-
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.
Sunil Narine's action reported (not to the ICC)
- Thread starter jonbrooks
- Start date
- Status
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Thought it was a rule here that it's tests unless mentioned otherwise . Yeah, they're better in LO, but who gives a **** about that?
YorksLanka
International Debutant
because the others can all change games with their wicket taking(or used to) and Ashwin very rarery does that - and yes i am taking about LO cricket..personally i give a **** about LO rather than tests..
Last edited:
The 'crackdown' started with Senanayake imo. Sure, Shillingford and Samuels were called beforehand (and let's face it, Marlon's quicker ball was more at home on a baseball field than a cricket one), but they really ramped it up once Senanayake was found to be so far over. When he hit 40 degrees or whatever, with an action that looked dodgy but not outright dire, they probably realised that a few of these guys that they previously assumed to not be too bad were likely to also be breaching the 15 limit.
Once more, I'd hardly say he was 'allowed' to throw; simply there was no way to actually make a judgement about his version of Narine's action because he only used it in one game -- you don't have a large enough set of samples to justify a report from one game. Not to mention Narine's action wasn't under any formalised scrutiny at one point -- if Ashwin got called there, then surely Narine should have been reported around the same time.
If he uses it again, especially now that Narine has been cited, I highly suspect that he'd be told to **** off and bowl properly. If he were tested and failed, then his 'Narine Ball' would surely be banned.
If there were no concerns over Narine's action at the time, then there shouldn't have been any concerns over the Ashwin one (unless, as Maximas alluded to, it was so far degraded that it looked even worse than Narine-proper). Not to mention, Narine's action hasn't been found illegal at all, so surely we can't be making the presumption than Ashwin copying Narine must be illegal.
Saying "Ashwin may have been allowed to throw" is about as useful as saying "the umpires let Narine throw for his entire career". It may be true, but it's essentially irrelevant. What's happened has happened.
Last edited:
karan316
State Vice-Captain
Seems like a few posters are avoiding to look at the overall situation here, only because they want to criticize Narine. Its pretty clear that the whole situation was dealt in an unfair manner.
Four games in a row, he looks clean,
all of a sudden, in the 5th game, there's an issue with his quicker ball, that was still fine, because these quicker deliveries might look a bit suspicious.
6th game, he doesn't use a single quicker delivery, but hey, now there's an issue with the other deliveries he bowled, and he is banned.
The situation doesn't look normal at all. Other spinners, who looked a lot more suspicious were reported aswell, but they didn't get banned.
And secondly, the way some of the people are posting, its evident that people haven't seen the matches, especially the semi final game after which he was banned.
Here's a video of him bowling from different angles, his action looks clean here, much better than some of the others.
Four games in a row, he looks clean,
all of a sudden, in the 5th game, there's an issue with his quicker ball, that was still fine, because these quicker deliveries might look a bit suspicious.
6th game, he doesn't use a single quicker delivery, but hey, now there's an issue with the other deliveries he bowled, and he is banned.
The situation doesn't look normal at all. Other spinners, who looked a lot more suspicious were reported aswell, but they didn't get banned.
And secondly, the way some of the people are posting, its evident that people haven't seen the matches, especially the semi final game after which he was banned.
Here's a video of him bowling from different angles, his action looks clean here, much better than some of the others.
Last edited:
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Thoroughly disagree with this, but again only time - and testing - will tell.
guys i just have a question
last time a baseline study was done in 2004 they found that 15% was the most logical flex to be given to the bowlers right? but this current set of testing rules seem to be quite different to the ones from back then, have they done a baseline study yet to see if the 15% is still valid? i remember reading somewhere that sena was measured at 43 degrees at cardiff and uwa measured him at 30 degrees, what does that mean? are they using different protocols to measure the flex?
last time a baseline study was done in 2004 they found that 15% was the most logical flex to be given to the bowlers right? but this current set of testing rules seem to be quite different to the ones from back then, have they done a baseline study yet to see if the 15% is still valid? i remember reading somewhere that sena was measured at 43 degrees at cardiff and uwa measured him at 30 degrees, what does that mean? are they using different protocols to measure the flex?
WindieWeathers
International Regular
1. Umpires don't have the right to call dodgy actions during a match.
2. It was a random ODI in the middle of nowhere against Bangladesh, and Ashwin never used the action again (as far as I am aware); there was not a sufficient history of Ashwin's 'new' action to file a report. Every other report we've seen, either pre- or post-Senanayake has come after the umpires have had a few games to look at actions, analyse them, presumably look at video footage and then act upon their suspicions.
