Who is better Imran Khan or Glenn Mcgrath?

[slowfinger]

I've never tampered with the ball.

Can I bet on that?

 

[Manee]

I've never tampered with the ball.

Neither have I, and from people who have seen me bowl, I am positively a rapid fast bowler.

 

[slowfinger]

Neither have I, and from people who have seen me bowl, I am positively a rapid fast bowler.

To be honest, you could be.

 

[slowfinger]

But that isn't my point, I am a spinner and therefore don't care tbh.

 

[slowfinger]

I really do wish you'd castigate me more for my use of suncream to improve the shining quality of my sweat - looks a tad hypocritical otherwise TBH.

 

[Burgey]

Of course bottle-tops and stanley-knives and car-park tarmac on the ball are totally different to other things. Such cases as these are exceptionally rare and always have been, though, and no-one's referring to them.

The use of natural-substance-enhancers (such as mints, suncream, something to increase the amount your nose runs, or whatever) is very different. So is rubbing a bit of dust on the ball (dust is as natural as saliva, the only difference is it's something which takes shine off the ball, rather than adds to it). So is lifting the seam (that's not even the application of a substance).

I honestly can't say any of the examples contained in the second paragraph remotely bother me, I don't think they should be illegal (in some cases there's no way you can pass a law making them so), and it's no surprise to me that almost all seam-bowlers have used them as tactics when they knew they could get away with it.

Rich, the problem will then be where does one draw the line as to what's used and what isn't?

I could see it ending up like th esledgin/ chirping/ having a chat argument - potentially a lot of grey areas.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Can I bet on that?

You can bet everything you own

I could cut it in and swing it in anyway, and also cut it away. Never considered trying anything illegal with the ball to get it to swing away, even though a combination of cutting it in and swinging it away would have been useful. It wasn't really needed in my comp

 

[Richard]

Rich, the problem will then be where does one draw the line as to what's used and what isn't?

I could see it ending up like th esledgin/ chirping/ having a chat argument - potentially a lot of grey areas.

There's already a lot of grey areas, though, that's the trouble. And there always will be - unfortunately there's no way to have fair law that's policeable. Just the same as with sledging, chucking and several other things. The game simply doesn't work in a way that allows this.

The line as currently drawn is both unsatisfactory and unpoliceable. Hence Australians trying to suggest sucking a few sweets on the field is akin to using a stanley-knife on the ball. And hence Pakistanis constantly complaining that they're unfairly victimised by Darrell Hairs. And hence... well, loads of other things, really. I'd be much happier if anything which improved the shine of the ball was allowed (including vaseline), and dust alone was allowed to take shine off it. Swing is IMO the greatest and most thrilling art this game possesses, and I'm happy with almost anything being used to enhance our chances of seeing it. The use of blatant scratching on the ball should be prohibited for mine, but that's it, but even this is never going to be 100% policeable.

 

[Burgey]

There's already a lot of grey areas, though, that's the trouble. And there always will be - unfortunately there's no way to have fair law that's policeable. Just the same as with sledging, chucking and several other things. The game simply doesn't work in a way that allows this.

The line as currently drawn is both unsatisfactory and unpoliceable. Hence Australians trying to suggest sucking a few sweets on the field is akin to using a stanley-knife on the ball. And hence Pakistanis constantly complaining that they're unfairly victimised by Darrell Hairs. And hence... well, loads of other things, really. I'd be much happier if anything which improved the shine of the ball was allowed (including vaseline), and dust alone was allowed to take shine off it. Swing is IMO the greatest and most thrilling art this game possesses, and I'm happy with almost anything being used to enhance our chances of seeing it. The use of blatant scratching on the ball should be prohibited for mine, but that's it, but even this is never going to be 100% policeable.

No, it's worse.

And there's the admission we've been looking for!!!

 

[Richard]

As I say - to admit something I do not consider a crime is no admittance.

 

[gwo]

As I say - to admit something I do not consider a crime is no admittance.

Can you say that again?

Try again...this time taking into account that the world doesn't quite revolve around you and your ethics.

 

[Richard]

I decide what I consider right in the game of cricket, though - and to me the use of saliva-enhancers is neither illegal nor possible to make illegal. You cannot regulate what cricketers eat.

 

[Son Of Coco]

There's already a lot of grey areas, though, that's the trouble. And there always will be - unfortunately there's no way to have fair law that's policeable. Just the same as with sledging, chucking and several other things. The game simply doesn't work in a way that allows this.

The line as currently drawn is both unsatisfactory and unpoliceable. Hence Australians trying to suggest sucking a few sweets on the field is akin to using a stanley-knife on the ball. And hence Pakistanis constantly complaining that they're unfairly victimised by Darrell Hairs. And hence... well, loads of other things, really. I'd be much happier if anything which improved the shine of the ball was allowed (including vaseline), and dust alone was allowed to take shine off it. Swing is IMO the greatest and most thrilling art this game possesses, and I'm happy with almost anything being used to enhance our chances of seeing it. The use of blatant scratching on the ball should be prohibited for mine, but that's it, but even this is never going to be 100% policeable.

The reason it's an 'art' is because it takes some skill to be able to do it. Whipping out the vaseline to enhance your chances of doing so isn't art.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I decide what I consider right in the game of cricket, though - and to me the use of saliva-enhancers is neither illegal nor possible to make illegal. You cannot regulate what cricketers eat.

Like 4 hot girls standing on the boundary?

 

[Richard]

The reason it's an 'art' is because it takes some skill to be able to do it. Whipping out the vaseline to enhance your chances of doing so isn't art.

