So the ICC evidence is finally in - and apparently even Glen McGrath chucks...

[Spark]

The fact that it looks like chucking. That's not good.

 

[silentstriker]

Why? EIther it's chucking, or it's not. Who cares what it "looks" like?

 

[uvelocity]

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.

I'm old enough to be a geezer, but I think you misunderstand me.

Test cricketer bowls to the edge of limit. Looks like chucking, gets advantage over traditional bowling style, takes wickets.

Club cricketer encouraged by TV, blatantly chucks, would not pass test, but there is no test, gets even more advantage.

Club cricket becomes a mess due to rampant chucking. Traditional spinners cease to exist in top flight cricket due to the pursuit of almost-chucking through the grass roots.

I don't like the scientifically 15 degree proven actions. But I like even less what the looks like chucking but can't prove it might cause in the rest of cricket.

 

[silentstriker]

I'm old enough to be a geezer, but I think you misunderstand me.

Test cricketer bowls to the edge of limit. Looks like chucking, gets advantage over traditional bowling style, takes wickets.

Traditional bowling style was also to the edge of the current limit - that was the point of the change. There was no advantage.

Club cricketer encouraged by TV, blatantly chucks, would not pass test, but there is no test, gets even more advantage.

Club cricket becomes a mess due to rampant chucking. Traditional spinners cease to exist in top flight cricket due to the pursuit of almost-chucking through the grass roots.

That's about seven steps of maybes, none of which may come to pass. I'm not worried about it.

 

[uvelocity]

There was no advantage.
That's about seven steps of maybes, none of which may come to pass. I'm not worried about it.

No advantage I definitely disagree with. Look at most off spinners, then look at Ajmal/Murali. In a world of their own.

May come to pass, I'm saying it is happening now. Umpires are not allowed to call chucking now in my competition.

 

[silentstriker]

No advantage I definitely disagree with. Look at most off spinners, then look at Ajmal/Murali. In a world of their own.

Can you work me through your logic? McGrath bends his elbow 12 degrees and gets no advantage while Ajmal bends it and gets advantage?

And as an aside, putting Murali in the same column as Ajmal in terms of actions makes no sense for a variety of reasons.

 

[Jarquis]

Definitely has come to pass, there's a guy at my club who chucks. Everybody knows he chucks, it's a bit of a joke at nets and the like and then he rolls out on a Saturday and takes 3/20 each week or something.
Now while he didn't start chucking due to watching TV, it's just the way he 'bowls', there is an attitude from some that "It happens elsewhere so meh".

 

[uvelocity]

Can you work me through your logic? McGrath bends his elbow 12 degrees and gets no advantage while Ajmal bends it and gets advantage?

And as an aside, putting Murali in the same column as Ajmal in terms of actions makes no sense for a variety of reasons.

Can't say as I have studied McGrath's arm bend tbh. It never looked like chucking live, the title of this thread is actually the first time I've ever considered such a suggestion. Will need to inspect further.

Spin vs Pace is probably as ridiculous as you consider comparing Ajmal to Murali. And really, I'm no physician. I'm not even a bowling technique officianado. If you want me to disect the actions of each bowler and explain the mechanics, I'm afraid I'll disappoint you.

Don't think that makes my thoughts irrelevant though.

 

[silentstriker]

Can't say as I have studied McGrath's arm bend tbh. It never looked like chucking live, the title of this thread is actually the first time I've ever considered such a suggestion. Will need to inspect further.

That's the whole point isn't it? You can't tell when someone is chucking because some people's action naturally look better to the naked eye compared to others. So the majority of bowlers were chucking but getting away with it (e.g getting an unfair advantage). That's the whole point of testing it.

Spin vs Pace is probably as ridiculous as you consider comparing Ajmal to Murali. And really, I'm no physician. I'm not even a bowling technique officianado. If you want me to disect the actions of each bowler and explain the mechanics, I'm afraid I'll disappoint you.

Don't think that makes my thoughts irrelevant though.

Well if you're going to say that one guy who bends it 12-14 degrees doesn't get an advantage while the other guy who bends it 12-14 does, it very much needs to be explained why before we can move further.

And spin bowlers were also chucking by the old rule.

 

[uvelocity]

it very much needs to be explained why before we can move further.

And spin bowlers were also chucking by the old rule.

Before move further shall sleep. Hopefully can have some other inputs. Maybe I will have an epiphany. Probably not though, most likely will awake thinking you are wrong but unable to say why

 

[honestbharani]

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.

and LBWs should look like LBWs? No matter what hawkeye or hotspot says?

 

[Daemon]

and LBWs should look like LBWs? No matter what hawkeye or hotspot says?

That's not his point. His point was the possible influence it might have on the game. I don't agree with it, but he's not trying to say that technology is wrong or that the human eye is superior.

 

[Cabinet96]

Definitely has come to pass, there's a guy at my club who chucks. Everybody knows he chucks, it's a bit of a joke at nets and the like and then he rolls out on a Saturday and takes 3/20 each week or something.
Now while he didn't start chucking due to watching TV, it's just the way he 'bowls', there is an attitude from some that "It happens elsewhere so meh".

