Who Is Martin Crowe ?

[Langeveldt]

What was going on at the commentary yesterday at Napier? Some camereman had a banner saying "Crowe leave off Murali", and he went beserk, saying stuff like "well what the hell will you be doing next year sunny?" live on air.. Anyone else hear this?

 

[_Ed_]

That was Ian Smith, joking about the cameraman who showed the banner.

Crowe's the boss of Sky TV's cricket coverage so Smith was saying the cameraman might find himself without a job.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I think everyone chucks the doosra. Harbhajan too. That delivery itself should be banned.

You can't ban a delivery on the suspicion that everyone who ever tries to bowl it will throw it.

What's wrong with treating each case individually? Apart from the massive blow-up from that player's supporters each time it's mentioned, it's the most common sense approach.

As for those who say a player's action has been 'cleared' - you cannot clear a person's action for life...every bowler's action should be cleared on a ball-by-ball basis only. If I'm cleared and then deliberately throw the next one what position does that put the umpire in that has to make a decision whether to call me or not (or report me should it be the 3rd umpire).

Personally, I think the current situation with regards to throwing is ridiculous and has come about through political to-ing and fro-ing within the ICC and interested parties. Murali's normal delivery has been tested, and seems ok (but I still refer to the ball-by-ball point made above), but there's no reason why he shouldn't be subject to scrutiny if he bowls a delivery that looks suspect.

Is it possible that the reason you seemingly get more players out of the subcontinent with strange actions than elsewhere because of the availability of coaching at junior levels? Rather than being a 'worldwide conspiracy' I think there's a simpler reasoning...feel free to call me a 'racist' now.

 

[Goughy]

1. You don't know that he throws the doosra. You think he does, but as has been proven you can't trust your eyes to pick up a 'throw' accurately. He has been tested numerous times and his action (including the doosra) has been found to be acceptable. What makes you think you know better than experts trained in the field? Do you have superhuman eyes that can detect a dodgy action better than biomechanical experts?
2. You're having a go at others for suggesting 'conspiracy theories' but you're suggesting others with comments like "The world is getting *****-whipped into not questioning certain cricketers and teams due to a guaranteed frenzied political and popular backlash."
I suppose it's fine when it supports your view though.

I dont remember being brought in for tests

TBH, When someones arm noticably straightens it is a throw. His arm straightens. End of story. Botha's did as well and he fully deserved to be banned.

Big difference is that Botha didnt have millions of excitable people willing to put national, ethnic or regional pride ahead of common sense. He chucked and got suspened, people accepted it.

Believe me, I am quite capable of spotting a throw.

This should not have been a big deal at all. Murali breaks the rules, he is punished and we all get on with life.

However, we see that rules dont apply to many people due to political reasons.

As for your last comment, I dont understand what you mean.

 

[Dasa]

I dont remember being brought in for tests

TBH, When someones arm noticably straightens it is a throw. His arm straightens. End of story. Botha's did as well and he fully deserved to be banned.

Everyone's arm straightens. You just don't notice it because the human eye can't pick it up. The ICC tests proved that even bowlers who have actions that look perfect 'throw' the ball.

Big difference is that Botha didnt have millions of excitable people willing to put national, ethnic or regional pride ahead of common sense. He chucked and got suspened, people accepted it.

Or maybe Botha was tested and found to be outside acceptable limits while Murali wasn't. But of course, thanks for stereotyping an entire region.

Believe me, I am quite capable of spotting a throw.

I'm sure you are, and I'm also sure that you wouldn't know if you were throwing it in your regular action either.

This should not have been a big deal at all. Murali breaks the rules, he is punished and we all get on with life.

However, we see that rules dont apply to many people due to political reasons.

As for your last comment, I dont understand what you mean.

"However, we see that rules dont apply to many people due to political reasons." is what I meant with my last comment. On one hand, you're utterly dismissive of someone complaining about the English press reaction to ball-tampering and you are quick to shoot down any suggestions of a 'conspiracy theory', yet you're willing to shout 'politics' (and suggest conspiracies based on region and race) when it involves an issue where you think you know best.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Sarwan is the only bowler who doesn't chuck it.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Sarwan is the only bowler who doesn't chuck it.

I'm sorry...but that's rubbish.

 

[social]

I am interested in knowing whether biomechanical analysis has proven if Murali's standard version of 'doosara' is within the acceptable range or not.


Opinions are a dime a dozen.

