Wisden on Murali's Action

[Daemon]

When some one rotates arm at rapid speed there is natural straightening.

So are you arguing that the limit of straightening in degrees should be capped at whatever the 'natural' straightening is?

I'm genuinely confused now.

 

[Pratters]

So are you arguing that the limit of straightening in degrees should be capped at whatever the 'natural' straightening is?

I'm genuinely confused now.

I am arguing natural straightening and traditional chucking are different. One shouldn't be confused with the other.

 

[OverratedSanity]

You can do the experiment yourself. Bowl without throwing the ball using the shoulder and wrist. Then bowl using the elbow by straigtening it as well

So you're saying chucking gives you an advantage? Well, yeah. What's your point?

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

How much faster is a fast bowler's arm rotating than a spinner's one?

 

[fredfertang]

When some one rotates arm at rapid speed there is natural straightening.

But surely the arm should be straight to start with?

 

[Pratters]

But surely the arm should be straight to start with?

Picture two long rods with a joint in the middle which rotates are a fast speed. Now imagine the human arm which rotates at a fast speed and delivers a ball. This is bound to create some degrees of flexing.

 

[Migara]

No reason to ask Warne or Swann to wear a brace as their actions have never been questioned.

Neither was McGrath's or Pollock's, but theyu extension was as bad as Murali's. Only thing is human eye sucked at picking it up.

 

[Migara]

Issue is larger than Murali. I also believe Murali to have all the positive aspects in his personality pointed out. I don't think he believed he chucked it either. Else he wouldn't go for the tests.

The reason the issue is larger than Murali is that the new law allows bowlers to chuck. As long as a bowler is within 15 degrees, he can jerk his elbow for a chuck intentionally or unintentionally. The question about McGrath chucking as per the old law was never there as he had a smooth action without that jerk on the elbow. At such high speeds a bit of straightening will be there for all bowlers. However its the jerking of the elbow which is the issue and has been traditionally, not degrees. I don't think they ever got into degrees when they threw Meckiff and so many others in that era when they stamped their foot down on the chuckers.

This jerk or something is more apparent in some bowlers. When there is a flexion deformity or when there is abduction / adduction (I prefer it to hyper extension) at the elbow, this "jerk" appears more prominent. At the same level of extension one looks smooth and other looks jerky, even all other parameters are same. The ebst method would be to test it out scientifically without using the naked eye to judge.

 

[Migara]

I like how Ajmal's chucking was pointed as he was flexing 35+ degrees. How is it not a chucking though if he did the same push and straightening at the elbow, only at 15 degrees? It would be a lower degree based chuck but a chuck neverthless as per the old law.

Even McGrath does that. Only thing is human eye cannot detect it.

 

[TNT]

Not clear what you are trying to get at.

Murali was cleared with the best available techniques at the time., They may be obsolete now, but, at the time they were the best. It showed not only every one extends their elbows, McGrath and Pollock do it to the same degree is Murali.

So what's your point?

Pollock and McGrath were tested? when did this happen?. Can you provide a link to the testing.

 

[Migara]

Pollock and McGrath were tested? when did this happen?. Can you provide a link to the testing.

Video analysis. It is in cricinfo, and should be knowledge for a cricket fan. Ask google may be.

 

[Pratters]

Neither was McGrath's or Pollock's, but theyu extension was as bad as Murali's. Only thing is human eye sucked at picking it up.

There is a difference between natural straightening and chucking according to me as already explained.

 

[TNT]

Video analysis. It is in cricinfo, and should be knowledge for a cricket fan. Ask google may be.

A knowledgeable cricket fan also knows that you cannot accurately determine the degree of bend from video analysis from a match. If you could then they could easily determine the actions of players like Ajmal without having to send them to testing centres. Why else do they have to send them to testing centres to be tested if they can do it from match videos.

I

 

[Migara]

There is a difference between natural straightening and chucking according to me as already explained.

Which is an arbitrary definition according to your expertise. Give me the parameters and cutoff numbers on how to decide on a "jerk" or not.

 

[Migara]

A knowledgeable cricket fan also knows that you cannot accurately determine the degree of bend from video analysis from a match. If you could then they could easily determine the actions of players like Ajmal without having to send them to testing centres. Why else do they have to send them to testing centres to be tested if they can do it from match videos.

I

It was a rough estimate. Since extension differs from ball to ball, a better method was needed. Hence the current method.

Testing the dodgy actions only is a mistake. Normal actions have to be tested to do comparisons or to find out overlaps. Current system sucks because there is no data on controls.

 

[TNT]

It was a rough estimate. Since extension differs from ball to ball, a better method was needed. Hence the current method.

.

No it was not a rough estimate, it is bull**** or more accurately a outright lie.

 

[Migara]

No it was not a rough estimate, it is bull**** or more accurately a outright lie.

Probably yes, I just heard from an expert.

 

[Pratters]

Which is an arbitrary definition according to your expertise. Give me the parameters and cutoff numbers on how to decide on a "jerk" or not.

I have already explained the logic with historical and practical context in detail.

 

[smash84]

A knowledgeable cricket fan also knows that you cannot accurately determine the degree of bend from video analysis from a match. If you could then they could easily determine the actions of players like Ajmal without having to send them to testing centres. Why else do they have to send them to testing centres to be tested if they can do it from match videos.

I

Ajmal is a different case. Everybody thought he was chucking but the lab results had cleared him and so people grudgingly accepted it. Once the lab results proved that he was chucking then he was banned.

 

[Migara]

I have already explained the logic with historical and practical context in detail.

Which means nothing. I need parameters and numbers, so I could measure it and objectively decide which is which. Other crap, I don't care.