Ajmal Action Reported

[Blain]

A bent arm is either poor technique, or used as an illegal advantage over batsmen. Thankfully the ICC are finally clamping down on it, it's out of control in the sub continent. Hafeez is next in line.

The rules are the rules, either everyone can throw or no one can. I know what I would prefer!

 

[marc71178]

Ah yes, that noted sub continent bowler Kane Williamson...

 

[Maximas]

The exception that proves the rule

 

[Athlai]

Ah yes, that noted sub continent bowler Kane Williamson...

Always wondered why he batted so well in the sub continent.

 

[TNT]

No they aren't. Firstly Al Amin was clear despite visually ugly. Secondly negative controls never had been tested using same methodology to say if umpire sees it clean it's 100% clean. At least data on the latter is missing and the new testing process is a scientific joke.

Nah just because you don't understand how something works, especially since it is perfectly fine there is no need to dumb it down so that people who don't have a clue can understand what is happening. The system as it is works and apart from a bit of whinging from people like Ajmal who by the way demonstrated he didn't even understand how the procedure works by claiming he had special compensation due to a car accident.

The umpires do not just decide to send a bowler for testing, there is a report made and the bowlers action is checked on replays and if doubt exists then he is notified and required to be tested, all bowlers go through this system and if they pass then there is no reason to further test them.

It would be a complete waste of money and bowlers time to test them all just so soothe a few sour grapes from disgruntled bowlers.

 

[GIMH]

Nah just because you don't understand how something works, especially since it is perfectly fine there is no need to dumb it down so that people who don't have a clue can understand what is happening. The system as it is works and apart from a bit of whinging from people like Ajmal who by the way demonstrated he didn't even understand how the procedure works by claiming he had special compensation due to a car accident.

The umpires do not just decide to send a bowler for testing, there is a report made and the bowlers action is checked on replays and if doubt exists then he is notified and required to be tested, all bowlers go through this system and if they pass then there is no reason to further test them.

It would be a complete waste of money and bowlers time to test them all just so soothe a few sour grapes from Migara.

AWTA z

 

[Burgey]

Just wondering with the new testing methods McGrath would have been cleared? No disrespect to the champion bloke he is

Of course he would have been.

The most bent thing in this whole shambles is your perspective on the issue.

 

[Migara]

He should been called under the straight arm law. After all he extended it more than Murali 's off break.

 

[Burgey]

Look mate, you need to get it through your noggin that for whatever reason there continue to be these hideous bowlers who exceed the degree of flexion/ extension allowed under the rules.

You're like those imbeciles on Finding Bigfoot: out alone in the wilderness crying out and hoping for a reply from a mythical beast which doesn't exist. Why can't you just accept there's a threshold, if a blokes action looks like it exceeds that threshold (chosen as it was as being near the point where flexion/ extension becomes apparent to the naked eye) they get checked? Then if they're over 15 degrees, they can't bowl.

Word out: there is no conspiracy. Roswell was a weather balloon and these muppets face the same checks as everyone else. The ICC didn't kill JFK, and 9/11 wasn't an inside job.

There's no conspiracy. All there is are third world structures and coaching leading to third rate, illegal actions without which these dud bowlers don't cut it and aren't even competitive.

You need to accept these things mate. With acceptance will come peace of mind, and you'll probably have to report to the doctors after your face cracks following your first smile in about 25 years. You can do it. I know you can do it.

Actually, I don't think you can tbh. But you should have a go.

 

[Migara]

A bent arm is either poor technique, or used as an illegal advantage over batsmen. Thankfully the ICC are finally clamping down on it, it's out of control in the sub continent. Hafeez is next in line.

The rules are the rules, either everyone can throw or no one can. I know what I would prefer!

test everyone or at least random checks. Just like they test for anabolic steroids. The resistance to testing so called normal actions is very difficult to understand. May be deep down every one knows that majority is going to fail it.

 

[Migara]

Nah just because you donclaunderstand how something works, especially since it is perfectly fine there is no need to dumb it down so that people who don't have a clue can understand what is happening. The system as it is works and apart from a bit of whinging from people like Ajmal who by the way demonstrated he didn't even understand how the procedure works by claiming he had special compensation due to a car accident.

The umpires do not just decide to send a bowler for testing, there is a report made and the bowlers action is checked on replays and if doubt exists then he is notified and required to be tested, all bowlers go through this system and if they pass then there is no reason to further test them.

It would be a complete waste of money and bowlers time to test them all just so soothe a few sour grapes from disgruntled bowlers.

from I m what you have written so far what I recollect is that you are absolutely clueless on the procedure and what are sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of a testing method. Sorry, but you sound daft.

