Naseem Shah recently began his first spell in Test cricket to one of the most supportive cheers he’s ever likely to hear from an opposition crowd.
Just 16 years of age – a fact suspect to scrutiny – Nassem had earned the respect of an Australian audience ready for the next Pakistani tearaway with hostile spells in the warm-up matches, despite, remarkably, only taking one wicket in two innings.
It was the first game in Perth where Naseem successfully roughed up Marcus Harris and Usman Khawaja, and it was enough to build significant anticipation ahead of his arrival to the Test arena. The key factor: pace. What was in store for someone so young could only be imagined. A bouncy Gabba awaited.
What followed, of course, was one of the most anti-climactic debuts in Test history. Match figures of 1/68 flatter a bowling display that was neither creative or incisive, despite the pace remaining around the mythical 90 miles per hour (145 kilometres per hour) mark.
The key moment was when Naseem bowled a tempter at 147, wide and full, which David Warner edged, unable to get his feet and hands out in time. For the fourth time in his career, he was relieved by the umpire’s judgement that there was an overstep.
Eventually he had his man, but Australia had lost just two wickets with a lead of over a hundred by then. The game was over and Naseem had missed his first chance to win a game for Pakistan.
(AAP Image/Richard Wainwright)
The notable aspect of Naseem’s spells was his consistency of pace. He never really lost energy at the crease and kept the speed of delivery almost exclusively above 140.
Where did it go wrong, then? How could someone so gifted end up with such bad figures?
In Australia – where so much emphasis is placed on pace – the answer was an inconsistent line and length. A failure with the bread and butter of pace bowling.
Criticising Naseem’s line and length isn’t actually founded in truth, however. He was certainly guilty of the crime committed by generations of quicks playing for the first time in Brisbane – bowling too short. But he wasn’t nearly as inconsistent as his teammate Imran Khan. Rarely too wide, usually too short.
Naseem didn’t bowl smart.
When the battle between bat and ball is at its best, both batsman and bowler feverishly anticipate the next move of their opposite numbers, with small movements and adjustments making all the difference. A bowler might notice a batsman’s tendency to jump on the front foot, or to hang deep in the crease, or to step slightly away to create room. In each of these scenarios, the correct ball is contextual.
Rarely do commentators scour the nuances of particular balls enough to notices these subtleties. When we talk about line and length as the be all and end all of bowling, we fail to realise that bowling itself has no one-size-fits-all solution.
What brings wickets is victory in the battle between bat and ball, not just bowling a good ball.
Bowling smart is only tangentially connected to the pace of a bowler. Australians should remember this, given the master of smart pace bowling plied his trade in very recent memory. Glenn McGrath’s over to Nasser Hussein ought to be compulsory viewing for cricket fans.
Darren Lehmann famously left a top-form Peter Siddle out of the side for a long time, deemed in hindsight to be a mistake after a dominant dead-rubber performance at The Oval in 2015.
What’s noticeable about McGrath’s tendency to draw out false shots from opposing batsmen is the way he used his middling pace to create uncertainty. He dealt in the fine line between instinct and thought – just too fast for the willow-wielder to think twice about their shot, but slow enough that they can’t entirely rely on their drilled instincts. The great man built uncertainty at the other end just as the batsman built an innings – usually unsuccessfully. And 125 kilometres per hour was his sweet spot.
Mohammad Abbas replaced Naseem Shah for the Adelaide Test. A master in seaming conditions, an average of 10.8 against Australia, and a serial mid-120s dweller – the perfect antidote to unrestrained and unsuccessful pace.
Abbas wasn’t poor and was regularly undermined from the other end, especially when leg spinner Yasir Shah was his partner. During his good spells, Warner and co were happy to face out maidens because scoring opportunities awaited from the other end. But the seamer failed to create any uncertainty within his own overs, and went wicketless. He rarely toyed with off stump, which is where he ought to have started.
Abbas has already enjoyed considerable success, mostly away from the eyes of Australian viewers. He’s done well to further reiterate the uselessness of medium-pacers to a speed-loving public despite being the sport’s best.
When New Zealand visit and Colin de Grandhomme first registers on a Perth Stadium radar gun, few will imagine that many wickets will fall at his end. He’s been invaluable in the Black Caps’ campaign against England, and if he’s smart, could prove an asset on unhelpful pitches later this summer.
tauranga boy
Roar Rookie
Martin Crowe was regularly given out LBW by Umpire Hare to balls missing leg stump, when he was in the 40's and looking dangerous. Annoyed me!
Brendon the 1st
Roar Rookie
I remember him operating at around 133kmh most of the time
Pieceofmerce
Guest
Not sure how the gun works. But a taller back of length bowler makes the delivery distance longer. Its trigonometry. So avegage will be down on flatter trajectory bowlers. As a batter. The pace a ball hits the bat after bouncing is noticeable. Mcgrath was an accuarate relentless great bowler who bowled at top of 5th stump to both rh an lh.
