From: HH9679A@auvm.american.edu (Howard E. Hill-Esbrand)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: "We are the world " Team of 80's
Date: 16 Oct 92 21:03:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: auvm.92290.170307HH9679A
 <1992Oct16.152839.18445@walter.bellcore.com>
Organization: The American University - University Computing Center

>In article <1992Oct8.144343.901@walter.bellcore.com>, shamim@bellcore.com
(Shamim Naqvi,MRE-2E342,829-4711,,21273) writes:
> I THINK THAT BATSMEN
> have become better and more used to playing fast bowling.  This is why
> the spinner is making a comeback. Many players now play the quickies
> well and very very few play the spinner correctly. I am really looking
> forward to the WI/Aus series where we will find out if the Aussies have
> become better at playing fast bowlers.  And then of course the Pak/WI
> series should settle some more of the issues.
Give me a break on the spinner crap| Who is the most feared bowler in
the world ? Waqar Younis and he does not spin . If you had four Waqars
would you drop one to play a spinner to give the attack balance ? If
you do you need HELP | If the West Indies had a world class spinner
they surely would not have played him very regularly at the expense
of a Quickie, WI played Harper and four Quickies not Harper and three
quickies| When we beat India continuosly in India on spinner's wickets
it was because of Garner,Holding,Marshall,Clarke & Co not because of
spinners which India had in abundance. I recall one test match which
India actually defeated West Indies that was with the one year sensation
Narendra Hirawani. Out of 20 tests India won one . West Indies won over
12 WITH OUR PACE BOWLERS | Why is Kapil Dev India's most successful bowler
even on India'sspinner's wickets? Why is Imran Khan Pakistan's alltime
leading wicket taker when Pakistan does not have wickets conducive to
pace bowling ? do not tell me that they took all their wickets outside
of their countries. The reason is a great fast bowler is much more
difficult to play than a great spinner.If you ever played cricket
at any competitive level (not between your brothers or schoolmates)
you would have realised this or maybe you  came from a district void
of quick bowlers. If batsmen were playing the quick stuff much easier
why did India recruit Lillie to help them develop pace bowlers. They
could have got Bedi to teach the art of spin instead of manage their
team. Since 1975-76 the top five bowlers in the world has always been
quickiesit started with Lillie and Thommo  with Roberts then in 76
Holding, Pakistan had Sarfraz and Imran they took the wickets not Inthakab
Alam. England's better bowlers were Willis,Hendrick and later on Botham
Underwood had retired. India still had four spinners Bedi,Chandrasehkar,
Venkataravaghan and Prassanna but who did they beat since then in a series?
Maybe NZ,SL or a depleted Australian team because of the ban on the SA rebels
(Hughes,Rackeman & Co) not much competition in those last three teams. Finally
again I state that the records of Marshall,Holding & Garner are far superior
to that of Abdul Qadir's in fact  of all bowlers with over 100 test wickets
Marshall has the lowest average runs per wicket and the least balls per
wicket (strike rate) not bad huh so he should be selected as a bowler
before anyone else. OK Hadlee has him on # of wickets but Hadlee was playing
siince 72 (more matches) and without three other top rate bowlers to share
the wickets. Marshall has more wickets than Imran, has played in less matches
wickets are from less deliveries and cost less runs. And forget Dev and Botham
it is hard to distinguish between their batting and bowling averages both
are about 29 or 30. So in fact maybe Qadir should play maybe before
Botham or Dev, but never ever in front of Hadlee,Imran,Holding,Garner
or Marshall.