In no way am I saying that brute strength alone will make you a good fast bowler. It's definitely a combination of a lotta things. It's just that generally, Pakistanis have a more aggressive physiologcal characteristic than Indians. Which is why I later highlighted that those with stronger shoulders etc. will be the bowlers extracting more out of the flat tracks, either side of the border.
Nothing to do with Muslim population or meat consumption etc. The Rashid Latif quote was just a light-hearted reference, in a friendly neighbour sorta way.
I agree with ya, it does take natural talent, dedication and a determined attitude to succeed in the arena. But it's seeing those representing your culture/country (or wherever you identify with) that sparks it off.
Emulating your heroes sows the seed,
determination and building on your talent results in the eventual fruit.
I think the bottom line is by idolizing someone like Imran, Wasim, Waqar or Javaid one could become better player in his/her field but IF that person has natural talent than surely he/she can join the class of Imran, Wasim, Waqar or Javaid given that he/she strugle hard. (As the old saying practice makes you perfect)
I think the reason for India not producing world class bowlers is inability to take risk. It is evident from some of the posts by our Indian friends that most of Indians think that it's better to control ball and not to give extra runs while some of the very best bowlers of Pakistan have always been accused of giving extra runs, not controlling their line and length. The same critics later on praised Wasim and Waqar for their ability to get wickets by their out swings. I think it's all in the mentality. Batting is MORE about control while in bowling one has to take risks i.e. variety is the name of the game.
I personally felt that Pakistanis were little afraid of playing fast bowlers of West Indies and hence they produced their own. Imran Khan's link with England in 80's must have also helped.
Pakistan never produced a genuine fast bowler till Imran burst on the scene. When he started his test career with Pakistan in the early 70's he was a very ordinary medium pacer. It was not till the early 80's that he was recognised as a genuine fast bowler. The stint he did with Worcester and Sussex obviously helped but along the line he worked hard and improved his bowling and speed.
After that came Akram and Waqar. Imran had a great hand in guiding these two towards greatness. Inspiration helps and then if those who inspire are there to guide them, then greatness is born.
Same is the story with the Indian batsmen. Tendulkar is a great role model and before him Gavaskar.
So long as the Indians dont follow Sidhu as a role model in cricket commentary the humanity at large will survive. :D
[QUOTE] Originally posted by Diablo Kazama: *
**The type of pitches used and Street cricket*: The lack of organized structure at the juinior level has a silver lining, in that it has regulalry been churning out a generation of gung-ho cavalier cricketers, who have to improvise, improvise and improvise to survive and excel in this region.
From there, the attitude continues when they play on the local pitches, slow and turning in both countries. The fast bowlers have to work extra hard to extract bounce etc., (and the physcially stronger ones are more likely to do it), and the batsman have to really up their game into high gear to play the spinners especially (the ones patient and enterprising enough).
Once they're thrown into the international limelight (at ages considered ridiculous in other parts of the world), their natural insitinct and drive to adapt as quickly as possible leads to future success. Fast bowlers find the wickets in Perth etc. a haven to bowl on, while the batsman who had to counter balls turning a feet or two suddenly find a much friendlier pitch to play on, and it's easier to cream the opposition's bowling.
[/QUOTE]
Thats the question.... Why is it that two countries with identical pitch conditions produce different kind of players. Why doesnt Srinath find the Sydney pitch as heavenly as Wasim or Waqar and why cant Younis Khan cream the bowlers like Tenulkar or Ganguly. As far as physical streghth goes I think even a lot of Hindus are eating meat now days, so I dont think its got anything to do with physical strength as far as fast bowling goes. Its just so confusing... I mean being a Pakistani its hard to admit for most of us but the truth remains India has a far superior and consistent batting line up compared to ours but at the same time Indians have to admit that we have always had a far superior bowling line up.
Now someone mentioned above that Kapil emerged as a fast bowler but cut down his pace as he had no decent bowling partner.... well neither did Imran. You cant really consider Sikandar Bakht or Saleem Jafir decent bowling partners but Imran still bowled fast. Anyway its still a million dollar question why India cant produce bowlers of the calibre of Akram and Waqar and Pakistan cant produce someone of the calibre of Sachin.
