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

[honestbharani]

Its CW. Its whinging and more whinging.

 

[honestbharani]

I find a lot of that nonsensical, and you seem to have ignored what has already been said and parrots queries I've already answered. McGrath occasionally bends his arm 12 degrees because it's not possible to bowl fast without it happening. 99% of fast bowlers occasionally bend their arm past 10 degrees. Do we want all 99% of fast bowlers banned? Of course not they're part of the game. But the game doesn't need artificial deliveries introduced to make spinners more effective. Doosras are not cricket and not good for cricket.

Botha's bowling is hideous. That he's worse than Swann is not the point. You will see more of guys like him and less of people who are bowling spin as how it was bowled for over a century. The rulings from 2004 make it perfectly acceptable to chuck like Botha, there are lots of doosras about already but there's going to be an epidemic when the next generation sees Ajmal throwing his team to victory.

There are plenty of legitimate ways to bowl, we don't need chucking in cricket.

I would love to know how you got to "McGrath OCCASSIONALLY bends it 12 degrees" and 99% of the fast bowlers bend it more than 10 degrees..


And no one wants to bowl like Botha, trust me. If you gotta model your action on someone, you would do it off someone good..

 

[ankitj]

Its cricket, its batting and bowling.

Resistant to change, eh?

 

[Spark]

In the end, the whole idea of bowling is that you're supposed to keep as straight an arm as possible. That's what I was taught as a kid, that's what everyone is taught as a kid. The straightening rule is a way of codifying that (because bowling with a bent arm and keeping it at the precisely the same angle throughout the action without any straightening isn't particularly easy or effective, let's be honest) If, by hyperextension or for medical reasons (Murali) it becomes impossible to keep a completely straight arm or bowl without a little straightening, then that's fine. But if you're consciously flexing/bending your arm in your bowling action then I'm not so cool with that.

 

[Migara]

I am OK with testing Ajmal's teesra because it is not tested earlier. But his off break and doosra has been tested and cleared. There should be zero discussion on it.

Better would be to test every bowler in the lab and as well as in the playing conditions. Singling out guys bevause you don't like their action or just he demolished your team is not the right way.

 

[a spambot]

i maintain that any straightening of a flexed arm is chucking. straightening a hyperextended arm ala shoiab/lee is fine but straightening from a flexed position is chucking, always has been chucking and always will be in my mind.

 

[Pothas]

Resistant to change, eh?

Not at all just resistant to changing the entire nature of the game as you seem to be suggesting we do.

Never had a problem with Murali, think unusal and experimental bowlers are fantastic but the basic idea of bowling and not throwing is fundemental to the whole game and always has been. It can be underam, roundarm, overarm or whatever but it is bowling and not throwing.

Basically what Spark just said.

 

[uvelocity]

he demolished your team is not the right way.

I don't want to write anything more about it until I get a couple of things clearer in my head. But one of them was sort of like what spark said. The intent feels important to me. Are you trying to bowl as the game was intended to be played, or are you using technicalities to try to circumvent what has always been fair play.

And the quote above is definitely not part of it. Couldn't be happier the poms copped a hiding, and even with Murali, if he had been disallowed as I think he probably should have been cricket would have been a much poorer game for his absence.

 

[Black_Warrior]

i maintain that any straightening of a flexed arm is chucking. straightening a hyperextended arm ala shoiab/lee is fine but straightening from a flexed position is chucking, always has been chucking and always will be in my mind.

LOL @ your name

 

[Daemon]

Ajmal Chucks

No, it's been proven he doesn't, how about we wait until the results for the teesra are out

He obviously throws, look at this replay

Looks shouldn't matter, because it's been proven he doesn't chuck

Looks matter because maybe the chucker is going to be wildly successful, and maybe kids will try to emulate him, maybe some of them will find success at a low level of cricket, maybe they get away with it at a higher level and then maybe we will suddenly find ourselves with hindreds of Ajmals and no Swanns.

