Pretty sure Truman and Snow won the ashes as well Ern?

LOL. I'm aslo pretty sure that what cost the Aussies the Ashes in 2005 was inability to play lateral movement (Jones' conventional and reverse swing, Hoggard's swing and to a lesser extent Flintoff's reverse swing).

I also recall Imran, Wasim and Waqar getting the odd bit of reverse swing. Oh, and Wasim in particular was one of the foremost exponents of swing bowling in his generation. As for Marshall: generally regarded as one of the 2-3 most complete bowlers in the history of the game... not least for his complete mastery of swing (both inswing AND outswing in the latter half of his career). Walsh was pretty good at getting swing as well. Roberts also: had this nice touch of showing the batsman the ball as he ran up and then turning it over in mid-delivery.

All rather misses the point though: selectors might invariably WANT a seam attack to match a theoretical one of Lindwall, Lillee and Marshall... you still need to start by looking at folk who've got the talent as a bowler and then see if you can get the extra yard of pace out of them rather than go looking for javelin throwers in pubs!

ps. Devon Malcolm vs Gus Fraser? No contest:Fraser did more of the hard yards, took more of the wickets, took his wickets at a HUGELY better average, built pressure that Malcolm invariably dissipated and to cap it all... ended his career with a significantly better strike rate!

I don't think Gilchrist OR Jayawardene would've survived against Curtley Ambrose on a Perth wicket. This Youtube video shows what Ambrose was capable of - Curtley Ambrose devastating spell of 7 for 1 run v Australia. Scorecard.

What other type of bowler could intimidate batsmen with a stare at the end of their follow-through?

Could a swing bowler have become so destructive in the same circumstances?

On Youtube - Dean Jones ANNOYS Curtley Ambrose! Australia v Windies

Well I know John Snow did - it was a series in 1971 in Australia I think.
It was not pretty though - Snow felled Terry Jenner with a (legitimate bouncer).YouTube - The John Snow Incident

Lillee and Willis also played in this game, which is famous for the "John Snow Incident".

Another more unfortunate incident was when Peter Lever fractured the skull of Ewen Chatfield Sportsfreak - Calling all sports freaks!, his heart acctually stopped after he swallowed his tounge.

Nobody want to see injuries, but when Englands Gatting had his nose spattered by Marshall in the West Indies, I think every Englishman wanted a bowler the like of Lillee or Marshall that would make a player not get into line, for fear of being injured if they were not good enough to play genuine pace.

This also had the effect of players learing better techniques against these quick bowlers which was good for cricket, but even the best players of pace have little reaction times when facing the speeds generated by bowlers like Lee and Tait, 2 of the worlds most underrated bowlers - even by their own board at times IMO.

When you compare a medium pacer with a genuine pace bowler, one may look prettier, but the other more often than not - is by far more effective.

Two of the most pleasing and easy run ups in International cricket, were by John Snow, and even better by Michael Holding.

__________________
Ern

Cricinfo tells me FST was an ashes winner in 1956 for the record.

I remember the Gatt incident very well. The 2 funniest things I've read associated with that were firstly he blew his nose when he got back to the dressing room and it all come out at 90 degrees much to this displeasure of his team mates and secondly at Heathrow with 2 huge black eyes and an x shaped plaster over his nose one journalist asked him where it hit him!!

Well, I think one thing that's needed to counter moving balls is quick reflexes, which isn't a problem for Gilchrist. Maybe he wouldn't have had the same impact, but 30 years ago he probably would have averaged in the '30s- as good as Knott, Dujon or Marsh.

By the way, players didn't necessarily have to have orthodox techniques to do well. Viv Richards was very unorthodox, and he did more than just survive.

Don't agree and neither do I agree with anything so far mentioned in this thread.

The first thing a fast bowler needs is PACE. You can't coach pace, it's either there or it isn't, whereas you CAN coach a repeatable action, line and length and pretty much everything else but you still cannot coach pace.

It's no different to genuine swing bowlers, either they have an action that naturally swings the ball or they do not and no amount of coaching will turn a non-swing bowler into a swing bowler. You can of course coach how to control swing and harness it but you cannot coach someone to swing the ball if their natural action does not do it.

So what use is a naturally repeatable action if the ball bowled is totally inefective? Without pace, seam, bounce, control or swing a repeatable action is worthless.

That is very true... Thankfully the modern coaches have recognised this and bowlers are encouraged to bowl fast if they have it in them because they can always get control later through practise.

A fast bowlers action is natural and the problem with a lot of young bowlers (i.e Plunkett) is that they have had their natural actions tampred with too much by coaches which is all well and good but as soon as you lose the rhythm you revert to your natural action and it all goes **** up!

Pace and quality spin are the two most potent weapons at all levels of cricket and its no surprise to see the current top teams all have good pace attacks while funnily enough since Englands pace attack crumbled and got replaced with a meduim pace version their fortunes have shown a strong decline.

What i do find ridiculous is a county pie thrower like Bicknell who was fortunate to play test cricket* having a bitch and saying that Pollock wouldnt have played for England. Its fairly obvious that Pollock being a hit the deck bowler who can bat and field would have been an automatic pick for England under Fletcher!

* I had the misforune of watching Bicknell lead an England attack v Australia at Leeds in '93. The ball was moving all over the place early on (and to be fair for most of the first day) and Bicknell managed not many for 150 odd from 50 overs.... Although the ball was moving he was so slow that the likes of Border and even Waugh could wait and watch the swing. I only saw Bicknell beat the bat twice all day (and they were consecutive balls) in bowler friendly conditions.

__________________
Mark.

This notion that "you can't coach pace" is utter nonsense, and the problem with such sweeping statements is that it only takes one exception for the assertion to be open to ridicule. Well, look no further than Collingwood: recognised by all to have added "a yard of pace" in recent times.

Any coach worth his salt would back himself to get an extra yard or two of pace out of Broad over the next two years. He has what tennis coaches look for in a young player: an action that gives the player the chance to utilise improved physique and with areas that can be improved without disrupting the basics.

All of this is rather besides the point though: what made Dexter's plan so absurd was the lack of realism - he really did underestimate what is involved in coaching technique and control (and most especially that glorious wrist position needed for genuinely mature bowling)... and completely undervalues the merits of bowlers who can manage technique and control without the pace.

Dexter comes across as someone who'd pass over Fraser, McGrath, Hoggard and Bedser in favour of a single Sami or Tait: pretty dumb.

I think it depends of fast twitch muscles. Some bowlers have them others don't and no amount of coaching will make them into a fast bowler. Broad is still growing and hasn't reached his potential when it comes to speed. Only in a few years will we know what his average bowling speed will be.