Chuckers

[Maximas]

Right, but take the example of Cameron Gannon, whose action was reported in the SS final and when he was tested it was shown he extended 24 degrees, are you saying he should be banned until he is tested again and shown to be within the limit - cos that's more or less what happened, I don't think the actual rules are far off what you want to see happen tbh

 

[hendrix]

It was always quite apparent to me that the whole "McGrath and Pollock do it too" was more of a throw-away line by the ICC targeting the public to encourage acceptance of Murali, in a time where a lot of people were doubting him. Suggesting that McGrath and Pollock were straightening their arms the same amount as Murali is absurd.

There is not enough facepalm in the world, tbh.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Right, but take the example of Cameron Gannon, whose action was reported in the SS final and when he was tested it was shown he extended 24 degrees, are you saying he should be banned until he is tested again and shown to be within the limit - cos that's more or less what happened, I don't think the actual rules are far off what you want to see happen tbh

I'm not the one who brought up the "Zero tolerance" thing, I was just responding to someone who was trying to be a smartass and failing miserably.

I think the Cameron Gannon situation was handled perfectly.

There is not enough facepalm in the world, tbh.

If you're not going to contribute anything, and just going to make yourself look ignorant then why even bother posting tbh

 

[Maximas]

Was laughing at Hendrix btw

 

[Maximas]

I'm not the one who brought up the "Zero tolerance" thing, I was just responding to someone who was trying to be a smartass and failing miserably.

I think the Cameron Gannon situation was handled perfectly.

Well, you did say you wanted zero tolerance, I was just seeking clarification, I agree Gannon was handled well

 

[hendrix]

If you're not going to contribute anything, and just going to make yourself look ignorant then why even bother posting tbh

You can't just add a little bit of temperance to the end of an argument full of absolutes and misinformation and then pretend that the whole post was serious, measured and comprehensive.

Basically, this is the way your posts have been on this topic:

1. Start with outrageous, inflammatory comment with no thought or justification to it. (e.g. "It's complete rubbish")

2. Say something like "why don't you contribute to the discussion" when people respond to your comments with the same level of thought and justification as you displayed.

3. Add a couple of paragraphs of more measured thoughts on the topic. Act like you were posting this way the whole time.

4. Repeat.

Don't hold the rest of us to the standards of step 3 when you're still reverting to steps 1 and 2 at the beginning of every post.

 

[TheJediBrah]

You can't just add a little bit of temperance to the end of an argument full of absolutes and misinformation and then pretend that the whole post was serious, measured and comprehensive.

Basically, this is the way your posts have been on this topic:

1. Start with outrageous, inflammatory comment with no thought or justification to it. (e.g. "It's complete rubbish")

2. Say something like "why don't you contribute to the discussion" when people respond to your comments with the same level of thought and justification as you displayed.

3. Add a couple of paragraphs of more measured thoughts on the topic. Act like you were posting this way the whole time.

4. Repeat.

Don't hold the rest of us to the standards of step 3 when you're still reverting to steps 1 and 2 at the beginning of every post.

m8 it's been like 5 pages since I was being outrageous and inflammatory get with the times

If you want to keep discussing in that tone then I'd question your motives but I'd rather keep things relevant and mature. Stop living in the past buddy.

 

[hendrix]

yes, it's always my motives and maturity and relevance in question, not yours, right?

 

[TheJediBrah]

In all seriousness, you're the one whose come in and being inflammatory and unconstructive now, because you feel upset(?) that I was like that a week ago?

Why?

 

[hendrix]

The point is that you can't post this:

It was always quite apparent to me that the whole "McGrath and Pollock do it too" was more of a throw-away line by the ICC targeting the public to encourage acceptance of Murali, in a time where a lot of people were doubting him. Suggesting that McGrath and Pollock were straightening their arms the same amount as Murali is absurd.
.

And then expect a serious answer. I'm not going to suck eggs responding to this other than to say that it's stupid and ignores all the positive discussion that you have previously contributed.

 

[TheJediBrah]

And then expect a serious answer. I'm not going to suck eggs responding to this other than to say that it's stupid and ignores all the positive discussion that you have previously contributed.

Sorry mate but there's nothing silly about that post.

Are you honestly telling me you think that McGrath and Pollock straightened their arm the same amount as Murali? Because if you do, that's fine, but there's really no point having this discussion if the only thing you disagree with is a matter of opinion.

So keep trying to start fights if you want, but I'm really not interested.

 

[Maximas]

You're basically rubbishing the opinions of others and then trying to blame others for the degrading of discussion, stop playing the blame game and get on with discussion if that's all you want to do

 

[TheJediBrah]

You're basically rubbishing the opinions of others and then trying to blame others for the degrading of discussion, stop playing the blame game and get on with discussion if that's all you want to do

Treat others how you want to be treated. Don't be an asshole to me and expect me to be all lovey dovey. "rubbishing the opinions of others" is most of what I've seen go on in here.

