« APPALL-AMERICAN | Main | REACTION STATIONS »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

gillysgone

Why has it been a boon for chuckers? Been a boon for those who want more money while not being very good. Also mafia types who take the punters money. Matches of low value for the purists now seem to have high value for the fixers. As the great philosopher Professor Morrisett once asaid "Isnt it ironic, dont you think?"

Tony Tea

Takes attention away from chucking and onto gambling.

gillysgone

aaaahhh?

gillysgone

oops aaahhh!

Tony Tea

How naughty is "this has got to be a fake photo" anyway?

Tony Tea

I wish the ICC would hurry up with the electronic in-match testing.

Professor Rosseforp

When is the ICC going to incorporate the UWA findings that elbow flexion is not a good indication of throwing? Some benders look legit, some non-benders look like chuckers. The motion of throwing comes from the shoulder, not the elbow.
Okay, it means the MCC will have to admit that its throwing laws have been looking at the wrong joint, but it might mean we could do something sensible about the current situation.
Even if we look at elbow flexion, how is it legitimate to look at the bowler's natural degree of bend, then subtract an "average" flexion to come up with a figure that is magically about the 15 degree mark? Does that mean if he doesn't straighten on one delivery, he can straighten 16 degrees on the next to keep up his average?
How about bowlers who overstep -- can they bring in their average rate of overstepping and claim it's okay, because scientifically they are not really overstepping?

JJ

Throwing is in the shoulder? May I ask how it is possible to bowl without employing the shoulder? Also, try throwing while keeping your arm straight - you'd be, um, bowling...

Clearly it is the elbow bend that is the issue. Ajmal is clearly throwing many of his deliveries, and Murali was awful, as any objective person knows.

The ICC has deferred to blind nationalism. That Pakistani supporters can look at Ajmal bowl and say he's not throwing is fine testament to cognitive dissonance.

The technology for in-game testing is almost upon us, but it will be blocked by the usual suspects. But if the ICC ever has the balls to implement it, then several careers will instantly end, and records will have to be erased if they are serious. That's why it will never be permitted.

But the truth is that one day it will simply be possible for anyone to run a video image through a computer and do it themselves. When that day comes it will be very, very embarrassing indeed for some bowlers and cricket boards.

Tony Tea

I hear you, brother.

Professor Rosseforp

JJ, if you throw the ball in from the boundary, you will feel your shoulder jerking. If you bowl, you should feel your shoulder rotating. You can throw a dart with a fixed elbow, if you jerk your shoulder. You will often hear commentators say that a quick bowler on the boundary has bowled the ball from the outfield rather than throwing it -- what they mean is that he is using a rotating-shoulder technique, not jerking the shoulder.
The UWA research has shown that some people bend the elbow a lot and don't appear to throw ; some bend the elbow a little and appear to be throwers. Their conclusion is that elbow-bending is not the only issue in throwing and is not a good way of judging a thrower -- BUT elbow bending is the only issue addressed in the laws of the game.
My original concern about Muralidharan's action was different to Brett Lee's, Charle Griffith's, or Meckiff's. These guys were plainly moving the elbow prior to, or following the delivery in some cases.
But Muralidharan had a whole chain of events going on: a super-flexible wrist (no problem), a bent elbow (no problem so along as he didn't move it -- but he did), and a huge shoulder movement not found in other throwers (no problem because the laws were silent).
His shoulder movement was the original cause for descriptions like "dart-throwing", "shot-putting", and explains why he could still appear to throw when he was splinted at the elbow.
The administrators of the game have avoided bringing the shoulder into discussion, whereas the shoulder movement is exactly what catches a spectator's (or umpire's) eye when he first suspects a bowler's action.
A good way of checking this analysis is to watch a baseball pitcher -- he is clearly not bowling, yet in many cases his elbow would stay within the current guidelines for cricketers. Pitchers have injuries to all parts of their bodies, as the pitch involves a chain of movement, but the fastest part of that movement is the shoulder movement.
If you've lasted this far into my views, thanks, and apologies for being long-winded.

Big Ramifications

Someone tell Professor Rosseforp that Bruce Elliot from UWA has stolen his logon details. Crikey!

ps: Had to be done.

Faruq

The arm is allowed to STRAIGHTEN 15 degrees. It doesn't matter how much it's bent. Ajmal's action is perfectly legal and the irony of Broad and others being professional/former professional cricketers and criticising bowlers while being ignorant of the sport's rules is kind of stupid.

Tony Tea

Blah, blah, blah. Heard it all before. Yawny, yawny, c**t, c**t.

Cameron

At least none of these cheats are involved in a coaching capacity with Australian cricket...

Professor Rosseforp

Good picture, Rammers!
I've repeated all this blah-blah-blah on The Roar, and it's pretty tedious, even for me.
But to clarify, my conclusion is that there is no doubt that Muralidharan was throwing before the ICC ruling ; it's pretty certain he continued throwing more frequently after the ICC ruling ; it's pretty clear that the ICC was happy to accept "scientific conclusions" to appear that they were doing something, when they need to look at the whole problem again and redefine "thrwing".

The comments to this entry are closed.