• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

England v India - Third Test, 10/07

The Breen Machine said:
In fairness though, if you look at the stats, he does average 12 less than Lee and I'd say around 8 less than Shoaib. I'm not sure I'd subscribe to him being far better, but there's a case for it and he is better.
Click to expand...
Well you can't argue with stats, as we all know.

He has the marginally better record at this stage (although Lee did it for longer) I would agree, but that doesn't put him in a different stratosphere.

For me personally, Lee and Shoaib are (were) traditional fast bowlers with classical run-ups and actions.

They would always be my preference over a Bumrah type, even though I can admire his individualistic style and what he's achieved through being unorthodox.
 

PallionLad said:
Agreed.

Its funny though how in some peoples eyes this looks ok, and to others just wrong and not in the spirit of the game.

Logon or register to see this image


Sorry for this random pic, but I forgot to post it last night when talking about one eye pricks
Logon or register to see this image
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't think Bumrah's action is illegal.

Suspect maybe, but by keeping his arm ram rod straight before the delivery stride means he can generate that much more pace from a shorter run up and release the ball later.

Very advantageous.

Good debate.

For me, he is an excellent bowler probably the best India have produced. But not the best ever, not by a long shot.
 
Salem Street South said:
Well you can't argue with stats, as we all know.

He has the marginally better record at this stage (although Lee did it for longer) I would agree, but that doesn't put him in a different stratosphere.

For me personally, Lee and Shoaib are (were) traditional fast bowlers with classical run-ups and actions.

They would always be my preference over a Bumrah type, even though I can admire his individualistic style and what he's achieved through being unorthodox.
Click to expand...

Aesthetically I agree with you, I'd rather watch Lee and Shoaib (He was box office to watch at Durham). They were out and out fast bowlers who looked it when you watched them.
 
Sea to Shining Sea said:
He was something to behold watching live. The run up and the fireworks were great theatre. Of the bowlers I’ve seen live, it was him and Warne that were total box office.

But as you say, as far as being an all time great bowler with a skill set to bowl good lines, lengths, variations etc, Akhtar (and Lee) probably don’t get on my list.
Click to expand...
Bang on. There was a period around 1999 WC when Akthar was genuinely box office. He was the 1st to break 100mph in an ODI I believe. Trescothick or Knight, can't remember who, batted it back nonchalantly :lol:.

His run up was ridiculous, as was the amount of sweat he produced. He's a bit of a windup merchant nowadays.
 
Salem Street South said:
Well you can't argue with stats, as we all know.

He has the marginally better record at this stage (although Lee did it for longer) I would agree, but that doesn't put him in a different stratosphere.

For me personally, Lee and Shoaib are (were) traditional fast bowlers with classical run-ups and actions.

They would always be my preference over a Bumrah type, even though I can admire his individualistic style and what he's achieved through being unorthodox.
Click to expand...
Aye there’s nowt better than watching a fast bowler absolutely steaming in and hitting those 90mph plus speeds.

And then you have Bumrah who shuffles in off about 10 paces and still fires absolute rockets down. Looks shite but Christ is it effective.
 
Dexter said:
Aye there’s nowt better than watching a fast bowler absolutely steaming in and hitting those 90mph plus speeds.

And then you have Bumrah who shuffles in off about 10 paces and still fires absolute rockets down. Looks shite but Christ is it effective.
Click to expand...
Yep, that's what I alluding to. Not textbook at all. But it is very very effective.

I wonder why Bumrah's action isn't taught though? To me it looks less damaging on a fast bowlers body. I might be wrong.
 
Nasser Butt-Head said:
Yep, that's what I alluding to. Not textbook at all. But it is very very effective.

I wonder why Bumrah's action isn't taught though? To me it looks less damaging on a fast bowlers body. I might be wrong.
Click to expand...
You say that but he still has back problems like most fast bowlers. There’ll still be a lot of force that goes into that action and I’m guessing most people can’t get their arm to flex like he does without chucking it.
 
Salem Street South said:
To say Bumrah is a 'far better bowler' than Shoaib and Lee and that they aren't in 'the same stratosphere' is nonsense and is just recency bias.
Click to expand...
Haway man - Bumrah's record is up there with the best in the game and he produces on all conditions against all teams. Brett Lee's record is worse than the likes of Matthew Hoggard (no offense to Hoggard like) There isn't even a comparison to be made. Lee could bowl fast and gave the great Australian attack something different but he was no more than a decent test bowler.
 
Dexter said:
You say that but he still has back problems like most fast bowlers. There’ll still be a lot of force that goes into that action and I’m guessing most people can’t get their arm to flex like he does without chucking it.
Click to expand...
Aye, you're right. He has had a lot of injuries hasn't he? Maybe his action doesn't lend itself to longevity after all. Not like Jimmy's and Broads.

Have the Aussies ever scrutinised Bumrah's action? They're normally sent over there to do a biomechanical analysis aren't they? It would be interesting to see his action broken down in super slow mo.
 
Salem Street South said:
Well you can't argue with stats, as we all know.

He has the marginally better record at this stage (although Lee did it for longer) I would agree, but that doesn't put him in a different stratosphere.

For me personally, Lee and Shoaib are (were) traditional fast bowlers with classical run-ups and actions.

They would always be my preference over a Bumrah type, even though I can admire his individualistic style and what he's achieved through being unorthodox.
Click to expand...
Eh - Bumrah has a test bowling average better that Marshall, Lillee and co. Brett Lee has a bowling average worse than Matthew Hoggard and Andy Caddick.
 
rentaghost said:
Haway man - Bumrah's record is up there with the best in the game and he produces on all conditions against all teams. Brett Lee's record is worse than the likes of Matthew Hoggard (no offense to Hoggard like) There isn't even a comparison to be made. Lee could bowl fast and gave the great Australian attack something different but he was no more than a decent test bowler.
Click to expand...
Lee was a great ODI bowler and I think this warps peoples views of him as a test bowler. Obviously still a very good player and to take 300 test wickets as a genuine fast bowler takes some doing, but I would agree with you he’s nowhere near as good as Bumrah in this format.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top