Did any of the Great bowlers of the past chuck?

[salman85]

Perhaps this wasn't an issue in the past,or atleast not one that is monitored as closely as it is now,but did you ever see footage of a bowler that you were too young to see live,and wonder if the action was completely legal?

I was going through some footage of Trueman today,and i thought there was a very prominent chuck on some deliveries.

Fred Trueman - Englands greatest ever fast bowler - YouTube

Watch the clip from 0:40 seconds on.

Any other bowlers from the past who have made you wonder?

 

[marc71178]

I would say it is impossible to speculate based on old videos as the cameras which they were produced on were ****.

 

[Eds]

Disagree re: Trueman. Looks as if he's got an almost perfectly straight arm, to me.

 

[zaremba]

Apparently after his retirement Don Bradman used to give presentations at which he played slo-mo footage of a particular left-arm fast bowler whom he encouraged his audience to agree to be a chucker. This was footage of Harold Larwood (himself long retired) which had been reversed. Shows an unattractively bitter side to the Don.

Now, one has to be wary of reading too much into 2D footage, but might the fast bowler whom Don praised to the heavens, Ray Lindwall, have a case to answer?

 

[Howe_zat]

Can't see anything suspect in the Trueman video.

Edit:

That looks like a straight elbow with a bent wrist, though it's obviously a poor angle with which to judge.

The Lindwall one looks much shakier. These clips don't usually mean much given the film quality and the fact that even if that is a chuck, it's just one delivery. That said, it is supposed to be on a video showing us his action.

As far as I've seen, cricket has pretty much always been at its most haphazard when trying to enforce these rules, so I can only assume that in a time when umpire reckoning was the sole tool available, it used to be even more so. There would have been plenty of bowlers not called when they should have been and called when they shouldn't have been.

At the end of the day, we just have to go with what's in the book. We have to assume that, say, negative lbw decisions that would be given today were still legit, and we have to give the same benefit of the doubt to the umpires for throwing calls too.

 

[fredfertang]

Trueman played in an era when chucking was the game's great controversy and I don't think it was ever suggested that he transgressed

... but at one time or other most fast bowlers were/are muttered about by batsmen who are beaten by sheer pace

 

[slowfinger]

Nah he was fine

 

[zaremba]

fred, are you aware of any contemporary (or more recent) mutterings about Lindwall? Everything I've read suggests he had the most wonderfully pure bowling action. There's also Pathe news footage of him bowling, albeit in the nets and presumably at half speed, where there's nothing suspicious at all.

 

[fredfertang]

fred, are you aware of any contemporary (or more recent) mutterings about Lindwall? Everything I've read suggests he had the most wonderfully pure bowling action. There's also Pathe news footage of him bowling, albeit in the nets and presumably at half speed, where there's nothing suspicious at all.

No I don't think so - he copied Larwood's action, so it must have been fine

 

[wellAlbidarned]

They (Trueman, Lindwall, Larwood) look to have a lot of wrist and just a touch of elbow in their actions, but it's well within the rules and no different to many modern bowlers.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Don't see much wrong with either of them (Lindwall and Trueman). The lesser frames per second make them look a little more jerky.

Saw some footage of Lock for the first time a while ago, that wasn't pretty.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Yeah, someone posted a vid of the "chucking controversy" of the 50s and 60s a while back and Lock's quicker ball looks a tad rancid.

It also mentioned Meckiff and the three other Australian chucking Amigos too: Keith Slater, Gordon Rourke & Jimmy Burke. The Latter's action is just comical.

 

[andyc]

Yeah, Burke's and Lock's actions especially look pretty terrible.

 

[Jager]

No idea where I read it, but Lock did realise he was throwing once he'd seen his own action on film. He then re-modelled his action and continued taking wickets.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Alec Bedser.




It's funny, but the action for the great man's delivery where he's deliberately getting some elbow into it still looks better than a few we're forced to endure nowadays.

 

[Burgey]

Botham.

Imran

Hadlee.

Marshall.

Garner.

Dev.

All look a bit dodgy

 

[stumpski]

Certainly Lock was the first name that came to my mind when I saw the thread title - of bowlers with 100+ Test wickets, anyway. The others mentioned (plus Geoff Griffin, Harold Rhodes, Geoff Cope) mostly had (unsurprisingly) short international careers. Lock's problems partly stemmed from having to bowl in the Oval's indoor nets where the ceiling was too low, resulting in a low arm.

Someone should reallly write a history of throwing, if it hasn't been done already. Issue goes right back to the 19th century.

 

[BoyBrumby]

To his credit Lock is, I think, the only chucker to 'fess up to his sin. Certainly the only one I'm aware of.

Actually, now I've said that, I think Gower did too; but his transgression was more of a one-off fit of pique rather than basing an entire career around it.

 

[Debris]

Charlie Griffith is the obvious one who comes to mind, aside from the ones who were actually banned. I do wonder if all those players who were banned would now pass inspection under the new rules.

 

[Viscount Tom]

Murali