3. The crackdown of reporting suspicious actions had yet to begin.
As I said in my previous post (which I'm assuming you must not have actually read, to have missed the point so thoroughly), this type of behaviour by Ashwin is always likely to slip through the cracks of the anti-chucking measures. It's not a long-term, degenerative, action-related issue like with Senanayake, Samuels, Shillingford, Williamson, Botha, Al-Amin, Gazi, Akhtar, Lee, Hafeez, Ajmal or whoever else has ever been asked to report for testing. It's also not a genuine 'throw', in the sense that he is still attempting to bowl (just with an action that is, in all likelihood illegal).
The ICC doesn't have the process to deal with throwing that doesn't conform to either of those two things, for two reasons. Firstly, we don't have in-match monitoring technology yet. Secondly, it really doesn't occur that often anyway.
Did Ashwin get away with chucking in that match? Probably; that action looks disgusting and I see the point Maximas made earlier. But that doesn't matter now, because he doesn't actually use that action.
Has Narine got away with chucking his entire career? Maybe, maybe not -- only testing can give us enough information. But if his action is deemed illegal after actual testing (and not this bs policy of suspension on suspicion), there's absolutely no point raising the complaint that he wasn't called six months ago, or two years ago, or when he was 13 and first learned a carrom ball. It's in the past and that can't be changed.
2. It was a random ODI in the middle of nowhere against Bangladesh, and Ashwin never used the action again (as far as I am aware); there was not a sufficient history of Ashwin's 'new' action to file a report. Every other report we've seen, either pre- or post-Senanayake has come after the umpires have had a few games to look at actions, analyse them, presumably look at video footage and then act upon their suspicions.
3. The crackdown of reporting suspicious actions had yet to begin.
As I said in my previous post (which I'm assuming you must not have actually read, to have missed the point so thoroughly), this type of behaviour by Ashwin is always likely to slip through the cracks of the anti-chucking measures. It's not a long-term, degenerative, action-related issue like with Senanayake, Samuels, Shillingford, Williamson, Botha, Al-Amin, Gazi, Akhtar, Lee, Hafeez, Ajmal or whoever else has ever been asked to report for testing. It's also not a genuine 'throw', in the sense that he is still attempting to bowl (just with an action that is, in all likelihood illegal).
The ICC doesn't have the process to deal with throwing that doesn't conform to either of those two things, for two reasons. Firstly, we don't have in-match monitoring technology yet. Secondly, it really doesn't occur that often anyway.
Did Ashwin get away with chucking in that match? Probably; that action looks disgusting and I see the point Maximas made earlier. But that doesn't matter now, because he doesn't actually use that action.
Has Narine got away with chucking his entire career? Maybe, maybe not -- only testing can give us enough information. But if his action is deemed illegal after actual testing (and not this bs policy of suspension on suspicion), there's absolutely no point raising the complaint that he wasn't called six months ago, or two years ago, or when he was 13 and first learned a carrom ball. It's in the past and that can't be changed.
WindieWeathers
International Regular
Whether it's a "one off" or not Dan is neither here nore there..the man clearly threw in that game and was NOT punished accordingly...which merely adds weight to the "bigger teams players not being called" notion 
...and like i said the excuse about "the crackdown didn't start" doesn't add up either when Shilly and Samuels was called just weeks before Ashwin did that.
I guess we're gonna have to agree to disagree here...because i've never seen evidence against Narine as blatant as that before.
...and like i said the excuse about "the crackdown didn't start" doesn't add up either when Shilly and Samuels was called just weeks before Ashwin did that.I guess we're gonna have to agree to disagree here...because i've never seen evidence against Narine as blatant as that before.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Ashwin's done it more than once tbf. Think he did it in two matches atleast.
Agreeing to disagree I can do.
When someone quite clearly tries to argue without actually bothering to read my posts, it just pisses me off.
WindieWeathers
International Regular
WindieWeathers
International Regular
Thank you for being honest..i seem to recall him doing it more than once but i didn't want to make those claims without proof..but if it is indeed true then that undermines some peoples excuses on the matter i'd say.
Agent Nationaux
International Coach
Flem is being a right git to WW.
Agent Nationaux
International Coach
That you are a git!
- Status