Anyway its still a million dollar question why India cant produce bowlers of the calibre of Akram and Waqar and Pakistan cant produce someone of the calibre of Sachin.
[/QUOTE]
Role models....that is the difference. Aussies have both types and look how good they are...
Role models....that is the difference. Aussies have both types and look how good they are...
[/QUOTE]
I really dont believe this role model theory... its talent that will get you there... why didnt Pakistan produce more Miandad's or Majid Khan or Saeed Anwar or Zaheer Abbas. Why didnt India produce more Kapil Dev's. I mean he is as big a legend in India as Imran is in Pakistan. I dont know who Tendulkar followed but whoever he did he is left him way behind. The point is Sachin is there cause he is talented, now if people try to follow him it doesnt mean they will be like him. Likewise Wasim Akram was really good now just cause every left hand bowler wants to be like him doesnt mean they will be able to.
Role Models and talent are not exclusive...Role Models help creating movements and if a person is talented he will rise....People in US took upto Tennis in the 80s-90s watching the exploits of McEnroe and Connors...You see many Aussies taking up Leg Spin after Shane Warne..
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by oursoulsatpeace: *
Role Models and talent are not exclusive...Role Models help creating movements and if a person is talented he will rise....People in US took upto Tennis in the 80s-90s watching the exploits of McEnroe and Connors...You see many Aussies taking up Leg Spin after Shane Warne..
[/QUOTE]
Well then kindly explain why Pakistanis pick bowlers & Indians pick batmen as their role model. This role model theory might be true as far as India in concerned as their cricketing scene have been dominated by batsmen since begining except for a few exceptions. But what about Pakistan... we have had some quality batsmen but unfortunatley we dont have any class player except for Youhana. We had Majid Khan, Hanif Mohammad, Zahher Abbas, Javed Miandad... you think no body in Pakistan wanted to be like them and everyone wanted to be like Imran Khan.
I really dont believe this role model theory... its talent that will get you there... why didnt Pakistan produce more Miandad's or Majid Khan or Saeed Anwar or Zaheer Abbas. Why didnt India produce more Kapil Dev's. I mean he is as big a legend in India as Imran is in Pakistan. I dont know who Tendulkar followed but whoever he did he is left him way behind. The point is Sachin is there cause he is talented, now if people try to follow him it doesnt mean they will be like him. Likewise Wasim Akram was really good now just cause every left hand bowler wants to be like him doesnt mean they will be able to.
[/QUOTE]
Kapil was good in India but his stature was nowhere like that of Sachin.
In Pakistan, Saeed Anwar was good, but his stature was nothing like Imran's.
Sachin and Imran are icons, and people try to emulate them anyway they can. Even if they fail but make it half way, they turn out to be pretty damn good players.
Kapil was good in India but his stature was nowhere like that of Sachin.
In Pakistan, Saeed Anwar was good, but his stature was nothing like Imran's.
Sachin and Imran are icons, and people try to emulate them anyway they can. Even if they fail but make it half way, they turn out to be pretty damn good players.
[/QUOTE]
Thats true but your timing is a little off on these. Imran and Kapil played at the same time. Sachin is a very new comer compared to them. I also understand before Sachin Indian scene was ruled by Gavaskar but Kapil had his fair share of fan following. Just like in Pakistan, Imran was an icon but Miandad also had his fair share of fan following. So why is it that we produced Wasim and Waqar after Imran and nothing of the calibre of Miandad and India prdouced Sachin, Dravid, Gangulay after Gavaskar but no one seemed to have followed Kapil's foot steps. I know there was Parbhakar, Prasad and Srinath but you cant put them in the same class as Kapil. Same with Pakistan, we came up wioth nothing of Miandad's calibre though I personally think we did get something really close to Miandad in Basit Ali (remember him) but we just wasted his talent.
Harbajhan is very over rated, just one good series and that too at home doesn’t make you world class.
Srinath on the other hand is a good bowler, not world class but slightly above average.
^
dont talk about that series....
most of thse wickets came courtesy of u know who....
i wonder how indian media still has the gutts to replay the famous hat-trick (i wonder if it was kharbooja singh or the umpire who did the hat-trick there)....
But yaar he provides good entertainment for some boring matches. What a character.