• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Ajmal Action Reported

BoyBrumby

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Mike Selvey on Ajmal's ban.

The Guardian's chief cricket correspondent seems to concur with my theory:

Mike Selvey said:
The electronic equipment used to detect the angles of the arm and the speed are sophisticated. The bowler must reproduce the same speeds and spin rotation as in match play, and there is comparison with real-time down to ultra-slow footage. Thus, it has become increasingly difficult to camouflage faults and certainly Ajmal appears to have been unable to do so.
Click to expand...
 
Adders

Adders

Cricketer Of The Year
So whats the upshot of all of this then?? Is this more ammunition for the Murali knockers and will a legend of the game now have a bigger question mark against his records?? Are people scrubbing his name off their ATG lists as we speak??

Even though I'm on the other side of the fence I do get the opinion of those that want these suspect players tested and ousted, I do........but I'm failing to find any positive in this. Bowlers that I loved to watch and brought so much unique diversity to the game are now being tagged "dirty rotten cheats"...........just doesn't sit well with me at all I'm afraid.
 
T

Tom Halsey

International Coach
Adders said:
Even though I'm on the other side of the fence I do get the opinion of those that want these suspect players tested and ousted, I do........but I'm failing to find any positive in this. Bowlers that I loved to watch and brought so much unique diversity to the game are now being tagged "dirty rotten cheats"...........just doesn't sit well with me at all I'm afraid.
Click to expand...
I don't think there is a positive in it either but how pleasant or otherwise a finding is has no relevance to its truth value. In other words, just because it would be nice to pretend he wasn't gaining any unfair advantage over his peers doesn't mean we should do so.

I was hoping that these tests would show him to be within the legal limits for more than one reason, chief amongst which being that I think cricket is better for Ajmal's presence. But the plain fact is that if these tests are correct then he is gaining an unfair advantage over his competition who actually keep within the laws of the game. Obviously one solution to this, which AMZ posted a while ago, is to just do away with the chucking law and let everyone chuck. I'm not against this in principle but realistically it isn't happening. So, IMO, the only option left is to ban Ajmal and everyone else who fails these tests.

Regarding Murali. Ajmal having passed one test five years ago and having failed one now is pretty far from proving anything about Murali and I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise. But, whatever the reasons behind it, the possibility of someone being cleared on one occasion and then being found to chuck it five years later is problematic for the Murali case. Whether Ajmal passed one test and failed another because his action legitimately changed and got worse or because he cheated the system the first time in a way he wasn't able to subsequently due to the procedure improving, either way it has been shown that his being cleared the first time around didn't mean that all of his deliveries forever more were legal. This would equally apply to Murali 10-15 years ago. It's not proof that he threw, far from it, and I would still hope that he didn't. But at the same time I think it is now hard to regard any test that Murali underwent as absolute proof that he never threw it.

One thing that I have never understood (possibly the answer is widely known or obvious, but I haven't read much about this sort of thing) is regarding those tests that were done at a Champions Trophy, I believe, that found that Sarwan and Giles (IIRC) were the only bowlers in international cricket with 0 degrees of flexion. From the way that any piece mentioning this reads, those tests were carried out in game. So why can't we test bowlers in game now? I presume the answer must be obvious/well known seeing as it hasn't been done but I am not sure why.
 
watson

watson

Banned
Adders said:
So whats the upshot of all of this then?? Is this more ammunition for the Murali knockers and will a legend of the game now have a bigger question mark against his records?? Are people scrubbing his name off their ATG lists as we speak??

Even though I'm on the other side of the fence I do get the opinion of those that want these suspect players tested and ousted, I do........but I'm failing to find any positive in this. Bowlers that I loved to watch and brought so much unique diversity to the game are now being tagged "dirty rotten cheats"...........just doesn't sit well with me at all I'm afraid.
Click to expand...
Throwing in a phrase like 'unique diversity' does make the reader feel good temporarily, but a euphemism doesn't disguise the fact that bowlers like Ajmal undermine the very foundation of bowling, and what it means to bowl a cricket ball.

Unhinge the meaning of bowling by deviating from an ethos that dates back to the 19th century and you unhinge the entire sport of cricket.
 
Last edited:
Adders

Adders

Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah look, I've got no real counter for that watson........I disagree with you, but I can't say you're wrong. I guess this just comes down to opinion at the end of the day.