Micko
Roar Rookie
But even when he holds the ball the same the ball still varies in bounce and trajectory according to these people.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Quite right, height plus accuracy was key for him. While a few super fast quicks can get away with being shortish, as can some swing bowlers in favourable conditions, height is key for pace bowling for two reasons: extra bounce and it’s that little bit harder to pick up the trajectory of the ball from a higher point of delivery. McGrath in the 130s (rarely 125 as suggested above) was just as hard to pick up, probably harder, than short guys like Nadeem Shah or Mohammed Musa.
Paul
Roar Guru
hi Miles, it seems to me your piece comes down to one sentence, "Bowling smart is only tangentially connected to the pace of a bowler". I wonder if that's the case? I look at a guy like Jeff Thompson who was easily the fastest bowler I ever saw. He picked up swags of wickets through shear pace and was only a fraction as good when his pace dropped, later in his career. Fast bowlers, no matter what pace, talk often about bowling "effort balls", the implication being they put in more effort and bowl a delivery quicker than they've been doing? Why would they bother, if pace is not really that important? You mention Glenn McGrath as an example of a guy who thrived on Aussie pitches, but what about another medium fast bowler named James Anderson. Why didn't he do as well, given your premise? Anderson has to be a smart bowler otherwise he wouldn't have taken 575 Test wickets, yet he was nowhere near as effective in Australia as he was in England for example. Maybe he was smarter over there? At the end of the day, all bowlers have to use the conditions in a smart way and have good variety that isn't reliant on high seams from Duke balls, pitches which offer plenty of seam movement, etc. In McGrath's case, he had height, simple variations of length & speed plus slight seam movements, all of which made him tough to play. Others like the two Mitchs - Johnson & Starc - were lethal because they were quick. If you're going to be a medium pacer in Australian conditions, you have to have variation. Without it, you're going to be cannon fodder.
Rellum
Roar Guru
I think people under estimate his seam movement. The bounce with the seam movement meant even a slightly angled blade would catch the edge.
jamesb
Roar Guru
McGrath bowled in the 120's or 130's, sometimes in the high 130's, low 140's. The one thing McGrath had was his height. And from his height, he would extract extra bounce. That extra bounce along with line and accuracy at around off stump made him a very uncomfortable bowler to face. McGraths height, bounce and accuracy at off stump in the corridor of uncertainty were his key attributes. Not pace.
Azza
Roar Rookie
How were they the better side? Like MCG in 87 had hometown umpire bias and howlers go their way. Ridiculous statement when they only won and got lucky due to Lyon stuff up. Every time they play here get bad calls, D Walters scored a hollow century because an Aussie umpire deemed Cairns was bowling intimidatory bouncers to get Higgs out? The MCG test of 87 Nz actually won, S Waugh actually admitted in his book, McDermott plumb, Dyer non catch, everyone conveniently forgets all the dudding and cheating over the years, so Australia can pretend they are “ the better team”
Rellum
Roar Guru
McGrath bowled at around or just under 140 for a long time
Rellum
Roar Guru
It's not natural variation if the bowler is holding the ball differently to cause that seem movement.
Brendon the 1st
Roar Rookie
For a guy who bowled in the 120/130s Glen McGrath looked faster than he was. He had a great ball that would leap and get players (mainly Atherton) in the ribs. If you want to watch something funny look up McGrath v Atherton on YouTube........bunny.
Pierro
Roar Rookie
This is an interesting article for a change , I think there are a wicket or two we could use medium pacers/all rounders . Notably Marsh got flogged against india last year and for me is more suited on one or two of the english pitches but there may still be grounds for a test for him or stoinis. Brisbane , Adelaide DN last two matches and perth last year typically dont need the medium pacer as much as the results recently at least indicate even with newer drop in pitches. Adelaide Day tests/MCG and SCG may have more merit though and definitely hobart. He’s not a medium pacer but pattinson has delivered outstanding figures at brisbane and mcg before and he does get it moving about a bit more than the other fast pacers
Pierro
Roar Rookie
Southee isn’t a medium pacer though is he micko he’s fast pacer.? Good points on mcgrath though. Boult is more in mcgraths mode. At adelaide DN in 15 he was ripping through us with line and length and small variation , we just got home in that match and were the better side but boult left an impression on me there. I met him afterwards at an event and he felt NZ were very close and they were with his bowling largely .
Pierro
Roar Rookie
Interesting marsh until he punched a wall and stoinis have been pretty effective wicket takers in shield this season and they pale in ability of some of the great medium-fast pacers such as mcgrath , admittedly they are all rounders but theres an argument to find the right grounds for them to play at potentially
Micko
Roar Rookie
The problem is de Grandhomme and Southee don't have a large repertoire of balls they bowl, and far too often rely on swing to get them wickets which will be an issue here. McGrath didn't either, but what he had that made him such a menace to face was amazing natural variation. A guy who faced McGrath in grade cricket in Sydney said that despite the ball pitching in virtually the same areas you could never predict where the ball would end up. The bounce would be subtly different each ball, and slight changes to the angle he held the seam of the ball, meant subtle deviation either legside or offside. So it was often so difficult to hit McGrath out of the centre of the bat despite his relatively pedestrian pace.