The sensitivity and specificity of umpires call had been poor especially when bowlers have fixed flexion deformities, hyperextension and abductions. And all the reported cases show extensions of 30+ degrees which is blatant. None had been in 15-30 range up to now showing umpire r porting is not sensitive enough and is grossly inadequate. Secondly there is no method to catch extensions of effort balls ofpeople with normal actions.

The gold standard is to test everyone. Next best is to test randomly in addition to the reported bowlers.

 

[Migara]

Look mate, you need to get it through your noggin that for whatever reason there continue to be these hideous bowlers who exceed the degree of flexion/ extension allowed under the rules.

You're like those imbeciles on Finding Bigfoot: out alone in the wilderness crying out and hoping for a reply from a mythical beast which doesn't exist. Why can't you just accept there's a threshold, if a blokes action looks like it exceeds that threshold (chosen as it was as being near the point where flexion/ extension becomes apparent to the naked eye) they get checked? Then if they're over 15 degrees, they can't bowl.

Word out: there is no conspiracy. Roswell was a weather balloon and these muppets face the same checks as everyone else. The ICC didn't kill JFK, and 9/11 wasn't an inside job.

There's no conspiracy. All there is are third world structures and coaching leading to third rate, illegal actions without which these dud bowlers don't cut it and aren't even competitive.

You need to accept these things mate. With acceptance will come peace of mind, and you'll probably have to report to the doctors after your face cracks following your first smile in about 25 years. You can do it. I know you can do it.

Actually, I don't think you can tbh. But you should have a go.

your response has verbal splendour but it lack the content. You neither have read nor understood the points I have made. the last reply would be a good starting point if you want to change the stereotypical view of yours.

 

[smash84]

Look mate, you need to get it through your noggin that for whatever reason there continue to be these hideous bowlers who exceed the degree of flexion/ extension allowed under the rules.

You're like those imbeciles on Finding Bigfoot: out alone in the wilderness crying out and hoping for a reply from a mythical beast which doesn't exist. Why can't you just accept there's a threshold, if a blokes action looks like it exceeds that threshold (chosen as it was as being near the point where flexion/ extension becomes apparent to the naked eye) they get checked? Then if they're over 15 degrees, they can't bowl.

Word out: there is no conspiracy. Roswell was a weather balloon and these muppets face the same checks as everyone else. The ICC didn't kill JFK, and 9/11 wasn't an inside job.

There's no conspiracy. All there is are third world structures and coaching leading to third rate, illegal actions without which these dud bowlers don't cut it and aren't even competitive.

You need to accept these things mate. With acceptance will come peace of mind, and you'll probably have to report to the doctors after your face cracks following your first smile in about 25 years. You can do it. I know you can do it.

Actually, I don't think you can tbh. But you should have a go.

Oh come on Burgey. Don't be a bitter old man. You didn't even read his arguments before launching into a burgrant.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

I don't think Migara has read any of the arguments against him either

 

[hendrix]

Most of Migara's arguments aren't wrong but it's the way that he brings up people like McGrath which smacks of agenda and insincerity and pre-emptive defensiveness.

We've accepted that Murali did not chuck. Noone here is saying that he did.

 

[smash84]

. Noone here is saying that he did.

?

Why not clarify it and simply state that the arm cannot be bent during the delivery of the ball and that any straightening of a bent arm will be considered an illegal delivery...

Oh, that's right, because then we have to invalidate 800 test wickets from the worlds leading wicket taker.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

His argument is that since umpires can't visually determine if a bowler with a dodgy looking action is definitely chucking or not this means the reverse is true - that a bowler with a clean action could be chucking. The logic isn't reversible so the argument absolutely falls flat.

 

[hendrix]

Blocky is on my ignore list, Smali.

 

[smash84]

His argument is that since umpires can't visually determine if a bowler with a dodgy looking action is definitely chucking or not this means the reverse is true - that a bowler with a clean action could be chucking. The logic isn't reversible so the argument absolutely falls flat.

You are saying that umpires can't determine if dodgy action bowlers are chucking or not, but umpires can determine that all seemingly clean action bowlers bowl ALL deliveries legally???

 

[hendrix]

His argument is that since umpires can't visually determine if a bowler with a dodgy looking action is definitely chucking or not this means the reverse is true - that a bowler with a clean action could be chucking. The logic isn't reversible so the argument absolutely falls flat.

yeah that part is wrong but that's not all that he's saying.