Lab testing has proven that he can bowl the doosra legally, i.e. within 15 degree tolerance level - plenty of links available and not hard to find.

Issue is whether he uses modified action, as created by biomechanics under controlled conditions, or whether he has reverted to "old" action where he definitely threw.

Doosra with "old" action was much harder to detect as it was delivered from same position on crease with same pace on ball, etc.

"New" action, when first used, resulted in substantial change to run-up angle (as it had to be delivered from closer to stumps) and reduced pace on ball, i.e. element of surprise was lost as easier to detect

Given that Murali is definitely a genius when it comes to "delivering" a cricket ball, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that he's found a way to conceal a legal doosra.

In any event, it's probably a dead issue as:

a. the political climate is hardly ripe for taking a stand on the issue; and

b. most people are beyond caring

 

[Dasa]

I'm sorry...but that's rubbish.

Why is it rubbish?

 

[Son Of Coco]

Why is it rubbish?

For a start...not every bowler was tested.

 

[Dasa]

For a start...not every bowler was tested.

Yeah, fair enough...but it seems like you're dismissing the notion of 'all bowlers chucking' rather than just arguing on semantics. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Yeah, fair enough...but it seems like you're dismissing the notion of 'all bowlers chucking' rather than just arguing on semantics. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm dubious about the 'all bowlers chucking' argument...but especially so when it can't be applied to all bowlers.

I have some questions about how they came to this conclusion, but I've asked them before so I can't see any point in repeating myself.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Out of all the bowlers tested Ranmaresh Sarwan was the only person who didn't extend his arm when bowling, fact.

 

[GotSpin]

Lab testing has proven that he can bowl the doosra legally, i.e. within 15 degree tolerance level - plenty of links available and not hard to find.

Issue is whether he uses modified action, as created by biomechanics under controlled conditions, or whether he has reverted to "old" action where he definitely threw.

Doosra with "old" action was much harder to detect as it was delivered from same position on crease with same pace on ball, etc.

"New" action, when first used, resulted in substantial change to run-up angle (as it had to be delivered from closer to stumps) and reduced pace on ball, i.e. element of surprise was lost as easier to detect

Given that Murali is definitely a genius when it comes to "delivering" a cricket ball, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that he's found a way to conceal a legal doosra.

In any event, it's probably a dead issue as:

a. the political climate is hardly ripe for taking a stand on the issue; and

b. most people are beyond caring

Wasn't the tolerance level increased to 15 degrees to cater for Murali? Im sure it used to be smaller anyway

 

[Son Of Coco]

Out of all the bowlers tested Ranmaresh Sarwan was the only person who didn't extend his arm when bowling, fact.

Yes, now you've put it that simply for me I'm a believer.

 

[nightprowler10]

Wasn't the tolerance level increased to 15 degrees to cater for Murali? Im sure it used to be smaller anyway

The limit used to be 10 degrees for spinners and 5 degrees for pacers IIRC. When tested during the 2004 CT, every bowler was over these limits with the exception of Sarwan. This, along with Muralitharan and Sri Lanka's persistance, put in to motion the new law that sets the limit at 15 degrees for every bowler, regardless of whether he is a pacer or a spinner.

 

[JASON]

"He sounds more like an Australian now." Said Ranatunga of Martin Crowe.

Gotta Luv Ranatunga, for the man is witty as ever .

 

[Son Of Coco]

Gotta Luv Ranatunga, for the man is witty as ever .

He certainly is..

 

[Prince EWS]

sitting in front of your TV you've seen what umpires at 22 yards could'nt see - silentstriker you are an optician's dream

Like the 90's reverse swing - this too will pass when Monty starts his version of the doosra

I was watching an interview yesterday with Panesar and he actually developed a doosra - but he throws it and he knows it so he doesn't bowl it. Interesting stuff really.

There's also Alex Loudon who actually already has a doosra (although it is by quite some margin the ball I have ever seen bowled - he just flicks it!).

I think the delivery itself adds something to the game, so I don't really want to see it banned. What irks me though is that Botha is banned and Mural isn't..

 

[social]

Wasn't the tolerance level increased to 15 degrees to cater for Murali? Im sure it used to be smaller anyway

This is what conspiracy theorists would have you believe

Reality is that scientific research indicates that the naked eye can only detect straightening of the arm during the bowling action once it reaches 15 degrees.

Given that the on-field umpires are the initial arbiters of the legality, or otherwise, of an action, it was deemed logical to set it at this level.
.