
Neither am I. I'm saying height makes little difference to the angle at which the ball hits the wicket; far less, certainly, than the pundits would have us believe when they characterise tall and shorter bowlers as "bouncy" and "skiddy".

It only takes a basic understanding of trigonometry to realise this.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 10:21   #31
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,073
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
Neither am I. I'm saying height makes little difference to the angle at which the ball hits the wicket; far less, certainly, than the pundits would have us believe when they characterise tall and shorter bowlers as "bouncy" and "skiddy".

It only takes a basic understanding of trigonometry to realise this.
Congratulations on your brilliant mastery of elementary trigonometry. You are truly a beacon unto the nations. Surely, though, the alleged bounce has to do with the angle at which the ball comes OFF the wicket?
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 11:47   #32
Summer of '77
World Class
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 7,721
I paid next to no attention to Maths at school, despite being placed in the O Level class. But I think I might have the gist of this. Essentially, if the length of trajectory is around 20 yards, then a few inches' height at the point of the delivery can't make much difference - the initial advantage is 'flattened out' over the course of the 20 odd yards. A profound difference would only arise from the point of delivery being substantially raised to, say, 18 feet, or the length of the pitch being reduced considerably. Have I got that right?
Summer of '77 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 12:16   #33
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,946
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
Congratulations on your brilliant mastery of elementary trigonometry. You are truly a beacon unto the nations. Surely, though, the alleged bounce has to do with the angle at which the ball comes OFF the wicket?
Caused, of course, by the angle of incidence. Do try to keep up.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 12:17   #34
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,946
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summer of '77 View Post
I paid next to no attention to Maths at school, despite being placed in the O Level class. But I think I might have the gist of this. Essentially, if the length of trajectory is around 20 yards, then a few inches' height at the point of the delivery can't make much difference - the initial advantage is 'flattened out' over the course of the 20 odd yards. A profound difference would only arise from the point of delivery being substantially raised to, say, 18 feet, or the length of the pitch being reduced considerably. Have I got that right?
Yep, that's pretty much it.

Good to see some getting a grasp of it!
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 12:54   #35
draexem
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 981
Unfortunately no. Two things Summer of '77 has forgotten - firstly it's the height + the arm height. And so a tall person with a high point of delivery will frequently have a release point of over a foot higher than a shorter person with a lower point of delivery (ideal for swing.) And secondly, comparative to the length of the pitch, deviations only need to be minor at the point of the batsman to have a profound effect. But Ambrose, and McGrath, could get a foot worth of deviation difference than other skiddier bowlers quite easily.

Back on the subject at hand, I really don't care how economical Wood is, or how much dosh Finn bowls, the difference between the 2 bowlers is this: Finn is an out and out wicket taker and that's something you can neither train or buy. Pretty impressive talent, he needs to be in the test team really.
draexem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 13:02   #36
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,946
Not sure I understand what is meant by "deviations only need to be minor at the point of the batsman". Perhaps it is being claimed that a minor difference in the angle of incidence produces a more major one in the angle of bounce which is clearly impossible.

Also, of course, we are dealing with other things being equal, including the actions of the bowlers, so there was no misunderstanding on the part of So77.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 13:06   #37
draexem
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 981
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
Not sure I understand what is meant by "deviations only need to be minor at the point of the batsman". Perhaps it is being claimed that a minor difference in the angle of incidence produces a more major one in the angle of bounce which is clearly impossible.
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.
draexem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 13:13   #38
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,946
Again, "batsman less than 6 feet" is rather confusing. It's difficult to take seriously a claim that someone else has misunderstood something if the person making it doesn't clearly explain why.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 13:20   #39
draexem
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 981
It's really very simple, nothing exists in a vacuum. The idea of 'substantial' bounce, or to put it in your words 'significant' deviations in bounce means absolutely nothing without relating it to something of important. 'Significant degrees' of anything is meaningless when put out by itself.

The ball does have to travel a long way, true, which means the difference between angles of McGrath and say someone like Malinga to be insignificant if comparing with some rather arbitrarily large values you pluck from nowhere. But when you consider the guy down the other end is usually shorter than 6 foot (a very small target comparitive to the length the ball is travelling,) and when you take into consideration that variations in deliveries any wider than a cricket bat cause batsman significant strife, then it becomes clear that the difference in angle the ball hits the pitch at only needs to vary by a very small margin to consistently cause strife to the batsman at the other end.

McGrath could probably get balls to bounce 2 foot higher than Malinga could, which would only need a small difference in angle, but that's an incredibly different amount of bounce at the batting end. Probably a third of the batsman's height.
draexem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2015, 13:34   #40
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,946
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.
D/L 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 10:30.



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