Who is better Imran Khan or Glenn Mcgrath?

[subshakerz]

Imran Khan admitted in 1994 that he had "occasionally scratched the side of the ball and lifted the seam".

He added: "Only once did I use an object. When Sussex were playing Hampshire in 1981 the ball was not deviating at all.

"I got the 12th man to bring out a bottle top and it started to move around a lot."

From the above, he did nothing in his international career that other cricketers were not doing at the time.

 

[Sanz]

From the above, he did nothing in his international career that other cricketers were not doing at the time.

There are two parts of the statement :-

1. He occasionally scratched the side of the ball and lifted the seam. (No mention of domestic/International matches)

2. Only once did he use an object to do the above. (Mention that it was county match).

From the above, my interpretation is pretty clear - Which is Imran did lift the seam on more than one occasion. Also the above does not say anything about other cricketers doing the same, even if it did, I wouldn't buy that. Because as far as I know no other bowler has confirmed this.

I do not know the cricket laws that well, so I would like to ask - Is it legal to scratch the side of the ball and lift the seam if you can do so without using an object ?

 

[vic_orthdox]

99% sure that it is illegal.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Yeah, I really can't imagine that it would be legal.

 

[Richard]

It's illegal, and I'd imagine the number of bowlers who didn't do it numbered about 0.03425%. And those who didn't do it regularly no more than about 20% or so.

 

[Swervy]

It's illegal, and I'd imagine the number of bowlers who didn't do it numbered about 0.03425%. And those who didn't do it regularly no more than about 20% or so.

what you 'imagine', and what is fact doesnt always coincide though does it

 

[Richard]

I imagine it because others imagine it. And no, I don't often tend to imagine something which is unlikely - that'd be a bit silly now, wouldn't it?

 

[BhupinderSingh]

Ocasionally Lifting up seam & scratching the ball weren't considered any serious offense despite being against the rules of cricket.Whether you believe it or not,almost every great bowler who played before 1992 has been involved in such practices.Cricket circles started considering it serious violutions of rules after Pakistan's tour of England in 1992 where English media tried to prove reverse swing as cheating & accused Pakistani bowlers of ball tampering(and England won Ashes in 2005 by using same art of "cheating").Only after that we saw bowlers getting punished for scratching,using dirt etc to alter the condition of ball.Its also interesting that before 1992 hardly any umpire(who checks the ball after every over) or player ever rejected over bowlers doing such things.Personally,I only consider using foreign objects as any serious violation of laws.

 

[subshakerz]

From the above, my interpretation is pretty clear - Which is Imran did lift the seam on more than one occasion. Also the above does not say anything about other cricketers doing the same, even if it did, I wouldn't buy that. Because as far as I know no other bowler has confirmed this.

Why wouldn't you buy that? It was no secret that players used to scratch the ball occasionally before television coverage made it an issue. Again, here's what Michael Holding has to say, if you don't believe me:

"You can ask any fast bowler. If he says he has never tampered with the ball, he either has just started playing, or is lying. Ball-tampering has been going on for donkey's years, and started long before I was born. It is only now, because of television, that people are becoming more and more aware of it. When I played in England, ball-tampering was rampant in county cricket. I saw many bowlers tamper with the ball, like picking the seam, or applying foreign stuff. I did not know anybody used things like bottle stoppers until I heard about it recently. I wouldn't pretend I never tampered with the ball."

http://specials.rediff.com/cricket/2004/jan/21cric2.htm

 

[Burgey]

Ocasionally Lifting up seam & scratching the ball weren't considered any serious offense despite being against the rules of cricket.Whether you believe it or not,almost every great bowler who played before 1992 has been involved in such practices.Cricket circles started considering it serious violutions of rules after Pakistan's tour of England in 1992 where English media tried to prove reverse swing as cheating & accused Pakistani bowlers of ball tampering(and England won Ashes in 2005 by using same art of "cheating").Only after that we saw bowlers getting punished for scratching,using dirt etc to alter the condition of ball.Its also interesting that before 1992 hardly any umpire(who checks the ball after every over) or player ever rejected over bowlers doing such things.Personally,I only consider using foreign objects as any serious violation of laws.

Mints!!! Mints!!!
My kingdom for some mints!!!!!

 

[Sanz]

Why wouldn't you buy that? It was no secret that players used to scratch the ball occasionally before television coverage made it an issue. Again, here's what Michael Holding has to say, if you don't believe me:

"You can ask any fast bowler. If he says he has never tampered with the ball, he either has just started playing, or is lying. Ball-tampering has been going on for donkey's years, and started long before I was born. It is only now, because of television, that people are becoming more and more aware of it. When I played in England, ball-tampering was rampant in county cricket. I saw many bowlers tamper with the ball, like picking the seam, or applying foreign stuff. I did not know anybody used things like bottle stoppers until I heard about it recently. I wouldn't pretend I never tampered with the ball."

http://specials.rediff.com/cricket/2004/jan/21cric2.htm

May be holding did it and I accept my ignorance about other cricketers doing it.

That said it doesn't make it right. You are not supposed to alter the condition of the ball. It is illegal regardles of how many bowlers were doing it.