You're only targeting what I've said as "rubbishing the opinions of others" because it's counter to what you believe.

 

[Flem274*]

kinda apt a thread about chucking has degenerated into mud throwing.

 

[Migara]

Those old laws actually make a lot more sense. the faster you bowl, the faster your arm action, the more you are vulnerable to unavoidable flexion as a result of the end your arm being left behind as you bring it over the shoulder.

Wrong mate. What's important is the arm speed more than the speed of the ball. Bowlers like Murali and Warne have arm speeds of a fast bowler. Since the ball is released differently, it arrives slower. there is no way to say that every fast bowler puts more stress on their arms than every spinner. There are some overlaps.

 

[fredfertang]

kinda apt a thread about chucking has degenerated into mud throwing.

Harsh - it's bloody difficult to type without bending your elbow

 

[Maximas]

Treat others how you want to be treated. Don't be an asshole to me and expect me to be all lovey dovey. "rubbishing the opinions of others" is most of what I've seen go on in here.

You're only targeting what I've said as "rubbishing the opinions of others" because it's counter to what you believe.

I can't be bothered finding out who started the war, but there was no bull**** going on until you arrived, and it a lot of it wasn't about opinions. We are only treating you like **** while we try to back up our arguments with evidence you just come out with these statements like "do you seriously believe ect ect". I'm rubbishing your opinion because time and time again you simply tell us we are talking **** and that your conspiracy theories are foolproof.

I don't care particularly if you disagree with what I'm saying, you don't have to believe my evidence or anything either, but don't tell me I'm talking **** when you've got nothing to back yourself up with.

 

[Migara]

i'm not trying to wind up anyone but we've had this discussion 48 times in the last couple of years, and i got really interested and looked into everything i could find about it. nowhere was any figure on mcgrath, pollock or anybody else mentioned (except sarwan) the actual quote (which i have probably quoted half a dozen times on cw is



the key part being bowlers like

but yet migara keeps ****ing warmongering trying to say these guys chucked, to somehow make his countryman seem more legit.

when i was about 12 or something i was listening to the test where daryl hair noballed murali. we were on a family holiday in myall lakes and instead of swimming i had the car radio going with abc on listening to the cricket and i was cheering so hard that he was getting no-balled, absolutely loved it. years later i watched the video with him bowling in an arm brace and i can see now that he didn't ever cheat at all, and i'm completely convinced by murali's action. plus he is such a seeminly top bloke and nice fella you can only wish him the best.

but i think the biomechanics have it wrong, and again something that ive posted repeatedly is some nz research that suggests its not the amount of elbow flexion, but rather the rate or speed of elbow flexion that determines a chuck. at the end of the day the worst part about it all is the as usual lack of info that comes out of cricketing governing bodies, keeping fans in the dark about the facts and the process and creating controversies.

The key part is when you use like, it means for an example. Trying to twist the facts will not work. Pollock and McGrath were mentioned because they are examples for such an act. No need of rocket science, they extend their elbows up to 12. Trying to "goebbelising" things will not work in 21st century.

 

[Migara]

It was always quite apparent to me that the whole "McGrath and Pollock do it too" was more of a throw-away line by the ICC targeting the public to encourage acceptance of Murali, in a time where a lot of people were doubting him. Suggesting that McGrath and Pollock were straightening their arms the same amount as Murali is absurd.

Know the prurists are butthurt, but that's what tests have shown. **** happens, so live with it.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I can't be bothered finding out who started the war, but there was no bull**** going on until you arrived, and it a lot of it wasn't about opinions. We are only treating you like **** while we try to back up our arguments with evidence you just come out with these statements like "do you seriously believe ect ect". I'm rubbishing your opinion because time and time again you simply tell us we are talking **** and that your conspiracy theories are foolproof.

I don't care particularly if you disagree with what I'm saying, you don't have to believe my evidence or anything either, but don't tell me I'm talking **** when you've got nothing to back yourself up with.

And that's exactly what's been directed at me these last 2 pages. "you're wrong, tests how this", no evidence. I was happy to let go that whole discussion because it's obviously not going to go anywhere, there is no sufficient evidence to either side (probably the reason people aren't "backing themselves up" funnily enough) but for some reason you guys keep bringing it back up.

You only notice when I did it because you don't agree with it.

Like this:

Know the prurists are butthurt, but that's what tests have shown. **** happens, so live with it.

If I said something like that you would be all over me. Nothing to back it up, pointing to tests that no one has seen the results to, relying on his own assumptions.