|WikiProject Cricket||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
Fast bowling classification
- There's a fair bit of subjectivity in these definitions, but generally fast-medium is thought of as faster than medium-fast. --Robert Merkel 07:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- A Cricinfo profile was cited as a source for "medium-fast" being quicker than "fast-medium"; however, there is no consistency in Cricinfo's use of the two terms. For example, Ewen Chatfield, Albie Morkel, and Graeme Labrooy are referred to as both "medium-fast" and "fast-medium" bowlers in their profiles. The only source I can find that addresses this distinction directly is the RSC faq, which classifies fast-medium above medium-fast. The FAQ is generally well-respected, but unfortunately it doesn't meet WP:RS. I can't find any sources that state that "medium-fast" is faster than "fast-medium". --Muchness 07:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I had that idea too, but then someone pointed out what the terms meant. Say you have two general levels, fast and medium, fast medium would be the faster end of medium while medium fast would be the middle part of the fast level. Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 09:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
- I had always thought that FM was quicker than MF. I looked in the 2006 Playfair Cricket Annual. Both terms are used for categorising players, but it doesn't say which is faster! There seem to be a lot more players described as FM than as MF. Looking at the entries for Sussex players, for instance, Kirtley, Lewry and Martin-Jenkins are all given as FM, but Naved-ul-Hasan is given as MF. If anyone is familiar with those bowlers, they might be able to work out which category is faster. JH 22:04, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Richard Hadlee has this to say about these two types of pace bowling in his book Cricket: The Essentials of the Game:
- Fast Medium — A bowler who usually has more control than the fast bowler but can bowl a quicker ball that can take the batsman by surprise. He may have the ability to swing the ball in the air or cut the ball off the pitch.
- Medium Fast — A bowler who tends to bowl within his limits and therefore in long spells. To achieve this he has developed some good skills and many variations – swing, seam, slower, faster balls.
--Muchness 11:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- My understanding is that the first term takes precedence, so that FM is faster than MF and MS is faster than SM. It in contrary to nomral use of English however - as the adjective normally goes first, so one would simply linguistically think that FM is medium bowler who is a bit fast, whereas MF is a fast bowler who is a bit medium. Certainly if you compare Sreesanth and Pathan, Pathan is MF and SS is FM, so I'm sure FM is faster. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 23:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Ok here guys i will clear this up here is how it goes - fast, fast medium, medium fast, medium but one thing that really bugs me is that some bowlers who were quick 2 years ago and now are bowling barely 130 are still labeled as fast!!!, for example makhaya ntini.
- But when I watched the profiles of Iain O'Brien (New Zealand) & Steven Finn (England) talking about their bowling classifications, the former says fast-medium, the latter said medium fast, but on average, they bowl at about the same speed, though Finn's quicker deliveries are touching 145kph, and O'Brien never got to 140.Nbagigafreak (talk) 09:45, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
This may be a stable article with a lot of good information, but the opening sentences are just not accurate. The contrast with fast/pace bowling is NOT spin bowling but slow bowling. And fast bowling and slow bowling are not the TWO approaches, because that leaves out medium-pace. Countless bowlers are neither fast bowlers nor spin bowlers: in fact, that's probably numerically the largest group of bowlers in the game.
Spin bowling is properly contrasted with seam bowling, but I see a distinction is made which contrasts seam with swing. Bizarre. "Seam bowler" is a perfectly good term for a swing bowler. Few seam bowlers never attempt to swing the ball.
My first thought on reading the introduction was exactly the same thing. Arnold, Ealham or (god help us) Boycott were not spinners but certainly not fast. This is too big, complex and (for the most part) good an article for a quick fix though. Epeeist smudge 06:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
There is a subtlety here because we are actually describing two slightly separate things - the method the bowler employs in attempting to get the ball to move from a straight trajectory, and the speed he achieves whilst doing so.
There are almost without question two distinct methods of bowling - seam bowling and spin bowling. The variation in speed in spin bowlers is small - between 40mph to 70mph, the variation in speed of seam bowlers is much larger - all the way from amateurs bowling at 50mph up to Brett Lee at 100mph.
