(01-29-2020, 02:05 PM)stillwill Wrote:(01-29-2020, 01:31 PM)Bada Wrote: That's your opinion, not a fact, unless if it's actually measured.
Of course, there's nothing to discuss when you present your opinion as a universal fact people should accept
There are these things called Eyes. I think Sanath hits the ball harder than Sanga. Do i need a measurement to prove that ? Same thing here. Sandakan bowls with more side spin so sometimes he gets big turns(without dip or drift) while Vandersay bowls with more top spin but still gets good turn because he imparts more revs. He also gets more drift and drip than Sandakan because he imparts more revs. You can see Drift, Dip and Turn when Vandersay bowls that you dont see with Sandakan(Sandakan's googly gets some dip but it is because he is bowling with scrambled seam and aerodynamics of scrammbled seam makes the ball dip). Vandersay also bowls googly with scrambled seam but he also bowls with seam presentation(not scrambled) and still gets the ball to dip. Generally if the ball dips a lot with proper seam presentation it means the bowler is imparting more top spin and more revs, if the ball drifts alot the bowler is imparting more side spin and the ball also turns more; top spin reduces turn. Generally Top Spin turns less and Side Spin turns more. When a bowler has Dip, Drift and Turn it means he is imparting tons of revs to purcahse all facets. That is quite a bit of potential.
Kuldeep imparts more revs than Chahal. Chahal imparts more side spin so he turns more than Kuldeep and hence looks like a better spinner bowler than Kuldeep. But Kuldeep is imparting more revs, adding dip, drift and turn. Kuldeep makes tons of batsmen commit mistakes that lands in no-mans land, gets inside and outside edge and so on. These things make batsmen second guess and all these things play a roe for victory.
Dip is more important because batsmen read legbreak, googly, and all fancy variations but batsmen cannot read how much a cricket ball will dip and deceive him in length. If you are imparting more revs, any minor adjustment to grip and seam presentation will result in variations how the ball gets to the batsmen. For example, you point the seam towards 3rd man and bowlg a leg break it will behave one way, next delivery if you point it towards 1st slip, the ball will have less turn, but dip more than the previous delivery. This is why Murali and Warne were so deadly. I talked to Mahendra Nagamotoo, the West Indies cricketer he says that when he faced Murali the ball actually disappears(blind spot) from the time it has reached the maximum flight to the time when it makes contact with the pitch.
So this is why I think Vandersay has potential. Do I want thim in the 50 over side ? No. Do I tink he should be given continuous 3 T20 vs WI/Zim/Bangla/Afghan ? Yes. He never played 2 matches in a row in the same series, he could be nervous, under pressure of getting dropped, who knows. But if you are willing to try Tilshila De Silva, let Vandersay go 3 matches in T20s vs a bottom ranked team.
There are also things called illusions.
Murali chucks more than allowed limit to the naked eye but it's provel scientifically he stays within the limit and you see the illusion due to his double jointed arm, that's a fact.
