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 > International Cricket
Register FAQDonate Members List Calendar Casino Articles Terms of Use Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 14th August 2015, 19:40   #961
slop
Posting God
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cambridge
Team(s): South Africa
Age: 42
Posts: 18,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1000yardstare View Post
Do bowlers wickets tail off as they get older?
Not as a simple correlation. They'll improve until peak, then you'd expect them to maintain, then drop. 32/33 is usually where it tails off for a fast bowler. There will be exceptions. But Pollock and Donald for example finished by around 34.
slop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th August 2015, 15:17   #962
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 852 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 16
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,214
Test bowling averages at 31 July 16

2 Tests - 4 wickets at 14.50 econ 2.55 s/r 34.0 - Rahman (20)
1 Test - 3 wickets at 15.33 econ 3.53 s/r 26.0 - Shanaka (24)
1 Test - 6 wickets at 16.33 econ 3.54 s/r 27.6 - Faulkner (26)
32 Tests - 126 wickets at 22.08 econ 2.75 s/r 48.1 - Philander (31)
82 Tests - 406 wickets at 22.53 econ 3.23 s/r 41.7 - Steyn (33)
6 Tests - 24 wickets at 24.70 econ 3.73 s/r 39.6 - Rabada (21)
18 Tests - 75 wickets at 25.12 econ 3.01 s/r 49.9 - Hazelwood (25)
5 Tests - 21 wickets at 25.28 econ 3.19 s/r 47.5 - Bird (29)
7 Tests - 21 wickets at 25.57 econ 2.59 s/r 59.1 - Abbott (29)
10 Tests - 34 wickets at 25.58 econ 3.09 s/r 49.6 - Woakes (27)
17 Tests - 70 wickets at 26.15 econ 3.35 s/r 46.8 - Pattinson (26)
9 Tests - 31 wickets at 26.22 econ 2.58 s/r 60.9 - Panyangara (30)
5 Tests - 21 wickets at 27.28 econ 3.98 s/r 41.0 - Chameera (24)
7 Tests - 20 wickets at 28.10 econ 3.22 s/r 52.3 - I Khan (29)
117 Tests - 458 wickets at 28.23 econ 2.99 s/r 56.6 - Anderson (34)
96 Tests - 352 wickets at 28.42 econ 3.01 s/r 56.4 - Broad (30)
40 Tests - 151 wickets at 28.87 econ 2.99 s/r 57.7 - Boult (27)
7 Tests - 20 wickets at 29.25 econ 2.42 s/r 72.3 - Chatara (25)
71 Tests - 242 wickets at 29.33 econ 3.12 s/r 56.3 - Morkel (31)
33 Tests - 120 wickets at 29.40 econ 3.57 s/r 49.3 - Finn (27)
61 Tests - 208 wickets at 29.88 econ 2.93 s/r 61.1 - Siddle (31)
26 Tsts - 97 wickets at 30.08 econ 3.45 s/r 52.2 - Starc (26)
16 Tests - 57 wickets at 30.17 econ 3.10 s/r 58.2 - Amir (24)
37 Tests - 122 wickets at 30.23 econ 3.26 s/r 55.5 - Roach (28)
20 Tests - 82 wickets at 30.52 econ 3.40 s/r 53.7 - Wagner (30)
22 Tests - 71 wickets at 31.73 econ 2.93 s/r 64.8 - JKhan (26)
49 Tests - 170 wickets at 31.92 econ 3.05 s/r 62.7 - Southee (27)
5 Tests - 16 wickets at 32.18 econ 2.92 s/r 66.0 - SMasakadza (29)
23 Tests - 72 wickets at 32.73 econ 3.02 s/r 64.9 - Bresnan (29)
14 Tests - 53 wickets at 34.22 econ 3.72 s/r 55.0 - Shami (25)
8 Tests - 25 wickets at 34.40 econ 3.37 s/r 61.0 - Wood (25)
16 Tests - 26 wickets at 34.46 econ 3.53 s/r 58.4 - Marsh (24)
19 Tests - 58 wickets at 34.75 econ 3.96 s/r 52.5 - Yadav (28)
1 Test - 2 wickets at 34.50 econ 3.45 s/r 60.0 - Peters (34)
12 Tests - 29 wickets at 35.00 econ 3.18 s/r 65.9 - BKumar (26)
