• 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.

*Official* Bangladesh in New Zealand

thierry henry

thierry henry

International Coach
I like Mahmudullah's action. Very vigorous, not your typical innocuous ODI spinner. Is he noted as a turner of the ball?
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
thierry henry said:
I like Mahmudullah's action. Very vigorous, not your typical innocuous ODI spinner. Is he noted as a turner of the ball?
Click to expand...
Yeah he definitely gets some when conditions suit; he's more of a Test bowler. Took a swag of wickets in the Tests against West Indies D.
 
thierry henry

thierry henry

International Coach
Anyone else get the impression that Shahadat could bowl significantly faster, but his action is a bit of a mess?

Also, is it just me or did Shahadat and Nazmul both bowl faster when they were 17?
 
Craig

Craig

World Traveller
thierry henry said:
That 3rd wide call was rubbish. Umpires suck at calling wides these days.
Click to expand...
They should change the laws IMO. Like if you see a bowler push the ball wide of off stump and the batsman moves towards the ball and misses it (like a play and miss) then it shouldn't be a wide IMO.
 
_Ed_

_Ed_

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Broom's out for 71.

Really good innings. He proved me wrong - I didn't think ODIs were his go at all, and I thought he'd continue to fail. Full credit to him.
 
thierry henry

thierry henry

International Coach
Craig said:
They should change the laws IMO. Like if you see a bowler push the ball wide of off stump and the batsman moves towards the ball and misses it (like a play and miss) then it shouldn't be a wide IMO.
Click to expand...
As far as I'm aware that already is (or was) the rule. That's always how I've interpreted it and seen it interpreted. Basically, once the batsman starts moving, you interpret in favour of the bowler- e.g. the bowler can follow the batsmen, and the wide lines are moved across in accordance with how far the batsman has moved, or if the bowler goes the other way, he can bowl as wide as he would normally be allowed to bowl. I think anyone with a shred of cricketing sense can see that that's logical.

That is, up until this season in NZ when a directive came from the HRV Cup umpires that they were just using the wide lines, regardless of where the batsman was standing, which is completely illogical and absurd imo.

Although what actually happened in this case was the opposite- Oram backed away to leg, and Shahadat bowled a ball outside off which was out of Oram's reach, but to my eyes was several inches inside the wide line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top