Quickest Bowlers? Today or Yesteryear?

[melanChronic]

I also think (at least in Australia) that most naturally quick freaks these days have their actions/techniques modified by sports scientists to decrease injuries and that reduces their absolute top pace potential. Cummins is a good example... Was clicking 150 at 17 but now thanks to injuries will likely never break that ceiling.

 

[ROOTA#6]

He was never hitting 150 at 17... Blokes pace get over rated immensely.

 

[Registered User]

Interesting. Duncan Spencer
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/the-nightwatchman/2016/sep/16/duncan-spencer-cricket-fast-bowler (long article).
Viv apparently said he was the fastest he faced, but I wonder if Viv being 40 or 41 at the time influenced his perception. However, Ponting said in his book that he was as fast as Akhtar!!

I finally finished reading the article. Jee, interesting story. I recommend at least skimming through it. I've never heard of him

 

[Belnakor]

He got reported and suspended alot when he played for Melville. Complete Twat.

good cricketer but first class arsehole, saw him lose it in a grade game and storm off. Used to have a v8 which he drove like a maniac. genuinely surprised he isn't in jail.

 

[Belnakor]

Someone said on radio the other day -- I think it was Geoff Poulter -- that the speeds in '70s were usually measured at the batting end, where now they're measured out of the hand. Is this true? The obvious inference is that Thommo was a lot faster than recorded.

if they were measured at the batting end you wouldn't see people hitting anywhere near 150km. The bowling competition where Lillee was clocked at 154, Roberts at 159, Holding at 153 was supposedly "under measured". This would have us believing that literally 4 blokes in the 1970 s could ALL bowl significantly quicker than the fastest bowlers today. Doesn't make sense.

based on this video , which seems right, in those tests Thommo clocked out at 160 and most of the others were around 150-140 at peak which makes sense.

 

[Belnakor]

But at the very top end most of it comes down to action and natural body type and those sorts of things haven’t changed all that much.

Probably right, If you look at Javelin which is a rough approximation, it hasn't changed a hell of alot since the 70s which makes me think there is a natural element in throwing that comes down to talent/body type etc.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Probably one of the most hostile overs I can remember was from the Whispering Death Michael Holding...

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Brian Close's body after facing Holding.....

 

[Gough]

D.B Close was a badass.

 

[PhatBoy]

Genuinely, if I was coaching England, I would show them that over during training before Adelaide. Issue their tail the challenge - if a 42-year-old opener with no protective gear can stand there and dodge/wear what he did in that over, they have no excuse whatsoever.

 

[sherb]

Brian Close's body after facing Holding.....

He was mid 40s then too.

You don't get much gutsier than that.

 

[sherb]

D.B Close was a badass.

Pretty sure he played Test Cricket in 4 different decades too.
40s, 50s, 60s & 70s.

 

[The Passenger]

Pretty sure he played Test Cricket in 4 different decades too.
40s, 50s, 60s & 70s.

It as a pretty bizarre career. Even before his comeback against the West Indies he had played 19 tests over an 18 year period. Then came back after a 9 year absence for 3 final tests.

 

[Wallaby]

Brian Close's body after facing Holding.....

Just some extra fashion accessories to match his Reg Grundies.

I've written before that if you look at, say, 100m Record, that has changed from 10.3-10.2 in the 1930s to 9.58 today. So that's equates (roughly) to - if we say the absolute top bowlers today are just reaching 160, the top bowlers in the 1930s would have been hitting around 150. And without helmets, chest pads or even decent gloves, that's f@@@ing fast. To be honest, it's probably a bit closer since Bolt was such a freak, and no one has been able to get within .1 of his time - the 9.58 is probably going to be a bit of an outlier for a few more decades.

Can't do the same comparison with Javelin, because that's been redesigned several times in the last 30 years, because people started throwing it out of the stadium (with steroid assistance).

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Just some extra fashion accessories to match his Reg Grundies.

I've written before that if you look at, say, 100m Record, that has changed from 10.3-10.2 in the 1930s to 9.58 today. So that's equates (roughly) to - if we say the absolute top bowlers today are just reaching 160, the top bowlers in the 1930s would have been hitting around 150. And without helmets, chest pads or even decent gloves, that's f@@@ing fast. To be honest, it's probably a bit closer since Bolt was such a freak, and no one has been able to get within .1 of his time - the 9.58 is probably going to be a bit of an outlier for a few more decades.