So the distinction is between seam bowling (of which swing bowling is just one particular weapon) and spin bowling. The classification of bowling speed shoud be kept separate - although the correlation should obviously be mentioned. A fast bowler is simply a bowler who bowls over 85mph, and is by necessity a subset of seam bowlers, because it is biomechanically impossible to bowl spin at this velocity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 12:24, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I am very interested in what desirable human dimensions assist speed.I think this is a very relevant discussion for the game of cricket. From the "world's fastest bowler competition in the 70-80's the best correlation with speed was the distance the arm moved during the action so longer arms were advantages if you assume basic centripetal acceleration(I am not certain if this was what I heard but think so). Shoaib and Lee who are the quickest of today are not exactly tall compared with the average international fast bowler and I can't find Jeff Thompson's height who also was one of the game's quickest.This also extends to javelin where below average height Zelezny(6'1 or 185cm holds the record). In my local competition there are players who generate great speed of all heights and arm lengths but I feel the technique varies between taller and shorter players i.e shorter guys have a power action and can only bowl shorter spells where taller guys generate similar pace easier and can bowl longer spells. Also I am very interested in Wasim Akram's dimensions but get extremes of 6'1-6'6. My guess is he is about 6'2 to 6'3. Gooogen 15:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Assistance to fast bowlers
The introduction to the article states that Pakistan has produced fast bowlers because of pitches in Pakistan which assist them. How is that true? India and Pakistan are known for producing batting pitches that are never helpful for fast bowlers. The greener pitches in England and Australia are more suited for fast bowlers. Is there a source for this claim? Inf fg (talk) 16:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
The batsman on the end of the delivery was Nick Knight who tamely guided it into the leg side. This is quoted from main text. All cricket fans have knowledge as to the pace at which pace bowlers such as Brett Lee and Shoab Aktar can bowl. The fact that Nick Knight played and made a shot of a ball travelling at this speed should not be downplayed in the main body. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 15:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Strike Bowler Definition
The definition used of strike bowler is incorrect - a strike bowler is simply a bowler employed by his captain to pick up wickets at the possible expense of giving up runs - this quality is what is measured by "strike rate". It has nothing to do with the velocity the bowler bowls - an aggressive spinner could easily be described as a strike bowler. Of course, there may be a correlation between strike rate and bowling velocity, but that is by the by. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 12:30, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support this entirely, I'll edit the paragraph under the "Strike Bowling" heading, but I haven't read all the way through yet to see if this mistake has been repeated GGdown (talk) 16:48, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Can we have a seperate wiki page on Military Medium Bowlers,the ones who bowl in the low and mid 120's sometimes reaching 130 kmph.There are quite a lot of them in recent times like Darren Sammy,Praveen Kumar,Sohail Tanvir,Trent Copeland etc.They were quite common in the 80's and 90's as well.
Spin bowling should not be in classifications of fast bowling table
I am amazed that spin bowling is listed in the classifications of fast bowling table. Spin bowling is completely different to pace bowling in that spinners walk or slowly trot in off a short run-up when they bowl, and their method of attack is to use finger or wrist actions to get the ball to spin as much as possible, this includes their grip on the ball. Pace bowlers run or jog in off a medium to long run-up; like spin bowlers the way they grip the ball is important but pace bowlers use little or no finger/wrist movement - speed and bounce are their main weapons. As people suggested in the fast bowling classification discussion above, there are such things as slow-medium and slow pace bowling. (I don't think there is medium-slow but I could be wrong) - both should be added. Spin bowling is often incorrectly called slow bowling but even though spin bowlers are usually slowers their bowling style is a different one altogether - a different discipline - to pace bowling. Furthermore, most spinners have a faster delivery, or in some cases their usual or stock delivery that is falls in or not far above the medium pace bowling range. So, not only should spin bowling not be in this table as it is a different discipline to pace bowling, but as this table describes what speed a bowler bowls on average to be classified as fast, fast medium, etc. spin bowling can't fit in neatly above, between, or below any of the pace bowling categories,. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 03:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Current fast bowlers
Does this section really add anything to the article? It takes up a large amount of space, and by its very nature, its bound to be both subjective and constantly out-of-date as bowlers come and go. In my view, its unencyclopaedic and should be removed. Py0alb (talk) 11:28, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
- I think maintenance and subjectivity are the key issues. It's being updated at the moment, but given the effort required it could go out of date quickly. More importantly though the criteria for inclusion are unclear, it's not clear what this 'index' relates to, and the methodology behind how the Cricinfo works out the speeds are unclear. It's an interesting tidbit, but are they really accurate? Nev1 (talk) 17:34, 2 March 2016 (UTC)