Jonbrooks chucking Megathread

[OverratedSanity]

I missed that os. Velocity at elbow limits would mean doosra for murali and every one else who bowls it would be outlawed.

How do you know? Did you strap a speedometer to Murali's elbow? How the **** do you make that statement that Murali would be outlawed without having any data to back it up? Just stop.

 

[honestbharani]

Let us also invent degrees for lbw like for chucking then?

Yes.. Degrees and angles were invented to define bowling actions.

 

[Shady Slim]

i hear that murali gets good revs on the elbow

 

[Pratters]

Old laws were perfectly fine. They worked for 150 years. After television came in you can argue to revise the laws but revise it correctly then without losing the essence of what a Chuck is. At least the old laws had that essence which the new law doesn't.

 

[Pratters]

How do you know? Did you strap a speedometer to Murali's elbow? How the **** do you make that statement that Murali would be outlawed without having any data to back it up? Just stop.

Bowling a doosra uses the elbow in a way which is the very opposite of what comprises a legal delivery. It's chucking.

 

[Migara]

Try bowling both the deliveries. One would be called by the umpires as per old law as a chuck, the other wouldn't as one has clear violation of laws as far as umpires go. That's why Emerson and Hair called Murali's doosra. In game practical evidence for you.

Once again it's not objective measurement. What I want is something measurable to show that Murali and McGrath differ. All others are subjective bull crap.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Bowling a doosra uses the elbow in a way which is the very opposite of what compromises a legal delivery.

How do you know how much "velocity" or force Murali put into his elbow? Did you measure it? Has anyone?

 

[honestbharani]

Old laws were perfectly fine. They worked for 150 years. After television came in you can argue to revise the laws but revise it correctly then without losing the essence of what a Chuck is. At least the old laws had that essence which the new law doesn't.

Dem lemons have essence too, you know.. Just sayin'

 

[Pratters]

Once again it's not objective measurement. What I want is something measurable to show that Murali and McGrath differ. All others are subjective bull crap.

Bowl both the deliveries. Or measure velocity at elbow. You will understand.

 

[honestbharani]

Old laws were perfectly fine. They worked for 150 years. After television came in you can argue to revise the laws but revise it correctly then without losing the essence of what a Chuck is. At least the old laws had that essence which the new law doesn't.

Sun was believed to be orbiting the earth for more than a 1000 years too. Should we go back to that? Or is there an essence to that argument that I am missing too? FAce it, the scientific evidence has shown that the law was stupid and unfair and hence it was changed.

 

[Pratters]

How do you know how much "velocity" or force Murali put into his elbow? Did you measure it? Has anyone?

If you bowl the doosra, you will see how the elbow is used to bowl the ball. That would be noticeable when one measures velocity.

 

[Migara]

A ball is fairly delivered in respect of the arm if, once the bowler's arm has reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing, the elbow joint is not straightened partially or completely from that point until the ball has left the hand. This definition shall not debar a bowler from flexing or rotating the wrist in the delivery swing.

Now, all bowlers use the elbow extension to bowl except Ramnaresh Sarwan. Now show above statement is wrong with whatever evidence you have. No subjective drivel please.

 

[honestbharani]

Bowl both the deliveries. Or measure velocity at elbow. You will understand.

Velocity at elbow? Again, care to explain? Can you also measure velocity at wrist and shoulders coz last time I checked, all 3 were used together to propel the ball. And you still have not explained why it is a better measure than the current one, apart from the fact that it suits your biased baseless stand on this issue.

 

[Pratters]

Sun was believed to be orbiting the earth for more than a 1000 years too. Should we go back to that? Or is there an essence to that argument that I am missing too? FAce it, the scientific evidence has shown that the law was stupid and unfair and hence it was changed.

Same can be said of the current laws and doosra.

 

[honestbharani]

Bowling a doosra uses the elbow in a way which is the very opposite of what comprises a legal delivery. It's chucking.

What is the way the elbow should be used to bowl a legal delivery. And how do you know it is used differently for a doosra? Are you saying we are supposed to believe that you can bowl every type of ball in cricket to international standards and hence you know something we don't?

 

[Migara]

They use it. However, they don't chuck it in the traditional (true) sense. They would never be called by the umpires as per the old laws.

Now what is the parameter you use to distinguish between "chucking use of elbow" vs "non-chucking use of elbow"?

This is getting ****ing hilarious I have to say!

 

[honestbharani]

Same can be said of the current laws and doosra.

How?

 

[OverratedSanity]

Man this is a bad thread

 

[Pratters]

Velocity at elbow? Again, care to explain? Can you also measure velocity at wrist and shoulders coz last time I checked, all 3 were used together to propel the ball. And you still have not explained why it is a better measure than the current one, apart from the fact that it suits your biased baseless stand on this issue.

It's not a biased baseless stand. It's not difficult to understand what chucking is and why the doosra is a Chuck. You don't need to be a nuclear scientist to figure it out.

 

[cnerd123]

Pratters is being an idiot and isnt worth engaging with anymore. TheJediBrah, who was coming from the same angle seems a lot more sensible:

Ah I see what you are saying. Yeah I was exaggerating a bit regarding the sore elbow.

But an increased flexion of the elbow is ubiquitous with bowling of the doosra. It's just the physiology of the movement. It's much easier to bowl an off-break, leg-break or a medium-pace delivery with less flexion than a doosra.

Well yea. But thats doesn't mean its chucking. If a bowler can bowl a doosra that has more flexion of the elbow relative to his offbreak, but less than what other quick bowlers or spinners obtain, then should he still be called a chucker? If so, then why? It doesn't seem fair that one bowler gets to leverage his elbow more than another, simply because he bowls in a more orthodox style or manner.

Similar to how the 'if it looks like a chuck, it must be a chuck' argument is not fair, saying the doosra should be banned because it requires the practitioner to straighten his elbow more than he would for his stock ball is also not fair. This is why we have rules like the 15 degree rule in place.