-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Murali
- Thread starter Gems
- Start date
on that you look at him bowl and see that he throws the ball. Unlike when the vast majority of bowlers their own is kept straight when they ball.marc71178 said:
His is bent and it straightens. it's not rocket science.
Loved the slip up by Warne on yesterdays cricket show.
Warne: "Murali is a tough man to bat to because he just throws the ball up....errr...bowls the bowl up outside the off stump and you don't know which way its going"
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
He'd been rehearsing that one for 6 monthshourn said:Warne: "Murali is a tough man to bat to because he just throws the ball up....errr...bowls the bowl up outside the off stump and you don't know which way its going"
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
These comments typify the ill-informed accusations.Langeveldt[/i] [B]Yes he is...[/B][/QUOTE] [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by hourn said:
As marc points-out, Langeveldt simply presents no reasons, and hourn simply contradicts medical evidence. Murali's arm cannot be straightened to 180 degrees. That is a medical fact, and anyone denying it really simply defies belief. Murali's arm doesn't change it's sinuosity throughout the delivery, that's been decreed by learned physicists at one of the most senior Universities in The World. And hence the action is legal.
Tom Halsey
International Coach
If his arm is bent, and it straightens, but not to the full 180 degrees, it is still a chuck.
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
Yes it would be, but since the scientists have undertaken extensive testing to show that the arm doesn't straighten, Murali doesn't chuck.halsey said:
It may look dubious, but that is just a trick of the eyes.
Like I say, my only fear is young bowlers copying his action.
Murali doesn't chuck, the weird bowling action is entirely due to a physical deformity. This is known to all, the experts havve cleared him, all the evidence is there to support it, there is no evidence against it, so why, why, why are we revisiting a topic that has been done to death, resurrected and done to death all over again?
Tom Halsey
International Coach
Not disagreeing, but that was proved about 4 years ago, and his action might have changed slightly. Also, they haven't tested his googly. I am not saying he chucks, but it has not been proved recently.marc71178 said:
Your fear about young bowlers copying his action is a fear also shared by me and many others.
Bazza
International 12th Man
That doesn't mean anything. Picture the situation:marc71178 said:
- Murali gets reported for chucking and undegoes 'remedial action'.
- Sri Lanka know they are screwed without him, so don't do anything really.
- ICC people test him for 2 days, hmmm, I wonder if he'll use his real action, or a legal one?
- Murali is cleared and there is no comeback because he has been cleared.
- Murali goes on chucking and will take about 700 test wickets...
Just to clarify, I am not picking solely on Murali, I think there is a real problem in the game (Lee looked very dodgy the other day, Kirtley always has, Shoaib I haven't seen for a while, that Sri Lankan got reported last year...). Maybe it always was and cameras have highlighted the problem in recent years, but there are several bowlers who 'bend' the rules (and their arms! :P) and I think something should be done.
Tom Halsey
International Coach
2 offies who I think chuck, but have never got reported (Feel free to disagree!):
Harbhajan Singh
Robert Croft
Harbhajan Singh
Robert Croft
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Yeah, something like that would be good.marc71178 said:So what would you suggest?
"*Official* Murali is / isn't a cheat, discuss" ?
As Anil says, this topic has been done to death everywhere you go, so instead of new threads over and over again, the arguments could just be topped and re-read over and over again.
Then there would be no need for us to repeat what we have written time after time.
Last edited:
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
That's a nice theory, but personally I've never seen any problem with his action when watching it with him bowling in matches. Also, I can't believe the testers would be stupid enough to fail to watch him bowling in the testing centre and compare it to match situations, to see if there are any differences (eg action, accuracy, amount of turn).Bazza said:
With "the Sri Lankan" I don't know if you're talking about Ruchira Perera, but he had a blatantly and consistently illegal action at Lord's in 2002. He'd never had a problem before, and they showed him after and he looked fine.
I don't believe Kirtley and Shoaib are doing anything wrong, as I discussed in another thread; please see that if you wish to.
Croft has certainly never looked like a chucker to me , but Harbhajan when he first came onto the scene did have a pretty fishy action , he changed it around 2000 as far as I know , whether he was ever reported or not Im not sure but I remember it being suspect.Rik said:
Obviously nothing wrong with it now though.