Print

[Dan W]

Pah! I think they should let everyone chuck, with the stipulation something like the ball has to come from above the shoulder or vertically outstretched elbow. It would look a bit weird, but the straight arm thing simply means spinning is less effective and merely a sideshow to the fast game. The chucking thing is too tough to detect. The umpire won't have the balls to do it there and then, the trial by TV replay isn't accurate, and it must be easy enough to replicate a safe action under testing to get through the tests.

Would be great if it was a bigger part of the game, especially as most legal spinners are rubbish!

[skip1973]

That's exactly the attitude that has seen society standards decline over the years.

[MD2812]

Pah! I think they should let everyone chuck, with the stipulation something like the ball has to come from above the shoulder or vertically outstretched elbow. It would look a bit weird, but the straight arm thing simply means spinning is less effective and merely a sideshow to the fast game. The chucking thing is too tough to detect. The umpire won't have the balls to do it there and then, the trial by TV replay isn't accurate, and it must be easy enough to replicate a safe action under testing to get through the tests.

Would be great if it was a bigger part of the game, especially as most legal spinners are rubbish!

I detect trolling. I certainly hope I do!! If not then cricket would have baseball pitchers within a week!

The solution to chucking lies in technology. ICC are testing a sleeve which is worn by the bowler and measures any bend or straightening of the arm in delivery.

In football goal line technology has to give a decision within .25 of a second. If this sleeve can do that for Umpires to a watch which vibrates on a no ball then that would be brilliant. Might also mean some slow bowlers wear shorter sleeve shirts on warm days!!

[MD2812]

When a bowler is banned for his action, should his wickets stand in the record books? Or should they be removed? If his bowling was deemed illegal, shouldn't those wickets not count?
Should batsmen who were out to him have not outs added to their score for those innings?

No, his action is only illegal from the testing date or results announcement. There is no evidence which can catagorically prove those delivieries were ileagal.,

[uknsaunders]

You could go further with a sleeve and allow it to flex 15 degrees and then stiffen. Would be very interesting to see whether Ajmal and Co would be nearly as effective if they were forced to wear one.

[mini998]

You could go further with a sleeve and allow it to flex 15 degrees and then stiffen. Would be very interesting to see whether Ajmal and Co would be nearly as effective if they were forced to wear one.

Murali bowled with a brace made out of steel which offered no flex during testing , it was nearly a kilo and he was able to bowl both his off spinner and doosra without issues.  Micheal Slater (and some other players I think, not remember their names) batted against him to test the quality of the bowling.

Obviously people who wan't label him as a chucker tend to look away from these information rather conveniently.

http://mutated-unmuated.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/muttiah-muralitharan-best-cricketer-in.html

[tim2000s]

Murali bowled with a brace made out of steel which offered no flex during testing , it was nearly a kilo and he was able to bowl both his off spinner and doosra without issues.  Micheal Slater (and some other players I think, not remember their names) batted against him to test the quality of the bowling.

Obviously people who wan't label him as a chucker tend to look away from these information rather conveniently.

http://mutated-unmuated.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/muttiah-muralitharan-best-cricketer-in.html

And everyone knows this. But we aren't talking about Murali, we are talking about a chucker called Senanayake, plus potentially others with similar actions. We also know that Murali could bowl leggies with a straight arm, so there is always going to be a question over how he did what he did.

[mini998]

And everyone knows this. But we aren't talking about Murali, we are talking about a chucker called Senanayake, plus potentially others with similar actions. We also know that Murali could bowl leggies with a straight arm, so there is always going to be a question over how he did what he did.

except he didn't, I know the video you have been posting all over this place , not sure if you missed it or conveniently tend to ignore below angle  in his leggie.




and people bought in murali in this thread, hence my reply about him and his brace

Because that's how he was taught and was told it was fine because Murali had been allowed to get away with it.

[Dhiraj]

except he didn't, I know the video you have been posting all over this place , not sure if you missed it or conveniently tend to ignore below angle  in his leggie.




and people bought in murali in this thread, hence my reply about him and his brace

Murali has a deformity which makes that angle with the natural arm which is what was concluded after all the braces and the bio mechanic tests.

There is a lot of debate of legal action of bowling but lets go back few years when even a slight bend was treated as chucking till bowlers came through with unusual action.
This 15 or 14 degrees is for now till somebody turns up with another crooked arm and turns the ball square on any pitch.
There is far too much noise around legal action but it isnt still clear.

[mini998]

Murali has a deformity which makes that angle with the natural arm which is what was concluded after all the braces and the bio mechanic tests.

There is a lot of debate of legal action of bowling but lets go back few years when even a slight bend was treated as chucking till bowlers came through with unusual action.
This 15 or 14 degrees is for now till somebody turns up with another crooked arm and turns the ball square on any pitch.
There is far too much noise around legal action but it isnt still clear.

That's actually not true , only reason they introduced this 15 degrees is because they found out it is almost impossible for any bowler to bowl without flexing/straightening their arms during delivery action . So they had to come up with a number and after testing several players they came up with 15 degrees flex limit, so Murali's crooked arm was not the reason for 15 degrees , although all of these initiated because of his issue.

[Manormanic]

When a bowler is banned for his action, should his wickets stand in the record books? Or should they be removed? If his bowling was deemed illegal, shouldn't those wickets not count?
Should batsmen who were out to him have not outs added to their score for those innings?

should the Mankading be cancelled as it should have been  no ball anyway ? 

[smokem]

And everyone knows this. But we aren't talking about Murali, we are talking about a chucker called Senanayake, plus potentially others with similar actions. We also know that Murali could bowl leggies with a straight arm, so there is always going to be a question over how he did what he did.

Incorrect if you go by the fact that one of his leggies was also called for a no-ball. One of the dumbest things I've ever seen an umpire do...

[skip1973]

It's not how straight his arm is at release point, it's how far it straightened on the way. Murali cocks his arm with the ball near the point of his bowling shoulder. He chucks plain and simple. The recent row game showed he's given up on even trying to disguise it.