Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

I simply think that the propensity of good pacers coming out in the era of these West Indian bowlers is related to the rules and culture of the game at the time. While they would probably make it as good bowlers now, in compraing their stats with the hand which they were dealt, I think its far less impressive.

Any 22 average with no helmets and unlimited bouncers against average of 22 with limited bouncers and helmets..... the latter has to win, its much tougher conditions.

I dont think its a co-incidence that after the dust settled on the extreme pace era, we seen a decade where hardly any bowler could match up.

sussexpob wrote:

Arthur Crabtree wrote:And there was still credit in Holding's fourteen wickets in an Oval featherbed in 1976.

Wasnt that the test where the Windies fans trampled all over the pitch after a crowd invasion and England, who were 300 for not many down at the time, lost 16 odd wickets for 300 runs to the conclusion of the game?

Don't remember that.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:

sussexpob wrote:

Arthur Crabtree wrote:And there was still credit in Holding's fourteen wickets in an Oval featherbed in 1976.

Wasnt that the test where the Windies fans trampled all over the pitch after a crowd invasion and England, who were 300 for not many down at the time, lost 16 odd wickets for 300 runs to the conclusion of the game?

Don't remember that.

From the original Wisden Report

Greig raised hopes of a long stay with two grand cover drives off Holding, but trying again he was bowled off his pads. A disgraceful scene followed. A huge section of the crowd, mainly West Indians, swept over the ground and trampled on the pitch with the departure of the England captain. The umpires led the players off the field at about 6.10 p.m

Nearly a 1000 runs had been scored for 12 wickets falling in the test.... after that incident England scored 208 all out and their last 6 wickets in the first innings fell for another 125 runs.

That was the first series I watched any part of, and I didn't watch it all, just enough to be interested. It's not the way Holding at the Oval gets remembered though, it's seen as an example of him making a lot out of very little. Maybe the crowd damaged the pitch, but a lot of the English press were very resentful of the West Indies' methods at the time, so it is possible they weren't reported fairly.

Obviously the scoop can only happen because of the helmet. And I never intended to argue that it didn't have an impact, I just question the degree. Pace in itself never guaranteed success, but it never stopped being a threat. Some players thrived against it, and no doubt it ruined some batters as effectively as spin finished Robin Smith.

Holding at the Oval is remembered as the one where he took the dead pitch out of the equation by bowling very full.

the whispering death

a marvellous bowler, but these days I could imagine getting pretty fed up of waiting for him to walk the 380 miles back to the start of his run up.

barely 26 overs are bowled in a session these days (which is an outrage!)... I have no idea how many were bowled in a session back then

Wasim Akram winning. Another one that suprises considering he averages 25,30,29 and 28 vs Australia, England, South Africa and India respectively. Although you could make the point that West Indies were still a top team in his day, and he blitzed them a few times.

I think someone has changed from Steyn to Wasim.

Reckon Wasim gets the vote for being an left arm bowler.
I certainly voted him for that since he does give you another option if Right hand batsman are batting at ease to the right handers.

out of intrested voted for Steyn and Wasim.
Gonna go for Mcgrath in the 2nd vote.

Marshall and Hadlee for me.

Tactical voting. Changed to Steyn

tactical vote

no matter how much I dislike him, Glenda was at least 10 times better a bowler than Steyn has been

A bit of a pile up for the second spot developing.

I tactical voted to get Steyn out too. Shame it has piled up.