i think they would have, his action looks really really bad.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
So the ICC evidence is finally in - and apparently even Glen McGrath chucks...
- Thread starter Slow Love™
- Start date
No almost certainly not (this is the Sun) but there would still be an awful lot of comment on here which is what I was refering to really.
smash84
The Tiger King
lol.....what a joke
Doctor
School Boy/Girl Captain
I just whipped this up.
You can see that, from this point of view, just before he has released it, the elbow is at a pretty large angle, which, to my naked eye, seems more than 15 degrees. And now I've just whipped this up, which shows its in excess of 40 degress from this angle. (although you cant really see bceause of pixels)
I'm not 100% certain of the law, but you can see at the point he releases the ball, his arm is quite straight (less than 15)
You can see that, from this point of view, just before he has released it, the elbow is at a pretty large angle, which, to my naked eye, seems more than 15 degrees. And now I've just whipped this up, which shows its in excess of 40 degress from this angle. (although you cant really see bceause of pixels)
I'm not 100% certain of the law, but you can see at the point he releases the ball, his arm is quite straight (less than 15)
benchmark00
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Haha l33t giffing.
benchmark00
Request Your Custom Title Now!
The 15 degrees of tolerance refers to how much you can straighten your arm at point of delivery.
So if just before delivery he has an angle of 40 degrees, at point of delivery his arm can only be 25 degrees.
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Don't see why this matters though. I'm no defender of the sun, it's banned in my house. But regardless of motive, a chuck is a chuck, and the Teesra is a chuck. Anyone who thinks otherwise is having a laugh tbh.
Migara
International Coach
Massive fail. Totally ignores that the arm (the humerus bone actually) rotates along three axes on the glenoid (shoulder). If you closely observe the tip of the elbow (olecranon process, if anatomically spoken) which first points towards right, rotates towards left, creating an illusion of straightening when observed from the side on view. You have to calculate the rotation along all three axes before commentingI just whipped this up.
You can see that, from this point of view, just before he has released it, the elbow is at a pretty large angle, which, to my naked eye, seems more than 15 degrees. And now I've just whipped this up, which shows its in excess of 40 degress from this angle. (although you cant really see bceause of pixels)
I'm not 100% certain of the law, but you can see at the point he releases the ball, his arm is quite straight (less than 15)
Black_Warrior
Cricketer Of The Year
Black_Warrior
Cricketer Of The Year
yes...and this man tries to be a beacon of honesty..
Doctor
School Boy/Girl Captain
I'm aware of the fundamental mathematical flaws in my post, however I'm obliged to admit that my post was more of a 'guide' as opposed to a be-all and end-all regarding the legality of his delivery, and I do apologise for the misunderstanding. I merely meant to convey that, from the side-on camera angle point of view, it appears as though Ajmal is breaking the fifteen degree legal limit, and this may be the reason that, since day one of the current test match, there are controversial opinions regarding his action. Ftr, whether or not the delivery is legal, I really don't care, as long
G.I.Joe
International Coach
That's not necessarily true. It could just be bent in a different plane to the previous one, causing it to look straight in 2 dimensions.I'm not 100% certain of the law, but you can see at the point he releases the ball, his arm is quite straight (less than 15)
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Yeah, that was the point Migara was making about his shoulder rotation.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
I didn't say it matters to whether it's a chuck - I was responding to people saying that the loud complaints had little to do with losing. Which is wrong. Pothas cleared it up to mean cw not media, which is probably right since we obsess over everything.
G.I.Joe
International Coach
Yeah, he's right. I still don't get why they can't just snap on three sensors if the umpire has his doubts and deal with it straightaway? While on the topic of obvious solutions, they could even implant sensors into the core of the ball and make hawk eye redundant.
uvelocity
International Coach
Migara, please don't think me stupid in this, but I've sat here for a while thinking and trying what you have said. It's completely foreign to me, but I can actually twist my arm at the shoulder and keep it bent, while projecting my wrist forwards. It's physically possible. I just can't reconcile that with what I'm watching with Ajmal. That doesn't seem to be what he is doing.
Anyway despite the above and more generally (and more importantly to me,) I can't help but think that it's also going to change the fundamentals of the game. It's wonderful to see batsmen innovate with reverse shots, ramp shots and fast scoring - changing the way we play the game. But.....
Bowling with dodgy looking actions proven by science, but disallowed by eye for generations (and still disallowed in 99% of cricket (here anyway,)) will give an advantage
to those who seek to bowl with undisputably dodgy animation in other forms of cricket not regulated through trial by science. We can't test every single bowler, and cricket is played by thousands of people in each country, not just 12 or 15. It needs to be simple.
If we start allowing kids here to bowl with actions which look like chucking I'm confident that within 5 years we can have some physiologically cleared, chucker looking, bowlers playing for Australia. We can have players in each shield side bowling doosra's and teesra's as soon as we allow kids and grade cricketers to look like they are chucking to the naked eye. It's probably already happening.
But I can guarantee you the same, that there will be most all of the real lovers of cricket here who feel ashamed by resorting to those tactics, and feel that we might be playing by the rules in that case - but not playing cricket.
Maybe I have some mad glasses I see the game through, but I just can't stand to see the likes of Ajmal bowling in a way completely different to every other bowler in cricket and getting an advantage from it.
For me bowling needs to look like bowling - round arm, one bounce, capable of being hit by a normal cricket shot. Anything outside of that is just playing a different sport.
Last edited:
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
What's wrong with this scenario?
You mean real cricket lovers can't handle scientifically proven facts so we should continue on playing by rules that are illogical because some old geezers are going to feel better that way? Nah, not buying that.