Can't do the same comparison with Javelin, because that's been redesigned several times in the last 30 years, because people started throwing it out of the stadium (with steroid assistance).

But running and bowling are different. Technique/action is far more important in bowling. Thomson had the perfect technique to generate maximum pace in that he uses his body like a sling shot, stretching it as much as possible and then almost recoiling to release the ball. His relaxed run up disguises the fact that his entire body is used to generate this recoil. Just like the cheetah is the fastest land animal because of the way it coils up its body and then stretches it makes it go faster than other animals whose legs move faster but cannot achieve anywhere near the same speed. Holding generated his pace through an immensely smooth action that when in rhythm was like petty in motion. He was a 400m runner to and so he was probably a better athlete than most of the current day bowlers and was very flexible.

 

[Wallaby]

Just to clear up the 'Michael Holding 400m Runner' one more time....

"In his first autobiography Whispering Death (published in 1993), Holding revealed that he still held the high jump record (four feet, 11 ¼ inches) for the under-12 class of Kingston College High School. And while he also competed in hurdles and 400 metres, his was a case of mistaken identity when he first made it to the West Indies team. A senior member of the Caribbean press fraternity spread the story that Holding was a potential 400m Olympic champion.

The fact was that Holding opened the bowling for the Jamaica youth team with Seymour Newman, who went on to become a Commonwealth Games (1978) silver medallist and an 800m participant in the 1976 Olympics at Montreal."

http://www.mid-day.com/articles/bolt-is-the-greatest-in-modern-times-michael-holding/177233

Obviously a good athlete, but nowhere near a top line runner. (By the way, that high jump for a 12-year old is nothing great, as well. But he was probably competing before the Fosbury Flop became standard, so who knows?).

Technique in 100m sprinting has significantly improved since the 1930s. I agree, it's not as important as in bowling, but there have been changes. In bowling, the most important thing is to be comfortable with your action - hence the enormous variations we see. If there was one 'perfect action' it would be taught from U8s. And yet, most bowling actions from the 1930s do not look unfamiliar to us today. (Watch Youtubes of Larwood and compare them the the Duncan Spencer clip in this thread). In sprinting, we can teach 99% of 'good sprinting' (Valeriy Bozov - 100%). The few who do look significantly different in style (Owens, Michael Johnson) are freaks.

 

[footyfan1978]

But running and bowling are different. Technique/action is far more important in bowling. Thomson had the perfect technique to generate maximum pace in that he uses his body like a sling shot, stretching it as much as possible and then almost recoiling to release the ball. His relaxed run up disguises the fact that his entire body is used to generate this recoil. Just like the cheetah is the fastest land animal because of the way it coils up its body and then stretches it makes it go faster than other animals whose legs move faster but cannot achieve anywhere near the same speed. Holding generated his pace through an immensely smooth action that when in rhythm was like petty in motion. He was a 400m runner to and so he was probably a better athlete than most of the current day bowlers and was very flexible.

Certainly all in the technique.
There are plenty of big guys that run in with a ball and you expect them to bowl fast but they cannot. Just got s**t actions. So more to do with technique that anything. Slingshot action of Thommo always seems to be more likely to generate the most pace for a persons body. Of course not everybody is comfortable with it but some are like Thommo and Tait.
Akhtar had a bit of a slingshot action too. Other actions can bowl fast too but the slingshot seems to be the daddy of them all. Just not many copy it and get comfortable to do it on instinct with muscle memory.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Just to clear up the 'Michael Holding 400m Runner' one more time....

"In his first autobiography Whispering Death (published in 1993), Holding revealed that he still held the high jump record (four feet, 11 ¼ inches) for the under-12 class of Kingston College High School. And while he also competed in hurdles and 400 metres, his was a case of mistaken identity when he first made it to the West Indies team. A senior member of the Caribbean press fraternity spread the story that Holding was a potential 400m Olympic champion.