17 Tests - 48 wickets at 35.16 econ 3.39 s/r 62.2 - Riaz (31)
8 Tests - 21 wickets at 35.80 econ 2.94 s/r 72.8 - Jordan (27)
25 Tests - 75 wickets at 35.97 econ 3.74 s/r 57.6 - Prasad (33)
4 Tests - 7 wickets at 36.85 econ 4.33 s/r 51.0 - Parnell (27)
70 Tests - 204 wickets at 36.96 econ 3.31 s/r 66.9 - Sharma (27)
21 Tests - 48 wickets at 37.37 econ 3.01 s/r 74.3 - Kulasekara (34)
16 Tests - 46 wickets at 37.39 econ 3.21 s/r 69.8 - RAli (27)
13 Tests - 41 wickets at 37.46 econ 3.46 s/r 64.8 - Plunkett (31)
19 Tests - 57 wickets at 37.50 econ 3.29 s/r 68.2 - Eranga (30)
25 Tests - 60 wickets at 37.58 econ 3.49 s/r 64.4 - Stokes (25)
18 Tests - 36 wickets at 37.88 econ 3.47 s/r 65.4 - Gabriel (28)
25 Tests - 69 wickets at 38.05 econ 3.37 s/r 67.5 - Bracewell (25)
4 Tests - 12 wickets at 38.66 econ 3.34 s/r 69.4 - Vitori (26)
4 Tests - 10 wickets at 38.90 econ 3.27 s/r 71.2 - Irfan (34)
9 Tests - 12 wickets at 39.33 econ 3.63 s/r 64.9 - Neesham (25)
9 Tests - 25 wickets at 39.68 econ 3.20 s/r 74.4 - Robiul Islam (29)
25 Tests - 57 wickets at 40.19 econ 3.69 s/r 65.1 - Best (34)
13 Tests - 16 wickets at 41.18 econ 3.03 s/r 81.3 - C Anderson (25)
21 Tests - 55 wickets at 41.32 econ 3.58 s/r 69.0 - Welegedara (35)
21 Tests - 54 wickets at 42.98 econ 3.57 s/r 72.0 - Pradeep (29)
3 Tests - 9 wickets at 43.77 econ 4.06 s/r 64.5 - Chameera (23)c
15 Tests - 21 wickets at 44.04 econ 2.74 s/r 96.2 - Holder (24)
14 Tests - 21 wickets at 46.00 econ 3.20 s/r 86.0 - E Chigumbura (30)
28 Tests - 59 wickets at 49.38 econ 3.35 s/r 88.2 - Lakmal (29)
8 Tests - 15 wickets at 50.53 econ 3.35 s/r 93.2 - S Islam (26)
60 Tests - 31 wickets at 51.32 econ 2.75 s/r 111.6 - Mathews (29)
38 Tests - 72 wickets at 51.81 econ 4.16 s/r 74.7 - SHossain (29)
3 Tests - 5 wickets at 52.60 econ 3.28 s/r 96.2 - E Adil (23)
9 Tests - 18 wickets at 52.61 econ 4.77 s/r 66.0 - Aaron (26)
2 Tests - 3 wickets at 54.00 econ 3.68 s/r 88.0 - McLaren (33)
4 Tests - 9 wickets at 56.00 econ 4.08 s/r 82.2 - Talha (27)
4 Tests - 5 wickets at 57.60 econ 2.74 s/r 126.0 - Shahid (27)
4 Tests - 10 wickets at 63.20 econ 3.73 s/r 101.5 - Henry (24)
2 Tests - 4 wickets at 63.25 econ 4.14 s/r 91.5 - Morris (29)
23 Tests - 32 wickets at 75.90 econ 3.90 s/r 116.6 - RHossain (26)
6 Tests - 6 wickets at 76.66 econ 3.13 s/r 146.6 - A Hossain (26)
6 Tests - 3 wickets at 86.00 econ 3.44 s/r 150.0 - Binny (32)
1 Test - 1 wicket at 88.00 econ 2.51 s/r 210.0 - Ball (25)
1 Test - 1 wicket at 94.00 econ 4.94 s/r 114.0 - Viljoen (27)
2 Tests - 2 wickets at 98.00 econ 4.26 s/r 138.0 - Cottrell (26)
2 Tests - 2 wickets at 146.00 econ 3.89 s/r 225.0 - Pankaj Singh (31)
3 Tests - 1 wicket at 242.00 econ 3.55 s/r 408.00 - Brathwaite (28)

Last edited by 1000yardstare : 31st July 2016 at 16:33.
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th August 2015, 15:55   #963
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,837
And the great Moeen Ali?
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th August 2015, 17:03   #964
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 852 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 16
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,214
Spinners