In 2012 when Ajmal ripped England apart I was posting on another forum, everyone was up in arms over him convinced he was chucking and therefore a cheat...........I just couldn't get my self worked up over it. I was just in awe of his skill and performance and knew I was watching a very special bowler. As an Eng fan it would have been easy (and far more convenient) if I could have got sucked into the we were cheated brigade, but it didn't bother me and I couldn't make it bother me.

Even now after he has been found to exceed the laws and in all probability was back then, I still don't feel like Eng were cheated in the UAE..........I still say we were outdone by a class bowler.

Perhaps I'm naive I dunno, but 10°, 15°........20°............I just don't care.
 
watson

watson

Banned
Adders said:
Yeah look, I've got no real counter for that watson........I disagree with you, but I can't say you're wrong. I guess this just comes down to opinion at the end of the day.

In 2012 when Ajmal ripped England apart I was posting on another forum, everyone was up in arms over him convinced he was chucking and therefore a cheat...........I just couldn't get my self worked up over it. I was just in awe of his skill and performance and knew I was watching a very special bowler. As an Eng fan it would have been easy (and far more convenient) if I could have got sucked into the we were cheated brigade, but it didn't bother me and I couldn't make it bother me.

Even now after he has been found to exceed the laws and in all probability was back then, I still don't feel like Eng were cheated in the UAE..........I still say we were outdone by a class bowler.

Perhaps I'm naive I dunno, but 10°, 15°........20°............I just don't care.
Click to expand...
"Cheating" is an emotive word and not useful in the current context. Personally, I don't care much whether Ajmal was cheating or not (he probably wasn't) as it's secondary to the overall effect that chucking has on the meaning of bowling and the ethos of cricket. Chucking is the enemy, not the bowler. So let's play the ball rather than the man.
 
sledger

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
He was doing something not permitted by the rules in order to leverage a competitive advantage. He was cheating,
 
watson

watson

Banned
sledger said:
He was doing something not permitted by the rules in order to leverage a competitive advantage. He was cheating,
Click to expand...
Apparently, it is possible to chuck and not be aware that you are chucking. That means that you are not cheating, just bowling incorrectly.

......Lock continued to take wickets in heaps at home. The hapless Kiwi batsmen of 1958 were no match for his guile and occasional speed as he devastated them to capture 34 in the series at just 7.47 apiece, with eleven scalps at Leeds.

Yet, success abroad eluded him. In the Ashes series of 1958-59, England sent what was hyped as their strongest ever team. Peter May’s men were trounced 4-0 and Lock finished with just five wickets from four Tests. His bowling, suited to the helpful English wickets, was toothless on the hard tracks of Australia where finger spinners have traditionally struggled.

At the other side of the Tasman Sea, however, Lock found the soft surface of Christchurch very much to his liking. Five for 31 and six for 53 ensured the third 11-wicket haul of his career, and scripted his first success story away from England. Yet, this was the very tour in which Lock was shocked when shown a film of his own bowling. The action was so obviously illegitimate that he exclaimed, “Had I known I was throwing I wouldn’t have bowled that way.”

The second remodelling

So, at the age of 30, Lock went back to the drawing board and began to sketch his future with a legitimate action. His bowling became almost orthodox, classical. The loop had returned, and guile was added from his treasure troves of experience.


Tony Lock: A colourful character and an excellent left-arm spinner - Latest Cricket News, Articles & Videos at CricketCountry.com
Click to expand...
I have no reason to doubt Tony Lock's word.
 
Last edited:
sledger

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
Yeah look, the notion that somebody cannot break the rules unless they intentionally do so is bull.
 
outbreak

outbreak

First Class Debutant
I still think they should be fining\reprimanding the cricket boards that allow players with dodgy actions into the side. Pakistan should be held responsible for not testing him themselves. It's amazing how some players with suspect actions go all the way through their development to international cricket without their home board trying to rectify the issue.
 
A

Arachnodouche

International Captain
The bowler is always aware of his action feeling a bit different if it's a one-off like the doosra or an effort bouncer. The only way he can be lulled into a false sense of security is if authorities let him get away with a flawed action for a long period, in which case it becomes chronic and second nature.

I think it's a bit of both in Ajmal or any other bowler's case for that matter. Nobody sets out to break rules from the outset but glitches can creep in subconsciously. It's the law's job to stem the rot so well done to the ICC in this case.
 
Last edited:
D

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
Prince EWS said:
There's a difference between breaking the rules and cheating IMO.
Click to expand...
Nah, everybody knows that when a bowler oversteps the front line by half an inch he's actually a cheating bastard and a terrible person who doesn't respect the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top