The fact was that Holding opened the bowling for the Jamaica youth team with Seymour Newman, who went on to become a Commonwealth Games (1978) silver medallist and an 800m participant in the 1976 Olympics at Montreal."

http://www.mid-day.com/articles/bolt-is-the-greatest-in-modern-times-michael-holding/177233

Obviously a good athlete, but nowhere near a top line runner. (By the way, that high jump for a 12-year old is nothing great, as well. But he was probably competing before the Fosbury Flop became standard, so who knows?).

Technique in 100m sprinting has significantly improved since the 1930s. I agree, it's not as important as in bowling, but there have been changes. In bowling, the most important thing is to be comfortable with your action - hence the enormous variations we see. If there was one 'perfect action' it would be taught from U8s. And yet, most bowling actions from the 1930s do not look unfamiliar to us today. (Watch Youtubes of Larwood and compare them the the Duncan Spencer clip in this thread). In sprinting, we can teach 99% of 'good sprinting' (Valeriy Bozov - 100%). The few who do look significantly different in style (Owens, Michael Johnson) are freaks.

I stand corrected but Holding was still a very athletic cricketer. His run up was poetry in motion and he was as smooth as silk.

Thommo was and remains in many experts eyes as the fastest of all time. Not the best by any means but before his shoulder injury, he was just as fast at the end of a day as at the start. Nobody bowling today approaches him especially on a consistent basis.

 

[VogonProsthetnic]

I reckon Lille in 1972 would be close. We wasn't holding back at all before his injuries and that 8-29 against the ROW would have to be one of the most hostile spells ever

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

The thing to remember is these days pace is measured from the hand, whereas it was measured over the full 22 yards under the old system. Today's quicks are pretty quick, anyone from 145+ is damned quick, but Thommo was the quickest. The amazing thing about Thommo was, even after he damaged his shoulder, he was still quicker than any other bowler in the world including Holding, Imran, etc. Makes you wonder how quick he was before the shoulder injury, and how quick he would have been measured under the current system. I'm guessing if the Starcs and Cummins' can get into the mid-high 150s on occasion, Thommo would have been nearing the 170s.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Brian Close's body after facing Holding.....

Some of those bruises may have also come from fielding in suicide positions with no helmet or padding. I never saw him play, but I'm told he was quite mad

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Someone said on radio the other day -- I think it was Geoff Poulter -- that the speeds in '70s were usually measured at the batting end, where now they're measured out of the hand. Is this true? The obvious inference is that Thommo was a lot faster than recorded.

Yep, that's true (see my post above.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

I reckon Lille in 1972 would be close. We wasn't holding back at all before his injuries and that 8-29 against the ROW would have to be one of the most hostile spells ever

 

[sherb]

I reckon Lille in 1972 would be close. We wasn't holding back at all before his injuries and that 8-29 against the ROW would have to be one of the most hostile spells ever

Lillee was ferocious pre his back injury.

When he took 8-29 against RoW, that included taking 6-0. He went from 2-29 to 8-29. It was just amazing.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Certainly all in the technique.
There are plenty of big guys that run in with a ball and you expect them to bowl fast but they cannot. Just got s**t actions. So more to do with technique that anything. Slingshot action of Thommo always seems to be more likely to generate the most pace for a persons body. Of course not everybody is comfortable with it but some are like Thommo and Tait.
Akhtar had a bit of a slingshot action too. Other actions can bowl fast too but the slingshot seems to be the daddy of them all. Just not many copy it and get comfortable to do it on instinct with muscle memory.

It's interesting to note with Thommo that when he was at his quickest (pre-shoulder injury), as he says he just shuffled in and went 'wang'. Very little run up, his speed came all from the delivery stride, and extra pace came from the way the ball slid off the pitch rather than bounced. You'll notice that later in his career, he began running in faster and longer in an attempt to generate more pace. The added bonus of having the ball behind his back in his delivery stride wouldn't have helped the batsman either.

A mate of mine played for SA, and a handful of Tests for Australia. He genuinely loved facing quick bowlers. He came back from Perth having faced Lillee and remarked if bowlers were any quicker than Lillee, he may think about retiring. Then he travelled to Brisbane to face Thommo at the Gabba. When he returned, all he would say was, "I may have to retire, Thommo seemed 2 yards quicker than Lillee".