If you don't have the skill to swing the ball (the seam-position in the hand, the arm\wrist\hand position on release, and a few other things) it doesn't matter what you put on it and how good a condition you get it in.

Some bowlers never or almost never swing the best cricket-balls you can wish to see.

It's an art regardless of what you use to help you. I am never happy to connect what is done to the ball to get it in the right condition to the skill of the bowlers.

 

[Richard]

Like 4 hot girls standing on the boundary?

That'd probably produce more; dunno whether it'd be of a better quality. You might need to be a bit closer to them to achieve that.

 

[Son Of Coco]

If you don't have the skill to swing the ball (the seam-position in the hand, the arm\wrist\hand position on release, and a few other things) it doesn't matter what you put on it and how good a condition you get it in.

Some bowlers never or almost never swing the best cricket-balls you can wish to see.

It's an art regardless of what you use to help you. I am never happy to connect what is done to the ball to get it in the right condition to the skill of the bowlers.

Part of the art is looking after the ball though. Unless you're stuck playing with Gabba balls like we are due to sponsorship of the comp. They're ****! After 10 overs none of us can do anything with it. Kookaburras will still do what you want them to do 40-50 overs in if you look after them. There's no art in covering a side with vaseline. It's greasy and absorbed into the leather. Totally different to saliva. I'm not sure how realistic Vaseline is though...I think a jar would be fairly obvious, and I wouldn't be volunteering to dump it in my pocket. I'm sure it's different in Test matches, but the greatest threat to anyone trying to swing the ball in my team is some dickhead shining both sides to 'keep the ball looking new' and all of a sudden your straight ball outside off is a foot down leg

 

[Son Of Coco]

That'd probably produce more; dunno whether it'd be of a better quality. You might need to be a bit closer to them to achieve that.

You'd probably end up with a 6 man slips cordon at long on.

 

[Richard]

Part of the art is looking after the ball though. Unless you're stuck playing with Gabba balls like we are due to sponsorship of the comp. They're ****! After 10 overs none of us can do anything with it. Kookaburras will still do what you want them to do 40-50 overs in if you look after them. There's no art in covering a side with vaseline. It's greasy and absorbed into the leather. Totally different to saliva. I'm not sure how realistic Vaseline is though...I think a jar would be fairly obvious, and I wouldn't be volunteering to dump it in my pocket. I'm sure it's different in Test matches, but the greatest threat to anyone trying to swing the ball in my team is some dickhead shining both sides to 'keep the ball looking new' and all of a sudden your straight ball outside off is a foot down leg

No, of course vaseline is not legal. And I'm not advocating the illegal use of it - I'm advocating the legalisation of its use.

Of course, I've never actually used vaseline on a cricket-ball and who knows whether it'd be terribly effective. But apparently John Lever did in '76/77, and that's where I plucked the random word "vaseline" from. I possibly could've used a better substance.

Of course part of the art is looking after the ball, and it annoys the heck out of me how poor some people are at this. Not just at the level I play at (I generally take sole responsibility for all shining at all times during my bowling spells) but at higher levels too!

However, there's also no denying that you get some shocking quality balls. The gunk we used between the summers of 2001 and 2006 were some such examples. Fortunately in the last couple of seasons we've got stuff that's swung again, and long may it continue.

However, when you get poor-quality balls (and TBH the Kookas have usually seemed that way to me, except at The SCG and The WACA, though I've only been watching cricket in Australia from 2000/01 onwards and I've heard more than 1 Australian observer say swing has diminished in that time) I'd like to see something legal to be used to improve things.

 

[Son Of Coco]

No, of course vaseline is not legal. And I'm not advocating the illegal use of it - I'm advocating the legalisation of its use.

Of course, I've never actually used vaseline on a cricket-ball and who knows whether it'd be terribly effective. But apparently John Lever did in '76/77, and that's where I plucked the random word "vaseline" from. I possibly could've used a better substance.

Of course part of the art is looking after the ball, and it annoys the heck out of me how poor some people are at this. Not just at the level I play at (I generally take sole responsibility for all shining at all times during my bowling spells) but at higher levels too!

However, there's also no denying that you get some shocking quality balls. The gunk we used between the summers of 2001 and 2006 were some such examples. Fortunately in the last couple of seasons we've got stuff that's swung again, and long may it continue.

However, when you get poor-quality balls (and TBH the Kookas have usually seemed that way to me, except at The SCG and The WACA, though I've only been watching cricket in Australia from 2000/01 onwards and I've heard more than 1 Australian observer say swing has diminished in that time) I'd like to see something legal to be used to improve things.

In my opinion the Kookas are the best I've played with over here. The seam stays hard and it's actually prominent so if you get the seam upright the ball will seam around. Look after them and you can hit the seam in the 40th over and it'll still move. The Gabbas on the other hand (which you probably haven't seen) are terrible. Flattened seam after 10 overs and nothing happens from then on in. The number of games where teams have been 4-6 for nothing and then scored 200+ from then on is unbelievable over the last 3-4 years we've been using them and it's not because each team has that many good bats. Had to use them for 3 games at the start of a season a couple of times and we all switched back to Kookas as soon as possible. This season we had to use the for the whole season and if you're not opening bowler there's nothing to look forward to. They gave us a new version at the back end of the season, but they were very insconsistent. One we used for 40-50 overs and it was good. Took the new ball and it did nothing after 8 overs had been bowled. Wouldn't use anything on them though, would prefer to just blow them up!