Chuckers

[TheJediBrah]

I'll take your word for it then

You can't accuse us of "talking out our asses" and then asking us to believe your 'logical' theories which have no basis in proof

I wasn't making any claims, just pointing out my opinions.

Seriously though, these bowlers are here to stay and we might as well accept it.

What pisses me off is that the Australian system is never going to let them through. If some kid starts bowling like these spinners then the coaches are not going to let him. Especially when the Chairman of Selectors is coming out and saying things like "we will never allow Australian spinners to bowl the doosra because we want to keep our integrity".

I guess we'll just have to import one from Pakistan.

 

[uvelocity]

been a few weeks since we had a chucking debate

 

[Prince EWS]

I wasn't making any claims, just pointing out my opinions.

Seriously though, these bowlers are here to stay and we might as well accept it.

What pisses me off is that the Australian system is never going to let them through. If some kid starts bowling like these spinners then the coaches are not going to let him. Especially when the Chairman of Selectors is coming out and saying things like "we will never allow Australian spinners to bowl the doosra because we want to keep our integrity".

I guess we'll just have to import one from Pakistan.

Who needs the doosra when Nathan Lyon has the Jeff?

 

[Maximas]

I legit haven't seen Jeff since the Perth test - does he still bowl it?

 

[Migara]

Proven to be legal during the tests administered.

The ICC opened a can of worms when they changed the rule to stop umpires calling Murali. They didn't back the umpires that they had put there in the first place and now they and us are paying for it. If Murali's action was fine then it would hold up and they needn't have changed the rules. Proofs were made (whether you believe them or not) and yet the rule didn't revert to their original composition.
We now go down a different yet related rabbit hole with the DRS and again ICC are really screwing umpires over IMO

They found that McGrath and Pollock also extend their elbows as much as Murali. It was to stop umpires calling McGrath and Pollock as well. When all bowlers extend their elbows to various degrees, the previous rule became a just bloody joke that no one cared about.

 

[Migara]

to be fair I don't really follow Bangladesh, obviously Murali is retired but one Sri Lankan I remember seeing in the Big Bash last year, Senenayake, had a shocking action.

He was tested before he was selected to play SL. He was just fine

"Tested and proven legal" is very different from actually being a legal action during matches.

So could be the ones with clean actions. So test them all during match situations. Don't pick and choose on the fact that the nationalistically biased human eye is seeing a dodgy action.

Faster bowlers it tends to happen just as a matter of course, and even then you can barely notice it live. The major issue is with spinners. I know for me personally, that it really takes away from the enjoyment of the game when there is a bowler blatantly.

Fast bowlers chucking it is bloody awful, because that will become their "faster balls" and injure batsman. It's more the fast bowlers who should be banned from chucking.

Don't be fooled by the propaganda. I don't think it is. And if it is then 15 degrees is obviously way too much.

We'll reduce it to 10 and see McGrath's and Pollock's records contain an asterik next to them, as matter of fact half of the bowlers.

 

[Migara]

Watch Glenn McGrath bowl, then watch Murali bowl. And try to tell me that they are bending their arm the same amount.

It's complete rubbish.

If your eye is so good at picking it up, then we'll eliminate third umpire and use you for the line decisions. Completely joke of an argument.

 

[Manee]

Pretty sure they look at speed, accuracy and turn when they measure bowlers. These are scientists, they are not going to make basic methodological errors. Also, the theory that their is some sort of conspiracy is the one which requires the evidence. The default view should be that there is no conspiracy.

 

[Manee]

Watch Glenn McGrath bowl, then watch Murali bowl. And try to tell me that they are bending their arm the same amount.

It's complete rubbish.

They are not bending their arm the same amount. They are straightening their arm a similar amount.

 

[Manee]

I wasn't making any claims, just pointing out my opinions.

People are annoyed by your opinions because they are the commonly-held yet ill-informed opinion. What you are saying is not original, people have heard it all before. It is the gut-instinct view but if you do the reading, it has no basis in truth.

 

[OverratedSanity]

People are annoyed by your opinions because they are the commonly-held yet ill-informed opinion. What you are saying is not original, people have heard it all before. It is the gut-instinct view but if you do the reading, it has no basis in truth.

While his opinion isn't well informed, it does point to the fact that chucking in matches is nigh on impossible to properly detect, because while all this talk of gut instinct not being an accurate way to say if one is chucking is well and good, that's exactly what umpires have to rely on. And let's face it, when they called Murali for throwing, they were right... Under those roles he WAS chucking, as was everyone else.

Also, let me just say that even though I love Murali and I think he's arguably the greatest bowler ever, if under lab supervision when he must have been conscious of not chucking it, he was barely under the limit, then it's a very very fair assumption to make that he, along with most bowlers chuck the ball fairly regularly when they're out there in a pressure cooker situation and focused solely on getting as much spin/pace out of the next delivery to get a wicket. There's nothing that can be done. You've just got to love with it

 

[TheJediBrah]

Does anyone know why these spin bowlers are so much easier to see "chucking" with the naked eye than others who appear not to, but they claim are straightening their arm the same amount?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Additionally why have I still never seen any reason to believe that these guys aren't changing their actions when being tested?

