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

[sledger]

Because if you're not enough without it, you'll never be enough with it.

 

[a spambot]

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?

flexion isn't the same thing as hyperextension

 

[honestbharani]

flexion isn't the same thing as hyperextension

I don't think every fast bowler in the world had hyperextension..

 

[Scaly piscine]

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?

Why should a delivery that was illegal and (as far as we can tell) not bowled for over a century suddenly be legitimate and commonplace now?

Legitimising the doosra is not good for cricket as far as I'm concerned. It pretty much cannot be bowled without chucking. That trumps any reason you can come up with for allowing the delivery.

 

[a spambot]

I don't think every fast bowler in the world had hyperextension..

it sounds more likely than every bowler over the last 100 years chucking without anyone noticing

 

[honestbharani]

it sounds more likely than every bowler over the last 100 years chucking without anyone noticing

no.. not at all. Especially because no one had any ****ing clue what hyperextension was until Murali and Shoaib showed up..

 

[honestbharani]

Why should a delivery that was illegal and (as far as we can tell) not bowled for over a century suddenly be legitimate and commonplace now?

Legitimising the doosra is not good for cricket as far as I'm concerned. It pretty much cannot be bowled without chucking. That trumps any reason you can come up with for allowing the delivery.

So if there was a 100 year period when no one bowled fast, you would ban fast bowling too?

 

[honestbharani]

it sounds more likely than every bowler over the last 100 years chucking without anyone noticing

And there have been more stories of guys reported to be chucking than anyone having hyperextension in the past 10 years alone.. But then again, when facts don't suit your argument, why bother about them?

 

[a spambot]

no.. not at all. Especially because no one had any ****ing clue what hyperextension was until Murali and Shoaib showed up..

people didn't know what hyper extension was? i'm sorry but people have known what hyperextension is since long before the first game of cricket was played.

also murali didn't hyperextend his elbow.

 

[honestbharani]

people didn't know what hyper extension was? i'm sorry but people have known what hyperextension is since long before the first game of cricket was played.

also murali didn't hyperextend his elbow.

no.. he had a different kind of hyperextension.. But it was that, alright..

 

[honestbharani]

people didn't know what hyper extension was? i'm sorry but people have known what hyperextension is since long before the first game of cricket was played.

also murali didn't hyperextend his elbow.

not cricket fans.. not the majority of them.. And since you seem to think Murali doesn't have hyperextension, I am guessing you don't know about it fully either.

 

[a spambot]

no.. he had a different kind of hyperextension.. But it was that, alright..

you're telling me that a guy who apparently couldn't even fully extend his arm somehow managed to hyper extend it? i'm honestly not sure you know what hyper extension is.

 

[honestbharani]

try googling hyperextension + Murali..

 

[Cevno]

Made this post earlier in the other thread -

But the Seamers then get extra speed from that extra hyper extension too. Bowl slower if you want to stay in the limit, IMO.

And spinners as you say have hyper extensions too, depending on their actions especially when they want to bowl the quicker delivery. Also what you are forgetting with spinners is that there needs to be some leeway for wrist and finger (and even shoulder) action to put revs on the ball.

That whole argument that seamers deserve more leeway because they bowl faster and have hyperextension is nonsense. Bowl slower if you want to stay in the limit then because by any stretch of logic bowling quicker is a advantage just like spinning the bowl more is.

 

[a spambot]

his arm is clearly in a flexed position, not even fully extended, let alone hyper extended

 

[honestbharani]

his arm is clearly in a flexed position, not even fully extended, let alone hyper extended

you have no idea what hyperextension is, do you?

 

[Cevno]

Why should a delivery that was illegal and (as far as we can tell) not bowled for over a century suddenly be legitimate and commonplace now?

Legitimising the doosra is not good for cricket as far as I'm concerned. It pretty much cannot be bowled without chucking. That trumps any reason you can come up with for allowing the delivery.

Seriously, that's your argument against the Doosra?

Similar arguments were used against reverse swing when all countries couldn't do it a while back(Mostly by fans/players of countries who couldn't themselves). Game evolves and new variations come in and rightly so as long as they are within the rules.

And the rules evolve over the time too, like almost all the rules have right from LBW to playing conditions. And this thread in itself is a example of why this specific rule had too.

 

[a spambot]

you have no idea what hyperextension is, do you?

define hyperextension for me then.

 

[honestbharani]

define hyperextension for me then.

hyperextension hy·per·ex·ten·sion (hī'pər-ĭk-stěn'shən)
n.
Extension of a joint beyond its normal range of motion.

 

[honestbharani]

hyperextension hy·per·ex·ten·sion (hī'pər-ĭk-stěn'shən)
n.
Extension of a joint beyond its normal range of motion.

Nothing there that states the joint should be a straight position or a flexed position when it starts..