The Doosra

[Richard]

Quickest response ever?

Haha, doubt it.

It's hard to imagine what else there is left to do with a ball (In spin bowling) or maybe, it's more about how to disguise it.

There are only 3 things you can do with the ball (as Iverson himself once said): make it go left, make it go right, or leave it to go straight on. It can't disappear or explode. There are, however, many hundreds of ways to do this, added to top-spinners and fore-spinners (Flippers when bowled by a wristspinner), and there will always be new ones being developed.

 

[neville cardus]

Richards also said he could pick the length by the angle of the bowler's arm as he released the ball.

Nothing short of astounding, that man.

Aye. He humiliated at least one poor trundler in a first-class match by playing him with the edge of his bat.

 

[neville cardus]

Quickest response ever?

It's hard to imagine what else there is left to do with a ball (In spin bowling) or maybe, it's more about how to disguise it.

I've made two discoveries (the straight-armed doosra and the round-armed googly) which I'm determined to pass on to a worthier practitioner.

 

[SJS]

Haha, doubt it.

There are only 3 things you can do with the ball (as Iverson himself once said): make it go left, make it go right, or leave it to go straight on. It can't disappear or explode. There are, however, many hundreds of ways to do this, added to top-spinners and fore-spinners (Flippers when bowled by a wristspinner), and there will always be new ones being developed.

You can make it go right and then left

 

[honestbharani]

Now the umpires are too sacred to no-ball a bowler for chucking, they just report a suspect action to referee and than the bowler has to go through a bio-mechanic test (which i think is not conclusive), a bowler can always chuck intentionally in a match and get away with it during a bio-mechanic test.

which shows u know nothing about what u r talking about.


The number of video cameras and the varying degrees to which the replays can be reduced to in slow motion can make it virtually impossible for a bowler to get away with changing his action even minimally between tests and actual match. Also, you can measure a bowler's flex through the super slow mos within 2% margin of error. And another thing is, you CANNOT bowl any cricketing delivery without chucking the ball..... Some people just don't like to face that fact.......

 

[Dan]

I spun the ball on the second bounce once in u/12s, their ump thought there was something wrong with the pitch.

I come up with all sorts of balls, i think i combined a topspinner, googly and flipper into 1 ball, then i gave up leg spin and changed to offies.

 

[neville cardus]

I spun the ball on the second bounce once in u/12s, their ump thought there was something wrong with the pitch.

I come up with all sorts of balls, i think i combined a topspinner, googly and flipper into 1 ball, then i gave up leg spin and changed to offies.

Let's compare notes.

 

[Goughy]

DO you think there are many more variations left to be discovered? I know it's a very general question.

There's probably new variations of just about everything left to be developed and discovered TBH.

Always amazes me that noone has developed (that I know of successfully) a heavily spun, back spinner.

ie, a ball that grips, holds up, slows and then bounces on an increased angle.

It would logically be difficult to time and have unpredictable bounce making it hard to play against.

(apologies for the 2 sec art work)

 

[Richard]

You can make it go right and then left

Eh? By bouncing it twice? Even then I can't see how you could do that.

The only way to make it go both ways would be to drift it away then turn it in, or vice-versa.

 

[Richard]

Always amazes me that noone has developed (that I know of successfully) a heavily spun, back spinner.

ie, a ball that grips, holds up, slows and then bounces on an increased angle.

It would logically be difficult to time and have unpredictable bounce making it hard to play against.

(apologies for the 2 sec art work)

Surely a ball like that'd be virtually impossible to disguise, though?

Mind, having said that it'd not be an incredibly easy thing to adjust to even if you did see it out of the hand.

 

[SJS]

Eh? By bouncing it twice? Even then I can't see how you could do that.

The only way to make it go both ways would be to drift it away then turn it in, or vice-versa.

Exactly. Barnes was a master at that. Swung it in late and then moved it sharply away on pitching.

 

[Richard]

The post you quoted from I was talking about what you can make it do off the pitch, though, not in the air.

 

[SJS]

The post you quoted from I was talking about what you can make it do off the pitch, though, not in the air.

I know

But since you did not say so explicitely I thought of following in the grand tradition of CW and quote out of context

 

[Goughy]

Also, (Ive tried it but Im certainly no expert in this area) noone has developed an equivelant of baseballs knuckleball.

For those that dont know the knuckleball has as close to zero rotation or spin imparted on the ball. It is difficult to do but when done correctly it floats towards the batsman.

As it has no rotation that ball can do anything. Dip, go right, go left, hold its line, drop like its hit a wall etc.

The batsman find it very hard to play, which is weighed by the fact that it is hard to master.

In cricket it would be interesting to see the effect of a ball that has a mind of its own, like a knuckle ball

 

[Richard]

I know

But since you did not say so explicitely I thought of following in the grand tradition of CW and quote out of context

One hopes the cream usually rises to the top.

 

[Richard]

Also, (Ive tried it but Im certainly no expert in this area) noone has developed an equivelant of baseballs knuckleball.

For those that dont know the knuckleball has as close to zero rotation or spin imparted on the ball. It is difficult to do but when done correctly it floats towards the batsman.

As it has no rotation that ball can do anything. Dip, go right, go left, hold its line, drop like its hit a wall etc.

The batsman find it very hard to play, which is weighed by the fact that it is hard to master.

In cricket it would be interesting to see the effect of a ball that has a mind of its own, like a knuckle ball

Didn't Warne bowl that of times? Or was that Mushtaq Ahmed? Or some other completely different wristspinner?

Sure I've heard a (cricket) commentator say "that's the knuckle-ball" sometime.

 

[neville cardus]

Always amazes me that noone has developed (that I know of successfully) a heavily spun, back spinner.

ie, a ball that grips, holds up, slows and then bounces on an increased angle.

It would logically be difficult to time and have unpredictable bounce making it hard to play against.

(apologies for the 2 sec art work)

It's possible -- I've done it --, but, again, it's incredibly difficult to control, as you're flicking your wrist backwards as your arm goes forwards. The ball actually tends to break in to the batsman a bit, keeping low rather than bouncing high.

 

[neville cardus]

Also, (Ive tried it but Im certainly no expert in this area) noone has developed an equivelant of baseballs knuckleball.

For those that dont know the knuckleball has as close to zero rotation or spin imparted on the ball. It is difficult to do but when done correctly it floats towards the batsman.

As it has no rotation that ball can do anything. Dip, go right, go left, hold its line, drop like its hit a wall etc.

The batsman find it very hard to play, which is weighed by the fact that it is hard to master.

In cricket it would be interesting to see the effect of a ball that has a mind of its own, like a knuckle ball

Bart King brought baseball grips into his cricket with great success.

 

[Prince EWS]

Didn't Warne bowl that of times? Or was that Mushtaq Ahmed? Or some other completely different wristspinner?

Sure I've heard a (cricket) commentator say "that's the knuckle-ball" sometime.

I've seen Jacques Rudolph of all people bowl it.

 

[Richard]

You know what, given I'm fairly sure the commentator was Barry Richards, it could just possibly have been him.