I went on a youth county tour last summer and most teams, us included, had a guy who chucked. Haven't seen them as regularly in club cricket but they're definitely there, especially from youths, which is a bit worrying to be honest.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Can you work me through your logic? McGrath bends his elbow 12 degrees and gets no advantage while Ajmal bends it and gets advantage?

And as an aside, putting Murali in the same column as Ajmal in terms of actions makes no sense for a variety of reasons.

McGrath bent his arm 12 degrees because of hyper-extension. He has a quick arm. It's not realistic to bowl fast without that bend.

Ajmal bends his arm that much because he chucks. Murali bends his arm that much on his doosra because he chucks. As do most if not all slower bowlers who bowl the doosra.

That is the difference. That's why the earlier allowances were 10 degrees for a quick and 5 degrees for a spinner. They just didn't study it properly and when the ICC did they ****ed it up again. There was no need to allow spinners to have 15 degrees. The allowance should be PURELY about allowing people to bowl within the laws after hyper-extension takes place. Because you don't really have any control over hyper-extension. That's part of cricket, this 15 degrees has made chucking (doosras) part of cricket and it's not right.

 

[a spambot]

McGrath bent his arm 12 degrees because of hyper-extension. He has a quick arm. It's not realistic to bowl fast without that bend.

yeah. i mean just watch him bowl ffs there is clearly no flexion of the arm whatsoever

 

[silentstriker]

McGrath bent his arm 12 degrees because of hyper-extension. He has a quick arm. It's not realistic to bowl fast without that bend.

Ajmal bends his arm that much because he chucks. Murali bends his arm that much on his doosra because he chucks. As do most if not all slower bowlers who bowl the doosra.

That is the difference. That's why the earlier allowances were 10 degrees for a quick and 5 degrees for a spinner. They just didn't study it properly and when the ICC did they ****ed it up again. There was no need to allow spinners to have 15 degrees. The allowance should be PURELY about allowing people to bowl within the laws after hyper-extension takes place. Because you don't really have any control over hyper-extension. That's part of cricket, this 15 degrees has made chucking (doosras) part of cricket and it's not right.

Uh, no, it wasn't measuring hyperextension. Can you point me to something showing where it said that is what it was?

 

[Scaly piscine]

Uh, no, it wasn't measuring hyperextension. Can you point me to something showing where it said that is what it was?

From all the articles it seems quite clear that they measured bending of the arm. End of story. Why would they take out hyper-extension when they can't measure it precisely anyway and then not bother to mention doing that? You've got your assumption and burden of proof the wrong way around.

Continuing on looking back at the articles it's quite interesting that the cameras they used for the study were 250 frames per second. I really don't see how they couldn't analyse in-game footage, so okay it may end up costing more to get the cameras in place and have the footage studied. But really this is 2012 and there should be something better than allowing a guy to blatantly chuck through a Test match or series until a process kicks in which involves bowling in artificial conditions.

 

[honestbharani]

That's not his point. His point was the possible influence it might have on the game. I don't agree with it, but he's not trying to say that technology is wrong or that the human eye is superior.

We only have UDRS and technology and 3rd umpires at the highest levels of the game. Doesn't mean umpiring, fielding or running between the wickets get adversely impacted at the lower levels... There are still bowlers at the club level who get wickets due to incompetent or poor or simply biased umpiring. They will only get found out if they play at a higher level but we don't raise a **** storm about such things.. There are always factors that let people get away with stuff at the club level that they wont get away with at the international level. Just deal with it instead of saying we should implement totally silly and arbitrary measures to discourage these things that happen at the club level.

 

[honestbharani]

McGrath bent his arm 12 degrees because of hyper-extension. He has a quick arm. It's not realistic to bowl fast without that bend.

Ajmal bends his arm that much because he chucks. Murali bends his arm that much on his doosra because he chucks. As do most if not all slower bowlers who bowl the doosra.

That is the difference. That's why the earlier allowances were 10 degrees for a quick and 5 degrees for a spinner. They just didn't study it properly and when the ICC did they ****ed it up again. There was no need to allow spinners to have 15 degrees. The allowance should be PURELY about allowing people to bowl within the laws after hyper-extension takes place. Because you don't really have any control over hyper-extension. That's part of cricket, this 15 degrees has made chucking (doosras) part of cricket and it's not right.

it is not realistic to bowl a doosra without that bend either. Why is suddenly fast bowling more important to cricket than a spinner bowling a doosra?

 

[honestbharani]

McGrath bent his arm 12 degrees because of hyper-extension. He has a quick arm. It's not realistic to bowl fast without that bend.

Ajmal bends his arm that much because he chucks. Murali bends his arm that much on his doosra because he chucks. As do most if not all slower bowlers who bowl the doosra.

That is the difference. That's why the earlier allowances were 10 degrees for a quick and 5 degrees for a spinner. They just didn't study it properly and when the ICC did they ****ed it up again. There was no need to allow spinners to have 15 degrees. The allowance should be PURELY about allowing people to bowl within the laws after hyper-extension takes place. Because you don't really have any control over hyper-extension. That's part of cricket, this 15 degrees has made chucking (doosras) part of cricket and it's not right.

Explain again, if I find fast bowlers who can bowl fast within 5 degrees of flexion, then you will ban blokes with actions like McGrath?