10 Tests - 61 wickets at 24.81 econ 3.09 s/r 48.1 - Y Shah (29)
35 Tests - 178 wickets at 28.10 econ 2.58 s/r 65.1 - Ajmal (37)
27 Tests - 141 wickets at 28.53 econ 2.99 s/r 57.2 - Ashwin (28)
22 Tests - 99 wickets at 29.39 econ 2.53 s/r 69.6 - Rehman (35)
60 Tests - 268 wickets at 29.97 econ 2.75 s/r 65.1 - Herath (37)
24 Tests - 113 wickets at 30.26 econ 2.58 s/r 67.5 - Ojha (28)
12 Tests - 45 wickets at 30.37 econ 2.39 s/r 76.0 - Jadeja (26)
95 Tests - 396 wickets at 32.13 econ 2.84 s/r 67.8 - Singh (35)
42 Tests - 147 wickets at 33.31 econ 3.00 s/r 66.5 - Al-Hasan (28)
44 Tests - 52 wickets at 33.90 econ 2.67 s/r 76.0 - Hafeez (34)
46 Tests - 162 wickets at 34.09 econ 3.16 s/r 64.7 - Lyon (27)
16 Tests - 70 wickets at 34.55 econ 3.09 s/r 67.0 - Shillingford (32)
50 Tests - 167 wickets at 34.71 econ 2.78 s/r 74.7 - Panesar (33)
19 Tests - 70 wickets at 34.77 econ 3.08 s/r 67.5 - Mendis (30)
16 Tests - 45 wickets at 36.04 econ 3.85 s/r 56.0 - Ali (28)
15 Tests - 55 wickets at 36.63 econ 3.16 s/r 69.4 - Mishra (32)
13 Tests - 50 wickets at 37.42 econ 3.12 s/r 71.9 - Bishoo (29)
26 Tests - 87 wickets at 39.10 econ 2.78 s/r 84.1 - Benn (34)
10 Tests - 38 wickets at 40.02 econ 3.56 s/r 57.4 - Craig (28)
15 Tests - 44 wickets at 40.61 econ 3.01 s/r 80.7 - Haque jnr (28)
16 Tests - 43 wickets at 46.39 econ 3.56 s/r 78.0 - Tahir (36)

not completed but interesting to note 2nd in strike rate after Y Shah.
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th August 2015, 02:19   #965
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 852 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 16
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,214
Bowling workload playing in all 5 Tests of a series since 2000

Caddick - 185.0 - 170.5 - 177.4
Gough - 171.0 - 173.5 - 155.1
Pollock - 184.2 - 228.1 - 222.1
Walsh - 220.2 - 199.4 - 263.4
Ambrose - 181.1
McGrath - 183.5 - 194.2 - 209.1
McClean - 137.0
Kallis - 189.4
Gillespie - 174.0 - 181.5
Lee - 120.5 - 191.1 - 196.5
Z Khan - 188.1
Srinath - 212.0
Dillon - 221.3
Cuffy - 190.0
Anderson - 161.5 - 158.0 - 213.1 - 205.4 - 190.3 - 199.1
Flintoff - 182.0 - 210.2 - 194.0 - 137.0
Ntini - 196.2 - 221.3
Hoggard - 200.3 - 122.1
Harmison - 190.5 - 161.0 - 170.1
Clark - 194.2
Hilfenhaus - 180.5
Siddle - 161.4 - 147.1 - 189.5 - 166.4
Johnson - 162.1 - 188.4 - 140.1
Broad - 154.1 - 185.5 - 161.5 - 175.5 - 143.3
Harris - 166.2
Kumar - 172.5
Starc - 142.2
Stokes - 105.0
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st September 2015, 09:52   #966
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 19,771
Another article on why cloud cover doesn't cause the ball to swing, and the biases that perpetuate the myth

https://theconversation.com/why-we-t...t-doesnt-46587
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 1st September 2015, 10:32   #967
D/L
Legendary
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 9,211
Good article. I quite like the term "motivated cognition". It describes so many strange views.

Clouds could never be the cause of a ball swinging. There have been stranger theories, though. I once heard Botham say that the state of the tide near a seaside ground can have an influence too!
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st September 2015, 10:47   #968
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 19,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
Good article. I quite like the term "motivated cognition". It describes so many strange views.

Clouds could never be the cause of a ball swinging. There have been stranger theories, though. I once heard Botham say that the state of the tide near a seaside ground can have an influence too!
When I read that article I had Botham and his anecdotal theories in my mind.