 

[Richard]

Mints!!! Mints!!!
My kingdom for some mints!!!!!

I really do wish you'd castigate me more for my use of suncream to improve the shining quality of my sweat - looks a tad hypocritical otherwise TBH.

 

[Richard]

May be holding did it and I accept my ignorance about other cricketers doing it.

That said it doesn't make it right. You are not supposed to alter the condition of the ball. It is illegal regardles of how many bowlers were doing it.

So therefore criticise all bowlers equally, not disproportionately criticise those who had the most skill and therefore made most use of the illegal actions they undertook.

Or better still, accept that the rules they were breaking were damn stupid ones and just recognise that they were brilliant bowlers regardless of a bit of illegal action which they shared with everyone else.

 

[Son Of Coco]

So therefore criticise all bowlers equally, not disproportionately criticise those who had the most skill and therefore made most use of the illegal actions they undertook.

Or better still, accept that the rules they were breaking were damn stupid ones and just recognise that they were brilliant bowlers regardless of a bit of illegal action which they shared with everyone else.

This is obviously an assumption.

 

[Son Of Coco]

:"You can ask any fast bowler. If he says he has never tampered with the ball, he either has just started playing, or is lying. [/B]

I've never tampered with the ball.

 

[Richard]

This is obviously an assumption.

It's a fairly well-founded one, though - Holding's comment on the matter sums-up it for mine. He's far from the only ex-seam-bowler to suggest such a thing. Seems like basic common-sense to me. All these ex-seam-bowlers here and there have said they undertook action which has come to be regarded as "tampering" and a crime against humanity in the last couple of decades. Some have made a high-profile issue of it, like Holding, with others it's been low-key revelations that have received little if any press. But it just makes sense - why on Earth would you not do something for which there is little chance of being discovered, which you've seen loads of other people doing, and which improves your chances?

 

[Son Of Coco]

It's a fairly well-founded one, though - Holding's comment on the matter sums-up it for mine. He's far from the only ex-seam-bowler to suggest such a thing. Seems like basic common-sense to me. All these ex-seam-bowlers here and there have said they undertook action which has come to be regarded as "tampering" and a crime against humanity in the last couple of decades. Some have made a high-profile issue of it, like Holding, with others it's been low-key revelations that have received little if any press. But it just makes sense - why on Earth would you not do something for which there is little chance of being discovered, which you've seen loads of other people doing, and which improves your chances?

What are these guys talking about though when it comes to tampering? Personally, I think a bit of sunscreen here or there is practically unavoidable. Unless you live in the UK Starting to carve at it with a bottletop etc though is a bit different. There's a difference between a bowler who can swing the ball keeping its shine for a bit longer and someone changing the characterstics of the ball by chopping up the leather.

 

[Richard]

Of course bottle-tops and stanley-knives and car-park tarmac on the ball are totally different to other things. Such cases as these are exceptionally rare and always have been, though, and no-one's referring to them.

The use of natural-substance-enhancers (such as mints, suncream, something to increase the amount your nose runs, or whatever) is very different. So is rubbing a bit of dust on the ball (dust is as natural as saliva, the only difference is it's something which takes shine off the ball, rather than adds to it). So is lifting the seam (that's not even the application of a substance).

I honestly can't say any of the examples contained in the second paragraph remotely bother me, I don't think they should be illegal (in some cases there's no way you can pass a law making them so), and it's no surprise to me that almost all seam-bowlers have used them as tactics when they knew they could get away with it.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Of course bottle-tops and stanley-knives and car-park tarmac on the ball are totally different to other things. Such cases as these are exceptionally rare and always have been, though, and no-one's referring to them.

The use of natural-substance-enhancers (such as mints, suncream, something to increase the amount your nose runs, or whatever) is very different. So is rubbing a bit of dust on the ball (dust is as natural as saliva, the only difference is it's something which takes shine off the ball, rather than adds to it). So is lifting the seam (that's not even the application of a substance).

I honestly can't say any of the examples contained in the second paragraph remotely bother me, I don't think they should be illegal (in some cases there's no way you can pass a law making them so), and it's no surprise to me that almost all seam-bowlers have used them as tactics when they knew they could get away with it.

I don't consider lifting the seam to be any different than bottle tops or sctratching the shine off the ball on the pitch to be honest.

I don't think there's any way you can prove 'almost all' seam bowlers did anything. Holding wouldn't have a wide knowledge of what goes on on the field since he left it. Unless he's managed to extract confessions from every bowler since 1970. I'd believe him for the time period he played though, and don't doubt it's happened on occasions since. I've never had anyone suggest doing anything to the ball at any level. I've also never played state or test cricket It's possibly an advantage if you can get it to do things it wouldn't normally do I suppose. If someone had told me by putting a nick in the ball somewhere I'd miraculously swing it away then maybe I would have tried it to see what happened. Not sure I'd try it in a game though.

 

[Richard]

Not sure if you've read Tom Cartwright's take on the issue - unfortunately, I can't find the quote as I can't remember what the piece was called. He too emphasised the same thing as Holding - and neatly enough, he was pretty much exactly the generation before the Jamaican.