Murali's reputation in tatters? Check this out.

[Slow Love™]

This is not a court case. This is a black and white scientific study. There is no defence to be made, nor is there a prosecution. Either he chucks or he doesn't (or so the theory goes), but someone has to make sure that the tests that are carried out are as close to reality as possible. Bruce Yardley is not that man.

You're right, it's not a court case, and therefore, I feel that the presence of the "accuser" is just plain unnecessary. Broad has played his part in the process.

It seems to me that your argument is more along the lines of "the best way to nail Murali" rather than a genuine search for the truth though. Surely you can see the wisdom of having someone a little more neutral (and I don't say this because Broad is the referee that reported Murali, but because Broad is a man who has gone on public record a number of times as highly critical of his action in the press and during game coverage previous to all this) assess Murali's action in this regard.

What I'd like to see is the chances minimized of EITHER camp claiming a fix-up. Yardley was bad for this, and so would Broad be. I don't know why you're so committed to Broad being there - there must be numerous people who can verify whether Murali is reproducing an action close to that of match conditions who both sides can maybe accept as objective (or at least it can remove the rational objections they might actually have about the process).

In the end though, the action WAS found to be illegal and exceeding current tolerance levels, regardless of how much some of the UWA staff might love giving juicy quotes to the papers about what acceptable tolerances should be. So, really, the tests have done their job anyway. The bigger issue to me is what's done with the findings.

 

[marc71178]

Are you going to answer any of the questions I ask of you, or are you just going to sidestep all of them by asking more questions of your own?

If you read I was actually answering your question.

Cannot have one without other, and as Slow Love pointed out, you seem more interested in getting him banned than in justice.

 

[DJ]

How is Broad's presence going to help 'nail Murali'? I still don't understand why people are saying this. He doesn't have any part to play once he's confirmed that the action Murali is using is the one that he reported to begin with. He doesn't do the tests, he doesn't analyse the findings and he doesn't make the final conclusions. How is he going to 'nail' Murali by doing this?

How is anyone other than the accuser going to confirm that the action Murali is using is the one that was reported? There is no-one else qualified to do that.

And as I said before, this was a concern of mine when Murali was first tested, not just now concerning his doosra.

 

[marc71178]

And that last paragraph tells us exactly all we need to know about your feelings towards Murali.

 

[DJ]

And how is my suggestion 'a sure way of getting him banned'? I'm sorry, that accusation just makes no sense to me.

Marc90210, you still haven't told me what your objections regarding having the accuser present are.

 

[DJ]

And that last paragraph tells us exactly all we need to know about your feelings towards Murali.

What, that I don't think he's been properly tested? I've been saying that since the start of this discussion.

 

[marc71178]

Marc90210, you still haven't told me what your objections regarding having the accuser present are.

Because that is turning it into a witch-hunt.

 

[marc71178]

What, that I don't think he's been properly tested? I've been saying that since the start of this discussion.

And you have absolutely no evidence to show it...

 

[DJ]

Because that is turning it into a witch-hunt.

How? Who else is going to confirm that the action used was the action reported?

 

[marc71178]

How? Who else is going to confirm that the action used was the action reported?

Any number of observers could've done.

 

[DJ]

And you have absolutely no evidence to show it...

Who confirmed his action in those original tests?

 

[DJ]

Any number of observers could've done.

Really? I wasn't aware that anyone else had reported him.

And yet again, the question of how Broad's presence is going to ensure that he is banned goes unanswered.

 

[DJ]

If you think I'm being paranoid about doubting the methodology of these tests, take a look at some of these reports:

"Elliott confirmed that Muralitharan had returned to the university to repeat the testing after originally bowling 28 deliveries before 12 high-speed cameras last Friday. A speed gun was used in the second tests, which showed Muralitharan bowling at 65-75kmh (40-47mph)."

Since when does Murali bowl at 40-47mph in a Test? He's dropped his speed by about a third. The scientists aren't bothered by this though, saying there's no way Murali could fool them, especially when they have a man of the calibre of Bruce Yardley there to monitor it's legitimacy. By the way, Yardley had this to say before the testing:

"There is no way Murali throws," Yardley said. "I believe that absolutely and will say it and defend him until the day I die."

I believe he dropped dead soon after the results of the doosra tests were made public.

Other points: Did any of you see any footage of the tests? I did. It was obvious he wasn't putting as much effort into his bowling as he does in a game. For a start, he was bowling off a run-up of about 3 steps. Has anyone here ever seen him bowl with such a short run-up before? I haven't. And of course, Bruce Yardley was satisfied that his slower deliveries bowled off a shorter run-up represented how he bowled in Tests.

 

[marc71178]

Really? I wasn't aware that anyone else had reported him.

There were more than just 1 person at the ground...

And yet again, the question of how Broad's presence is going to ensure that he is banned goes unanswered.

Broad has a very vested interest in the case. There is absolutely no need for him to be there.

 

[DJ]

What's Broad's vested interest? And even if he had one, how is his presence going to ensure that Murali is banned?

 

[marc71178]

What's Broad's vested interest?

Oh, I wonder what on earth it could be?

And even if he had one, how is his presence going to ensure that Murali is banned?

Un-neceessary outside influence on the testers.

 

[Langeveldt]

A speed gun was used in the second tests, which showed Muralitharan bowling at 65-75kmh (40-47mph)."
.

I love it... The guy should be banned and exiled for his sheer "im bigger than the game" arrogance... he must be having an absolute laugh, because unless he was injured or something he shouldnt be bowling at under 50mph in a career deciding set of tests. He is wasting everyones time if he won't do this properly...

 

[biased indian]

murali
icc

 

[Langeveldt]

murali
icc

Murali :
ICC :
Jeremy Beadle
Ross Emerson, Broad

 

[marc71178]

He is wasting everyones time if he won't do this properly...

What is his usual speed out of interest (genuine question)