I liked the analysis of Cook's decision to bowl at the Oval. Better to make the right decision and fail than risk the wrath of the commetariat, especially when your reputation as captain is still not fully secure.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 1st September 2015, 11:52   #969
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 852 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 16
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,214
Reading one of the other articles by Craig Ransom and Alun Hardman in The Conversation..

A brief comparison shows that Anderson has bowled 22,114 test match deliveries since his debut in 2003, and has a current total of 80,803 deliveries in first-class cricket. This is an annual average of 1,923 test match deliveries. Trueman bowled 15,178 test deliveries between 1952-65, an annual average of 1,167. In his career he bowled a total of 115,865 deliveries in first-class cricket. Given that Trueman’s career was slightly longer, the overall figures actually suggest similar bowling loads.

Similar bowling loads? What they have done is add Anderson's Tests and first class cricket together. He has bowled 49,823 not 80,803. Nowhere near similar bowling loads.
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st September 2015, 13:44   #970
Minor Maggie
Buttleresque
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Lancashire, England
Posts: 26,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1000yardstare View Post
Reading one of the other articles by Craig Ransom and Alun Hardman in The Conversation..

A brief comparison shows that Anderson has bowled 22,114 test match deliveries since his debut in 2003, and has a current total of 80,803 deliveries in first-class cricket. This is an annual average of 1,923 test match deliveries. Trueman bowled 15,178 test deliveries between 1952-65, an annual average of 1,167. In his career he bowled a total of 115,865 deliveries in first-class cricket. Given that Trueman’s career was slightly longer, the overall figures actually suggest similar bowling loads.

Similar bowling loads? What they have done is add Anderson's Tests and first class cricket together. He has bowled 49,823 not 80,803. Nowhere near similar bowling loads.
Looking at cricinfo I make it 49,733 by adding first class, list A and T20 together.
Minor Maggie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st September 2015, 13:52   #971
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,717
Did think that proportion of overs outside test cricket looked totally wrong, given how little he's played in the FC game since he became a test regular.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st September 2015, 14:36   #972
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 852 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 16
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minor Maggie View Post
Looking at cricinfo I make it 49,733 by adding first class, list A and T20 together.
One of us needs a new calculator.


No Balls

79 Tests - 358 no balls - 4.5 per Test - Flintoff
67 Tests - 203 no balls - 3.0 per Test - Hoggard
63 Tests - 126 no balls - 2.0 per Test - Harmison

I thought Flintoff was bad but ..

76 Tests 580 no balls - 7.6 per Test - Lee
55 Tests 324 no balls - 5.8 per Test - Edwards


107 Tests - 37 no balls - 2.8 per Test - Anderson
84 Tests - 53 no balls - 1.58 per Test - Broad
26 Tests - 17 no balls - 1.52 per Test - Finn

Most sixes in 20/20s

44 Broad
37 Dernbach
32 Swann
31 Rashid
29 Bresnan
22 Ali
20 Finn
19 Tredwell Patel
18 Stokes
16 Mascarenhas Anderson Wright Jordan
14 Collingwood
11 Sidebottom Woakes Willey
9 Briggs Topley
8 Yardy Bopara Parry
7 Mahmood Root Plunkett
5 Schofield
4 Shahzad Pietersen
3 Panesar Mills
2 Lewis Flintoff Wood
1 Gough Dalrymple Snape Tremlett Batty Meaker Rankin Gurney Dawson

Last edited by 1000yardstare : 11th February 2017 at 04:15.
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st September 2015, 17:48   #973
geoff_boycotts_grandmother
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 28,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1000yardstare View Post
Reading one of the other articles by Craig Ransom and Alun Hardman in The Conversation..

A brief comparison shows that Anderson has bowled 22,114 test match deliveries since his debut in 2003, and has a current total of 80,803 deliveries in first-class cricket. This is an annual average of 1,923 test match deliveries. Trueman bowled 15,178 test deliveries between 1952-65, an annual average of 1,167. In his career he bowled a total of 115,865 deliveries in first-class cricket. Given that Trueman’s career was slightly longer, the overall figures actually suggest similar bowling loads.

