Jonbrooks chucking Megathread

[the big bambino]

These are some tired arguments given here:

"Changing the rules for one bowler"
"Pro-Asian bloc in ICC"
"Report wasn't released"

It's been almost 10 years guys - time to read up/give up/get with the program.

Tired: Really? I'd say relevant bcos they are still outstanding. Not that it was the point of my post. People were speculating who would be powerful or interested enough to change the rules for a bowler. SL are obviously interested and India definately powerful. Neither can you deny a mighty effort was expended directly or indirectly on one bowler's behalf. I mean historically a bowler was called and that was it for him. So I just offer the possibility to speculation as to whom would have benefitted form all this activity.

 

[the big bambino]

Yes it has. Google it, it's there for everyone to read.

Nothing against you personally TBB, but there is one of the most frustrating things about this discussion..........so many people with such strong opinions but so few have ever educated themselves and actually read this report (or even know it exists)

None taken; and thanks.

 

[Prince EWS]

Tired: Really? I'd say relevant bcos they are still outstanding. Not that it was the point of my post. People were speculating who would be powerful or interested enough to change the rules for a bowler. SL are obviously interested and India definately powerful. Neither can you deny a mighty effort was expended directly or indirectly on one bowler's behalf. I mean historically a bowler was called and that was it for him. So I just offer the possibility to speculation as to whom would have benefitted form all this activity.

Cricket.

 

[the big bambino]

Thats not just you in disguise is it PEWS?

 

[Prince EWS]

Thats not just you in disguise is it PEWS?

This post has gone way over my head. Which "that" are you referring to?

 

[the big bambino]

Sorry. Look I might think an Abbott prime ministership is for the good of the country. Have a feeling Burgey might disagree. Sometimes people conveniently think what suits them is good for everyone else too.

However I don't disagree that cricket generally has benefitted from the" Murali" rule though I don't think it was the intended recipient. Whatever anyone's personal feelings are about Murali's action something had to be done to resolve what was a pretty ugly divide in cricket at the time. Even those who were against the change have to admit that the new policing of the rules has taken away the bitterness, loaded with racial overtones, that accompanied the application of the law as it once stood.

It is important that everyone trusts the methods and processes to settle reports of throwing now and bcos of that I would, on reflection, agree cricket has benefitted.

 

[Dan]

This post has gone way over my head. Which "that" are you referring to?

That by "good for cricket" you actually meant "fits my views on the situation but I'll call it good for cricket to give it legitimacy above and beyond just being my stance"



TBH, if there was ever a guy to 'unfairly' be benefitted by a law change, you'd want it to be Murali. He just comes across as such a nice guy and he added so much to the game. How can you dislike him or want him to be thrown out of the game?

 

[Prince EWS]

That by "good for cricket" you actually meant "fits my views on the situation but I'll call it good for cricket to give it legitimacy above and beyond just being my stance"

Ahh. Maybe it's time to add a line in my signature about how my posts represent my opinion only unless specifically stated otherwise.

 

[the big bambino]

Yeah I did mean that but I agree that cricket has benefitted for the reason I subsequently posted.

 

[viriya]

Interesting developments:

In order to help bowlers correct their flawed actions, the ICC tied up with a consortium of Australian cricket, sports science and sports engineering institutions in 2012 to develop wearable sensor technology that would allow the legality of bowlers' actions to be assessed during matches and training sessions. The ICC revealed that the technology was tested on 70 players in training sessions during the Under-19 World Cup held in UAE earlier this year.

"The results of the trials were very encouraging, with the final stage of the project expected to conclude in 2016," the ICC's release said, without elaborating on any details of the findings.


ICC news : ICC committee mulls better methods to detect flex | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo

Sounds like all international bowlers would be wearing sensors in the not-too-distant future.

 

[Maximas]

Tired: Really? I'd say relevant bcos they are still outstanding. Not that it was the point of my post. People were speculating who would be powerful or interested enough to change the rules for a bowler. SL are obviously interested and India definately powerful. Neither can you deny a mighty effort was expended directly or indirectly on one bowler's behalf. I mean historically a bowler was called and that was it for him. So I just offer the possibility to speculation as to whom would have benefitted form all this activity.

Insert Migara post to the effect that McGrath and Pollock as well as many other fast bowlers from around the world benefited from from the rule change given that many actions other than Murali's were found to be illegal under the old rules.

 

[Dan]

<Insert another six pages of the exact same argument we've had with the exact same posters making the exact same points as every other time here>

 

[Dan]

Well, nice to see that we got that argument over and done with quickly, in a civil manner, and without the need for infractions. See you in six months, chucking debate!

 

[flibbertyjibber]

<Insert another six pages of the exact same argument we've had with the exact same posters making the exact same points as every other time here>

Same as Mankad thread/debate then.

 

[91Jmay]

Would the sensor type thing go off and the bowler no balled for that ball? That would be so fun.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Would the sensor type thing go off and the bowler no balled for that ball? That would be so fun.

Reckon an electric shock would be better

 

[jonbrooks]

Williamson's action reported!

Hilarious!

 

[Blocky]

It's dodgy as **** - kink and flick in his elbow, he's gotten worse over the years too.

 

[Hurricane]

Justice prevails. (Or may do after the testing)

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah, this has been a long time coming.