Jonbrooks chucking Megathread

[weldone]

Testing in live match situation should be the final aim. The no-ball decision should come from an automated system in real-time (or maybe with a lag of upto 5 seconds)

 

[cnerd123]

Testing in live match situation should be the final aim. The no-ball decision should come from an automated system in real-time (or maybe with a lag of upto 5 seconds)

Why not 6.

 

[weldone]

Ya maybe 6.543543532 also

 

[cnerd123]

Round it up to 8 IMO

 

[wellAlbidarned]

One thing that isn't entirely explained is what point does a delivery count as a doosra? It's basically just a slight extension of the topspinner so is he banned from that too?

 

[grecian]

The point is surely, did the ones that were legal actually turn much. So not sure how this changes much/anything.

 

[Migara]

The point is surely, did the ones that were legal actually turn much. So not sure how this changes much/anything.

or are these ones aimed at the off stump?

 

[cnerd123]

Lots of complexity with banning a particular delivery. How is the umpire to differ between a doosra and a topsinner that hit a crack and deviated away?

 

[Dan]

Yeah, exactly. Weird system.

 

[Prince EWS]

Lots of complexity with banning a particular delivery. How is the umpire to differ between a doosra and a topsinner that hit a crack and deviated away?

I believe the whole point of this system is that the umpire isn't meant to do **** about anything. If he bowls a doosra it'll be revealed in the video analysis.

Which makes me think Propser may be in some trouble for what he's sent down in this T20 series. Dangerously close to bowling off breaks a few times.

 

[TheJediBrah]

One day we might get to a stage where we can definitively determine when a delivery has been illegally bowled, but we are still a long way from it looking at what we are doing now

 

[cnerd123]

I believe the whole point of this system is that the umpire isn't meant to do **** about anything. If he bowls a doosra it'll be revealed in the video analysis.

Which makes me think Propser may be in some trouble for what he's sent down in this T20 series. Dangerously close to bowling off breaks a few times.

It's still strange. You can bowl an offbreak in a thousand different ways. Just because a ball happens to move in off the pitch, doesn't mean it has been delivered the same way as it was in the lab.

What's likely is they will use 2D footage to check the bowler's grip, release point, delivery stride and then determine if it was an offbreak or not. But then a bowler can always alter it slightly, and then claim in his defence that it wasn't the exact same ball that got banned, that is has more overspin or sidespin or what bowled with a rounder arm or whatever.

It's just not clear enough.

 

[Prince EWS]

You can bowl an offbreak in a thousand different ways.

Yep, and you're banned from bowling off breaks, you can't bowl them in any of those ways.

If Propser's got some variation of an off break that he thinks isn't a peg he can go and get it cleared before he bowls it.

I mean realistically he's an off spinner who isn't allowed to bowl off breaks; he should just be banned in general until he fixes that. It's a bit of a farce in general, particularly given he now just bowls nude balls. But if he wants to carry on doing what he's doing and he bowls something that looks like an offie he should be suspended IMO.

 

[weldone]

Yep, and you're banned from bowling off breaks, you can't bowl them in any of those ways.

If Propser's got some variation of an off break that he thinks isn't a peg he can go and get it cleared before he bowls it.

I mean realistically he's an off spinner who isn't allowed to bowl off breaks; he should just be banned in general until he fixes that. It's a bit of a farce in general, particularly given he now just bowls nude balls. But if he wants to carry on doing what he's doing and he bowls something that looks like an offie he should be suspended IMO.

Ya and if an offspinner is banned from bowling offbreaks, I don't get why the selectors don't just drop him from the side. I know people like Sobers and Ghavri could bowl spin and pace of decent quality - but Utseya's medium pacers are not compable. I think he didn't get a single International wicket after the ban. Surely, the reserve bowlers in Zimbabwe are not as bad as in Namibia.

 

[cnerd123]

Yep, and you're banned from bowling off breaks, you can't bowl them in any of those ways.

If Propser's got some variation of an off break that he thinks isn't a peg he can go and get it cleared before he bowls it.

I mean realistically he's an off spinner who isn't allowed to bowl off breaks; he should just be banned in general until he fixes that. It's a bit of a farce in general, particularly given he now just bowls nude balls. But if he wants to carry on doing what he's doing and he bowls something that looks like an offie he should be suspended IMO.

That's so ridiculous tho. The first thing is, how do you define an offbreak in this case. Any ball that deviates to the right after pitching? Even if Prosper were to bowl it with a completely different grip and release? Does he have to go and get every new delivery he plans to bowl in a match that could replicate the effect of an offbreak cleared before he can bowl it now? Topspinners, googlies, etc?

Second of all, what's to stop him from deciding he wants to develop a new chucked delivery, and introduce that into his current armoury?

Theoretically, you could have a bowler who is primarily a legspinner, who bowls a chucked offbreak. He will get called up, tested, and be banned from bowling the offbreak. He could then introduce a chucked quicker ball into his armoury, and use it until that gets banned. Then he can bring in a chucked topspinner. And so on and so forth.

He can basically keep on bowling and taking wickets with chucked deliveries until he runs out of variations that aren't banned.

This is so ridiculous.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Ajmal waaahh

 

[TheJediBrah]

Ajmal waaahh

I put my protractor up to the screen and that is literally 43 degrees right there

stop ****ing complaining cheat and take up baseball or some ****

 

[Top_Cat]

So much bull**** surrounds this stuff.

An ICC spokesman, however, insisted that bowlers of all types and of all nationalities were treated equally.

"We have a robust and transparent process to test bowlers," the spokesman told ESPNcricinfo. "It is consistent to all countries and all types of bowlers. Indeed, a fast bowler has been reported and players from various nations have been reported.

"We have five ICC accredited testing centres around the world in which members of ICC Panel of Human Movement Specialists conduct tests using the ICC Standard Analysis Protocols. These protocols are the same for anyone who undergoes assessment of his bowling action. As a result, following assessments, some bowlers have been cleared to continue bowling; some have needed to re-model their actions."

Just saying it doesn't make it true.

 

[indiaholic]

So much bull**** surrounds this stuff.



Just saying it doesn't make it true.

All the boards seems to be strangely comfortable with it.

 

[TheJediBrah]

It's pretty funny that they go to so much effort and spend so much money on the testing process which is completely pointless unless they actually test during match conditions.

Oh great you've got the world's best biomechanists and spend millions on facilities and procedures? absolute waste of time and money.

It would be like testing a new influenza medication on people who had the flu years ago but were fine now, then deciding the medication works because the patients didn't have the flu.