It's incredibly ignorant to think they aren't. Why do you think Ajmal tends to always wear long sleeves during matches?

All I've heard in this thread is the same empty claims everyone's been hearing for over a decade, like this:

They found that McGrath and Pollock also extend their elbows as much as Murali. It was to stop umpires calling McGrath and Pollock as well. When all bowlers extend their elbows to various degrees, the previous rule became a just bloody joke that no one cared about.

"they got tested, he was under 15 degrees"
"everyone straightened their arms the same"
"they had experts viewing to make sure they didn't change their action"

It's a complete farce. So the naked eye is obviously so unreliable to tell if bowlers are chucking or not, but we trust the naked eye to judge that they are not changing their actions while being tested?

Come on, people, where has the common sense gone.

 

[Manee]

It's a complete farce. So the naked eye is obviously so unreliable to tell if bowlers are chucking or not, but we trust the naked eye to judge that they are not changing their actions while being tested?

Come on, people, where has the common sense gone.

They test that the ball is delivered at the same speed, accuracy and/or spin. The people that test the actions are scientists, not conspirators.

 

[hendrix]

Common sense as a term today means "I'm going to ignore the evidence and opinions of experts because my ignorance is better than your knowledge"

Additionally why have I still never seen any reason to believe that these guys aren't changing their actions when being tested?
.

a) because you haven't looked
b) because you've ignored what people have told you

answer is here:

I very much understand the frustration that bowlers could potentially fool the system by sticking within the laws during testing and exceeding them during play, but the video analysis is there to ensure that their actions haven't changed since testing.

It's certainly not foolproof.

Ideally we'd come to a point where every bowler can have little motion trackers stuck to each of their inflexion points and no balls could be automatically called live. That's what I'd want.

Until then, we have to hope that the video is being closely monitored to ensure that bowling actions don't change from when they were tested.

 

[TheJediBrah]

They test that the ball is delivered at the same speed, accuracy and/or spin. The people that test the actions are scientists, not conspirators.

Is this supposed to relevant at all? Speed would be relevant for a quick or Marlon Samuels. Application of scientific method for these tests is appalling, and certainly not statistically significant. This is what makes me see it as more of an appeasement to fans rather than genuine results.

Common sense as a term today means "I'm going to ignore the evidence and opinions of experts because my ignorance is better than your knowledge"

a) because you haven't looked
b) because you've ignored what people have told you

answer is here:

Like I said, compare the video testing to matches where the bowler is wearing long-sleeved baggy shirts? Makes sense.

And you know bowlers aren't bowling every single ball with the same amount of flexion, even if they tried it's not possible.

As long as we can agree it's not fool-proof. Honestly I would rather just measure the actions in game if we could, and I'm sure that will be the next step because any rational scientifically inclined individual can tell how pointless lab testing is in these situations.

 

[hendrix]

As long as we can agree it's not fool-proof. Honestly I would rather just measure the actions in game if we could, and I'm sure that will be the next step because any rational scientifically inclined individual can tell how pointless lab testing is in these situations.

Well I'm a scientist. That is my day job. I would call myself a scientifically inclined individual and I do not think lab testing is at all pointless.
I agree that it would be better for live testing to be available. I've already proposed how this might occur.

As for the video analysis - I believe it measures speed, revolutions, direction of revolutions, and perhaps some (subjective - as an objective measure would be far too time consuming to make) measure of how close the action remains to what was tested in the lab. I think this is a good, but not foolproof system.

Live testing would absolutely be better. But this cannot be achieved by the umpires. I've already proposed how this live testing might occur in the future.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Well I'm a scientist. That is my day job. I would call myself a scientifically inclined individual and I do not think lab testing is at all pointless.
I agree that it would be better for live testing to be available. I've already proposed how this might occur.

As for the video analysis - I believe it measures speed, revolutions, direction of revolutions, and perhaps some (subjective - as an objective measure would be far too time consuming to make) measure of how close the action remains to what was tested in the lab. I think this is a good, but not foolproof system.

Live testing would absolutely be better. But this cannot be achieved by the umpires. I've already proposed how this live testing might occur in the future.

I agree. And hence why I can't shake the feeling that certain bowlers are achieving an unfair advantage.

To be perfectly honest I probably wouldn't care so much if there were some "dodgy" looking spinners playing in Australia but our system is not allowing it and I feel that it's putting us at a slight disadvantage, especially playing on the subcontinent.

 

[Daemon]

So essentially you're just jelly

 

[TheJediBrah]

So essentially you're just jelly

pretty much

and pissed off at aussie administrators