TOPIC:

There is an interestting article on JR Thommo over on ESPN cricket, one that people might be keen to look at when time permits. Debatting how fast Thommo bowlled, it has contributions from the Chappell boys, Marash Sir IVA Richards and some others whom faced the man. The general consensus was that he was right up there with the bast in terms of pace with only P Patterson surpassing him.

I would add that you don't bowl good batsmen, such as AW Greig, unless you could sling them down really quickly over 22 yards. He bowlled against some good players in 1974-5 -- there were no batting collapses from England in those days -- to say nothing of the WI batsmen the following year.

Well, at least I thought so, until I read some of the comments on the article -- some statting that Thommo would struggle today as batsmen 'would step out to him', use their better 'reflexes' and the reverse sweep.

All rubbish of course -- even on today's slower pitches, Thommo would be a handful, in the same way Mitchell Johnson proved to be in our time. As to the new ways that today's batsment would have magically dealt with Thommo's pace, we can forget those claims. If any batsmen tried such tactics quite a few would end up being badly hit, even with helmets; a piece of equipment, which of course, those whom question Thommo's imapct, forget, that Dennis Amiss never had in 1974.

Ark i can remember Steve Waugh top edging Patrick Pato for 6 at the Waca.Boom,boom was quick.
Have never been able to work out why another bowler hasnt used Thomos action,the slingshot.Probably the closest being Malinga from Sri Lanka.

ArkRoyal wrote: There is an interestting article on JR Thommo over on ESPN cricket, one that people might be keen to look at when time permits. Debatting how fast Thommo bowlled, it has contributions from the Chappell boys, Marash Sir IVA Richards and some others whom faced the man. The general consensus was that he was right up there with the bast in terms of pace with only P Patterson surpassing him.

I would add that you don't bowl good batsmen, such as AW Greig, unless you could sling them down really quickly over 22 yards. He bowlled against some good players in 1974-5 -- there were no batting collapses from England in those days -- to say nothing of the WI batsmen the following year.

Well, at least I thought so, until I read some of the comments on the article -- some statting that Thommo would struggle today as batsmen 'would step out to him', use their better 'reflexes' and the reverse sweep.

All rubbish of course -- even on today's slower pitches, Thommo would be a handful, in the same way Mitchell Johnson proved to be in our time. As to the new ways that today's batsment would have magically dealt with Thommo's pace, we can forget those claims. If any batsmen tried such tactics quite a few would end up being badly hit, even with helmets; a piece of equipment, which of course, those whom question Thommo's imapct, forget, that Dennis Amiss never had in 1974.

Laughable to think that today's batsmen would be able to handle anything other than on a flat track 20-20 style pitch.

gtr: I think Clarke and Stephenson could also fire them down at times. I have always felt a bit sorry for the WI players whom got banned for life because of going to South Africa, three or four years would have been more appropriate.

swan 42: the amazing thing is that, yesterday I watched part of an interview with B A RIchards, one of the best ever, whom claimmed to be taught the MCC way, whom said he would throw the coach's book out. He referred to Lehmann, someone whom batted with his eye with success.

I nearly fell out of my chair laughing at the great South African batsman. Lehmann, as you know was no Barry Richards, because he was not taught how to bat properly. South Australia has had a long line of such left handers all of whom have failled Australia at test level because of lack of batting technique.

The man, Lehmann was a first rate shield and county batsman, if he passed wind in Leeds train station, the crowd would give him a standing ovation because of his batting exploits for Yorkshire; natural talent can only take you so far, something also supportted in the career of Michael Bevan, whatever Barry Richards thinks.

I saw Thommo in that 74 - 75 series at the WACA , terrorising the English batsmen including poor old Colin Cowdrey who had been lured out of retirement because of all the Englishmen maimed by Thommo and Lillee. I also saw him bowl the next year against the West Indies in a test that Australia lost, mainly due to a certain Andy Roberts who was bowling pretty fast as well ( not forgetting Michael Holding too) and a magnificent counter attacking innings from Roy Fredricks (169?). Believe you me he was fast, very fast. He also hated batsman so no matter what the modern player would have tried, Thommo would have still had his share of success these days. The only fast bowler who was scarier than Thommo in my opinion was the late Malcolm Marshall.

Mike...I saw an interview of Thommo a few weeks ago where he recounted the story about Cowdrey...apparently the poor bugger walked out to the wicket, straight past the umpire and went up to Thommo and tried to shake his hand obviously hoping he'd go easy on him...Thommo told him to fu*k off or words to that effect...bloody funny interview.

AR I missed Thommo in his absolute speed demon prime (74-76) before he injured his shoulder in that collision with Alan Turner but having seen the footage from that 74/75 Ashes series I doubt that many have been quicker than that.
A few of those West Indies boys in the late 70s/early 80s, Shoahib Akhter & Brett Lee from the modern era plus Frank Tyson & Fred Truemen from the 50s/60s would have been around the mark at their quickest but none as quick as Jeffrey Robert Thomson as Ian Chappell would call him.
Interestingly another quicky from the modern era who could hurl them down 150+ on his day was Shaun Tait who had a similar action to Thommo!

BH: I agree with all that, and I never saw him in his prime either. I think Benaud used to go on about Tyson and Thommo as the quickest he had seen in his time watching cricket in both Australia and England.

One good story from the comments section of the article was an Englishman whom relatted an experience watching JR in 1981. Thommo was bowlling for Middlesex against an Australian xI, and apparently, he let rip, putting Greame Wood in hospital. The point to stress about that story is that Lord's has always been a slow pitch, and yet, Thommo had his countrymen hopping around.

mike h
swan 42 and others

did you see the following bat:

Barrington
Boycott
Cowdrey
if so whom was the better player?

cheers.

Unpredictability was Thommo's greatest asset.....speed was his greatest weapon....the two combined was scary.....Marshall had control and speed, both fantastic bowlers in their hey day....Turner was the worst test selection Australia ever made, he killed Thommo's career.

ArkRoyal wrote: BH: I agree with all that, and I never saw him in his prime either. I think Benaud used to go on about Tyson and Thommo as the quickest he had seen in his time watching cricket in both Australia and England.

One good story from the comments section of the article was an Englishman whom relatted an experience watching JR in 1981. Thommo was bowlling for Middlesex against an Australian xI, and apparently, he let rip, putting Greame Wood in hospital. The point to stress about that story is that Lord's has always been a slow pitch, and yet, Thommo had his countrymen hopping around.

mike h
swan 42 and others

did you see the following bat:

Barrington
Boycott
Cowdrey
if so whom was the better player?

cheers.

42 would no doubt have seen W.G Grace bat in his prime AR!!