"I didn't like the idea of having a third man, because a third man was always a wasted fielder as far as I saw, and to actually hit the ball to third man you needed a basic sort of control with your batting, and otherwise you nicked it to third man, so you might as well have slip in position to get a wicket.
Message Board Archives
The world's No. 1 bowler
2016-12-02 02:03:27
2016-12-02 02:04:48
2016-12-02 04:05:46
In reply to shivnotout
interesting that nearly 30% of Graham Swanns victims were LBW making him one of the most successful in the lbw tables Lance Gibbs on the other hand had the lowest percentage rate 6.8% making him the least successful ??? 
2016-12-02 06:22:19
In reply to shivnotout
He is a very knowledgeable bowler. Serious thinker.
2016-12-02 16:14:23
In reply to ponderiver
Gibbs bowled in an era where batsmen could push their pads down the wicket and pretend to play a shot.
Umpires always said not out then
2016-12-02 16:16:28
In reply to MasterP
If gibbs was playing today his wickets would have been much more
2016-12-02 16:27:36
My father played cricket against Lance Gibbs.....he always reminds me of this fact when I talk to him about cricket... which he doesn't care to follow any more....
2016-12-02 18:10:24
In reply to ponderiver
Also interesting to see how much Gibbs may or may not have operated from over the wicket to the lefties. I know it's customary now to operate around the wicket.
2016-12-03 16:12:20
[b]In
Every off spinner during those years suffered the same fate.
2016-12-03 19:12:23
Plus there was the false premise, not supported by geometry, that an offspinner bowling round the wicket could not get lbw decisions
2016-12-04 06:23:23
In reply to CricketLuva4
the LBW rule was different then as someone mentioned. u could simply pad out all day...sure that had some influence
was Lance also a bigger turner of the ball?
Search
Live Scores
- no matches