Comments on: Fighter Batsmen and Stud Bowlers http://noenthuda.com/blog/2009/03/18/fighter-batsmen-and-stud-bowlers/ Wed, 08 Sep 2010 16:54:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Studs and Fighters and Form | Pertinent Observations http://noenthuda.com/blog/2009/03/18/fighter-batsmen-and-stud-bowlers/comment-page-1/#comment-2858 Studs and Fighters and Form | Pertinent Observations Sun, 02 Aug 2009 07:46:19 +0000 http://noenthuda.com/blog/?p=1218#comment-2858 [...] seems like Johnson is a stud bowler (as I’d remarked earlier, Test match bowling in general is stud). And the theory goes that form matters so much less for the [...] [...] seems like Johnson is a stud bowler (as I’d remarked earlier, Test match bowling in general is stud). And the theory goes that form matters so much less for the [...]

]]> By: skimpy http://noenthuda.com/blog/2009/03/18/fighter-batsmen-and-stud-bowlers/comment-page-1/#comment-1742 skimpy Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:25:47 +0000 http://noenthuda.com/blog/?p=1218#comment-1742 no - he needs to be able to bat long enough for him to score 50 runs, however long that is. given his studness, he doens't need to be as fighter as others (for eg, to get 50 he needs to stay 30 balls while others need to stay for 50). and don't make the mistake of matching studness with fflamboyance nad fighterness with grind. some fighters can be extremely elegant to watch - like dravid, or maybe gavaskar. no – he needs to be able to bat long enough for him to score 50 runs, however long that is. given his studness, he doens’t need to be as fighter as others (for eg, to get 50 he needs to stay 30 balls while others need to stay for 50).

and don’t make the mistake of matching studness with fflamboyance nad fighterness with grind. some fighters can be extremely elegant to watch – like dravid, or maybe gavaskar.

]]> By: skimpy http://noenthuda.com/blog/2009/03/18/fighter-batsmen-and-stud-bowlers/comment-page-1/#comment-1741 skimpy Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:23:56 +0000 http://noenthuda.com/blog/?p=1218#comment-1741 i'm not sure this tallies with what i've said. as i've said you can have stud batsmen and fighter bowlers. batsmen need not be fighter and bowlers need not be stud. i’m not sure this tallies with what i’ve said. as i’ve said you can have stud batsmen and fighter bowlers. batsmen need not be fighter and bowlers need not be stud.

]]> By: Lord Labak Das http://noenthuda.com/blog/2009/03/18/fighter-batsmen-and-stud-bowlers/comment-page-1/#comment-1732 Lord Labak Das Fri, 20 Mar 2009 08:25:15 +0000 http://noenthuda.com/blog/?p=1218#comment-1732 Reading it again, looks like my idea of a "stud" turned out to be very different from yours. Reading it again, looks like my idea of a “stud” turned out to be very different from yours.

]]> By: Lord Labak Das http://noenthuda.com/blog/2009/03/18/fighter-batsmen-and-stud-bowlers/comment-page-1/#comment-1729 Lord Labak Das Fri, 20 Mar 2009 04:00:31 +0000 http://noenthuda.com/blog/?p=1218#comment-1729 Interesting. Had never thought of cricket that way. Where does this theory lead ? Stud is generally more attractive than the fighter (at least in the short term, and from the point of view of the impatient new generation and casual viewers). ODI gives more scope for studs as it elevates the batsmen and still gives scope for bowlers for studness. T20 takes it even further. Even bowling a maiden over becomes a stud activity. Or even a few great stops. Perhaps that is the explanation the casual cricket watchers find T20 more attractive and ODI more than Tests. But like movies centred around stunts and fights, too much studness can soon get invaded by a certain sameness and boredom. When we were kids, we all loved stunt movies and often could not bear to watch movies with a proper storyline. When we become mature this changes a bit. Same with T20/ODI/Tests. Interesting. Had never thought of cricket that way.

Where does this theory lead ? Stud is generally more attractive than the fighter (at least in the short term, and from the point of view of the impatient new generation and casual viewers). ODI gives more scope for studs as it elevates the batsmen and still gives scope for bowlers for studness.

T20 takes it even further. Even bowling a maiden over becomes a stud activity. Or even a few great stops.

Perhaps that is the explanation the casual cricket watchers find T20 more attractive and ODI more than Tests.

But like movies centred around stunts and fights, too much studness can soon get invaded by a certain sameness and boredom. When we were kids, we all loved stunt movies and often could not bear to watch movies with a proper storyline. When we become mature this changes a bit. Same with T20/ODI/Tests.

]]> By: shrikanthk http://noenthuda.com/blog/2009/03/18/fighter-batsmen-and-stud-bowlers/comment-page-1/#comment-1720 shrikanthk Thu, 19 Mar 2009 11:03:20 +0000 http://noenthuda.com/blog/?p=1218#comment-1720 It is a v.good generalization. A fighter batsman like Chanderpaul may end up with a career batting average of 50. But a fighter bowler like Chris Harris is never going to have a test bowling average of less than 25. @varun - sobers was mainly a batting allrounder. Averaged 35 with the ball which isn't special It is a v.good generalization. A fighter batsman like Chanderpaul may end up with a career batting average of 50. But a fighter bowler like Chris Harris is never going to have a test bowling average of less than 25.

@varun – sobers was mainly a batting allrounder. Averaged 35 with the ball which isn’t special

]]> By: Rajesh http://noenthuda.com/blog/2009/03/18/fighter-batsmen-and-stud-bowlers/comment-page-1/#comment-1717 Rajesh Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:47:43 +0000 http://noenthuda.com/blog/?p=1218#comment-1717 Sehwag really does not need the ability to play long innings. His prowess lies in the fact that he scores the same number of runs in lesser time. Thulping is the order of the day in batting. The traditional grinders like Padams and Atherton are gone by. Only Shiv remains from that genre. Dravid, for all his fighter instincts is getting increasingly sidelined. Sehwag really does not need the ability to play long innings. His prowess lies in the fact that he scores the same number of runs in lesser time. Thulping is the order of the day in batting. The traditional grinders like Padams and Atherton are gone by. Only Shiv remains from that genre. Dravid, for all his fighter instincts is getting increasingly sidelined.

]]> By: Varun http://noenthuda.com/blog/2009/03/18/fighter-batsmen-and-stud-bowlers/comment-page-1/#comment-1716 Varun Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:48:42 +0000 http://noenthuda.com/blog/?p=1218#comment-1716 Which is why Bradman & Tedulkar are mortals but Sir Garfield Sobers is GOD! stud+Fighter=Studfight MAX!!! Which is why Bradman & Tedulkar are mortals but Sir Garfield Sobers is GOD! stud+Fighter=Studfight MAX!!!

]]>