Similar bowling loads? What they have done is add Anderson's Tests and first class cricket together. He has bowled 49,823 not 80,803. Nowhere near similar bowling loads.
And what about limited overs bowling?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer
It was a poor innings by Bell with the bat.
geoff_boycotts_grandmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st September 2015, 18:13   #974
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 852 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 16
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother View Post
And what about limited overs bowling?
Their total bowling 115865 v 49823

List A 986 v 12927
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd September 2015, 08:53   #975
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
Another article on why cloud cover doesn't cause the ball to swing, and the biases that perpetuate the myth

https://theconversation.com/why-we-t...t-doesnt-46587
Interesting article. Not entirely sure of the attribution but came across this on another site, suggesting that it is far from the definite opinion, however:

Quote:
The phenomenon of swing bowling, in which a cricket ball veers sideways during flight, is not influenced by humidity, researchers say.
Cricketers and sport scientists alike have long hypothesised that high humidity may increase the swing effect.
But precise 3-D studies of cricket balls under varying humidity showed no effect on the balls' shapes.
A report due in Procedia Engineering instead suggests that cloud cover increases swing by stilling the air.
Much like the path of a "curve ball" in baseball or a looping corner kick in football, the swing effect comes from setting up different kinds of air flow on opposite sides of the ball - smooth or "laminar" flow on one side and chaotic "turbulent" flow on the other.
But why the effect is more noticeable during some matches, and even some days in the same match, has had researchers and players stumped.
"Lots of scientists have always tried to discuss this idea around cricket ball swing and the effect of atmospheric conditions, and people talk about humid days being really important," said study co-author David James of Sheffield Hallam University's Centre for Sport Engineering Research.
"The leading hypothesis as to why cricket balls swing was around the fact that the seam on the cricket ball will swell on a humid day, becoming more pronounced, and that might lead to more swing," he told BBC News.
Wasim Akram
Wasim Akram was one of the all-time great exponents of swing bowling
Dr James and his colleagues John Hart at Sheffield and Danielle MacDonald at AUT University in New Zealand made use of the centre's "climate chamber", in which atmospheric conditions can be tightly controlled.
They used a 3-D laser scanner to monitor differently conditioned balls reacted under varying humidity, but found humidity had no detectable effect on the ball's geometry.
Instead, they have pitched in another idea: that bright sunshine - or the lack of it - is to blame for variation in swing.
"When the ground heats, it makes convection currents which make the air rise off the cricket pitch - that creates turbulence in the air on a sunny day," Dr James explained.
"On a cloudy day you get stiller air, because you don't get these convection currents coming off the ground."
Stiller air does less to affect the imbalance of smooth and chaotic flow on either side of the ball that leads to swing, so cloud cover could indirectly be the culprit.
Dr James concedes that the team's hypothesis must now be put to a test under controlled conditions, but they are convinced that humidity is not the variable that should put batters on the back foot.
"We fairly rigorously went through every possible thing around humidity and debunked it," he said.
So while I buy the stuff around motivated cognition and heuristics (there's a fair bit of work on diagnostic error in medicine using the same principles), we still don't know why the cricket ball does or doesn't swing. There is even, I understand, a case that the article I quoted may be wrong as it's possible that dust particles may precipitate out water in more humid conditions on cricket grounds in a way that won't happen in a sterile lab.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd September 2015, 08:57   #976
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,717
Which leaves the odd possibility that Botham may actually be correct about tides.

Also, while I'm here, DL, love your comments about motivated cognition but after a long time of keeping us guessing, I'm afraid it's totally blown your cover as anything other than a wind up merchant. Not that I've taken anything you've posted terribly seriously for months but that's a clincher: nobody could have such an effective self awareness bypass as that.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd September 2015, 09:36   #977
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 19,771
The random mention of Wasim in that article, probably an orphan image caption, does suggest that cloud cover our humidity are not that important as he swung it round corners on hot dry days in Pakistan and the sub-continent as well as in England.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd September 2015, 09:56   #978
Chin Music
Administrator
 
Chin Music's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: la sala de opinion equivocada
Team(s): ****
Posts: 24,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
The random mention of Wasim in that article, probably an orphan image caption, does suggest that cloud cover our humidity are not that important as he swung it round corners on hot dry days in Pakistan and the sub-continent as well as in England.
Nothing to do with creative manipulation of the ball away from actually delivering it though..........
__________________
Quote:
"One of the greatest problems of our time is that many are schooled but few are educated" - Thomas More
Chin Music is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd September 2015, 11:08   #979
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 19,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin Music View Post
Nothing to do with creative manipulation of the ball away from actually delivering it though..........
You mean he applied a method to make the ball swing based upon engineering principles and not relying on folklore?
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd September 2015, 12:22   #980
Chin Music
Administrator
 
Chin Music's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: la sala de opinion equivocada
Team(s): ****
Posts: 24,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
You mean he applied a method to make the ball swing based upon engineering principles and not relying on folklore?
Well if the effects of sandpaper and the good old human nail might have some value!
__________________
Quote:
"One of the greatest problems of our time is that many are schooled but few are educated" - Thomas More
Chin Music 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 09:01.



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