Maybe once they're in the international scene then they can't escape any longer?

The doosra is bad.

The ICC cleared it.

Integrity, bro, integrity.

 

[Doctor]

ah the same old debate about spinners chucking. Its the biggest non issue out there. Spinners don't threaten physical injury if they chuck or throw, so I don't think there's any real need to have rules preventing that. Get me more bowlers that can bowl doosras, teesras, carrom balls etc and leave batsman look stupid.

That's not the point. Heck, by that logic, then we might as well pitch it like in baseball (slower or further away.) Cricket is unique to other bat and ball sports in many ways, and one of the ways it stands out is because of the straight-arm bowling action.

 

[Spark]

Yeah the injury argument is weird. No one's arguing that anyone will get injured, but it simply is not cricket. One of the first things I learnt about playing the sport - don't chuck.

 

[Daemon]

ah the same old debate about spinners chucking. Its the biggest non issue out there. Spinners don't threaten physical injury if they chuck or throw, so I don't think there's any real need to have rules preventing that. Get me more bowlers that can bowl doosras, teesras, carrom balls etc and leave batsman look stupid.

Wow.

 

[vic_orthdox]

It's a massive issue at lower levels, guys get away with chucking all the time because they're not going to be tested, but they aren't going to be pulled up because guys bowl with bent arms in international cricket.

Also, surely Murali didn't have hyperextension, the whole thing is that he can't have his arm fully straight?

 

[Black_Warrior]

"If Murali was allowed to take more than a thousand international wickets then how could the ICC turn round to this bloke and say you’re a cheat? Remember, too, that off spin was a dying art before these guys came along and they have rejuvenated this form of bowling. And that has to be for the good of the game as a whole." - Nasser Hussain

 

[GIMH]

Nasser has changed his tune, hugely anti-Murali as a player.

Anyway the injury line is a little strange. I mean no one is under threat from injury if a batsman pads up to one pitching middle and hitting middle so why don't we start ignoring that rule as well?

 

[Black_Warrior]

Nasser has changed his tune, hugely anti-Murali as a player.

Anyway the injury line is a little strange. I mean no one is under threat from injury if a batsman pads up to one pitching middle and hitting middle so why don't we start ignoring that rule as well?

I don't think he is supporting Murali.. All he is saying is..if you have allowed Murali take 800 wickets, there is no way in hell you can stop Ajmal..which is my take as well. I know there are some issues with Ajmal's action but if Murali was allowed to ball, you cannot ban Ajmal.

 

[Spark]

It's a massive issue at lower levels, guys get away with chucking all the time because they're not going to be tested, but they aren't going to be pulled up because guys bowl with bent arms in international cricket.

Also, surely Murali didn't have hyperextension, the whole thing is that he can't have his arm fully straight?

Yeah that's what I meant by the medical reasons - he's just a bit of a freak physiologically (I mean that in the nicest possible way)

 

[GIMH]

I don't think he is supporting Murali.. All he is saying is..if you have allowed Murali take 800 wickets, there is no way in hell you can stop Ajmal..which is my take as well. I know there are some issues with Ajmal's action but if Murali was allowed to ball, you cannot ban Ajmal.

True but I was surprised just to read the good for the game line.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I am OK with testing Ajmal's teesra because it is not tested earlier. But his off break and doosra has been tested and cleared. There should be zero discussion on it.

Better would be to test every bowler in the lab and as well as in the playing conditions. Singling out guys bevause you don't like their action or just he demolished your team is not the right way.

That's pure codswallop. It's based on the entirely false premise that no bowlers ever change their actions. Passing a test once in laboratory conditions is not a licence to chuck henceforth. An analogy would be being cleared of armed robbery and immediately walking down to Barclays with a sawn off. "I can't be robbing you, I've been tried and cleared."

If bowlers couldn't change their action those who exceed the limits in testing would be pissing in the wind with their "remedial work" before being tested again, wouldn't they?

FFS.