Chuckers

[the big bambino]

EDIT - Its actually a fair point. Still I'd be amazed if SL, for eg, dared to be upset if one of their bowlers is reported. A report happens post game (I think) so any objection is atleast taken away from the playing field. Then they'd have to run the gauntlet of the press who'd reasonably ask why they object to a process they signed up to.

 

[uvelocity]

id say its as much to do with the new law/process falling on the side of not rubbing people out, the controversy is still there its just people would get more hysterical about players banned than players who they feel are dodgy but due to an opaque and delayed process are allowed to continue to play.

 

[the big bambino]

Yep its pragmatic as the politicians would say

 

[jonbrooks]

I think testing bowlers in a lab is pointless. Bowlers will do their best to bowl legally when under obvious scrutiny. It's only when they're searching for a wicket and need extra pace, bounce or turn where they may deliver a ball illegally. Some bowlers may be doing this subconsciously but I am certain there are some who do it knowingly.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

I think testing bowlers in a lab is pointless. Bowlers will do their best to bowl legally when under obvious scrutiny. It's only when they're searching for a wicket and need extra pace, bounce or turn where they may deliver a ball illegally. Some bowlers may be doing this subconsciously but I am certain there are some who do it knowingly.

Until the technology comes through to test them in live conditions, can't do anything about it.

 

[Maximas]

Man this thread takes me back

 

[jonbrooks]

Until the technology comes through to test them in live conditions, can't do anything about it.

I think there is enough tech around via super slow-mo cameras at multiple angles. Also a device such as this could be of use:

Stretch Sensors - StretchSense

 

[Agent Nationaux]

They should try that on Ajmal

 

[Daemon]

So did Shillingford's doosra and Samuels' faster ball get cleared?

 

[Migara]

I think testing bowlers in a lab is pointless. Bowlers will do their best to bowl legally when under obvious scrutiny. It's only when they're searching for a wicket and need extra pace, bounce or turn where they may deliver a ball illegally. Some bowlers may be doing this subconsciously but I am certain there are some who do it knowingly.

Yeah, test all of them. Not the the selected few you think that have dodgy actions. I am pretty sure that a significant proportion of so called clean actions will be going pass the tolerance limit.

 

[Maximas]

Yeah, test all of them. Not the the selected few you think that have dodgy actions. I am pretty sure that a significant proportion of so called clean actions will be going pass the tolerance limit.

The current one? Doubt it, most would be between 6 and 13 I'd have thought

 

[mullarkey]

Murali should never have been allowed to bowl in any cricket with that action. Shane Warne's action was never called into question and rightly so but Murali? I know we have to be careful what we say here but this issue has become the unspeakable truth.

 

[Shri]

No.

 

[fredfertang]

Murali should never have been allowed to bowl in any cricket with that action. Shane Warne's action was never called into question and rightly so but Murali? I know we have to be careful what we say here but this issue has become the unspeakable truth.

Why not?

There was nothing illegal about his action

 

[hendrix]

Murali's bowling not even close to being illegal so really stfu.

 

[Daemon]

Murali's bowling not even close to being illegal so really stfu.

Nah, he was close. I've forgotten all the degrees again but he was definitely close.

 

[Migara]

The current one? Doubt it, most would be between 6 and 13 I'd have thought

Some argue that the extension increases when bowlers are tired and lab data is not representative of the match situation when it comes to tested bowlers. Their argument is partially correct, but it applies to so called clean actions too. There will be a proportion of deliveries which will fall beyond the tolerance limit for everybody.

 

[Maximas]

Nah, he was close. I've forgotten all the degrees again but he was definitely close.

After some remedial work he got his doosra down to 10 degrees, now 5 degrees below the limit, I assume his other deliveries were about the same - he was probably no closer to that particular limit than many other ordinary bowlers.

I would recommend this video to Mullarkey and anyone else with ill-informed Murali views btw

 

[the big bambino]

Its not actually impossible to see that video and come to a different conclusion you do. As any number of comments below the video show.

 

[lockton2skipper]

worst chucker i've seen in recent years has to be Glenn Querl who played Zimbabwe domestic cricket.