Chucking tests don't work

[Sureshot]

Your guess is as good as his.

Inconsistent umpiring would be mine. But can one umpire see it and another not?

Actions don't change.

 

[sohum]

Well, actions can certainly change. Especially if you are going to change into an off-spinner from a medium pacer.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

But why such a big fuss? Murali's action doesn't give him an unfair advantage! His wrists does, any other action is probably impossible for him. I mean, you try bowling normally, chucking, and then "chuck' while making it look normal! its hard, why would any one go through the bother just to get a few wickets in a game! Just let him be, he is a genius in his own rights.

 

[Jarryd]

Murali chucking it gives him an advantage in that he can obtain more spin. He is not a genius, he is a cheat.

But this is not what this thread is about. The debate about who chucks and who doesn't is for an entirely different thread (which I've started many times...).

 

[valvolux]

The tests are perfectly good, it's how they monitor the tests which is wrong. They supposedly have an expert there to ensure that they are bowling as they would during a game. Now if my memory serves me correct, the expert at Murali's tests was the bloody sri lankan coach! Now i'm sure he was really subjective during the tests. But by the same token i'm sure it's bloody hard to bowl with all those ping pong balls over your body.

The thing that came out of the testing, is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to bowl a doosra without chucking - biomechanically impossiple to be scientific. They made that as clear as day, then there was talk that Murali would never bowl the ball again....months pass, he slips it back in the arsenal and the ICC somehow forgets the whole testing process. Pretty ludicrous huh? His offspinners are obvious throws as well (just watch him in brian laras cricket , but he has gotten by through the "birth defect" arguement....which may very well be true, but that doesn't explain the other suspect actions in world cricket (like botha) nor his doosra.

Murali's record will always have a big * next to it, because several umpires, who are paid to make these decisions, called him for throwing. My opinion is that he bowls illegally, there's no good proof out there to say he doesn't, but there's hours of footage that suggests he does. But at the end of the day it doesn't worry a lot of the better batsmen, because he isn't that good a bowler. He bowls 80% of his sides overs so you'd expect him to take a few wickets, and has taken over 100 test wickets against crickets minnows in Zimbabwe and Bangladesh (I think Shane Warne has about 5) - genius? I think not.

Why hasn't Giles or say Symonds added the doosra to their arsenal? Apart from both being pretty ordinary tweakers, it's because they bowl with a straight arm, and it's impossible.

 

[Sureshot]

Murali chucking it gives him an advantage in that he can obtain more spin. He is not a genius, he is a cheat.

But this is not what this thread is about. The debate about who chucks and who doesn't is for an entirely different thread (which I've started many times...).

Even though it's been proven he isn't a cheat! :

 

[andrew_nixon]

Even though it's been proven he isn't a cheat! :

Murali could go in front of every specialist in the world, be subjected to a battery of tests, be proven absolutely conclusively not to chuck, and Jarryd will still say he chucks.

Murali was cleared by the same people that cleared Brett Lee, I assume Jarryd still calls Lee a chucker too?

 

[Sureshot]

I really don't understand though, why JarryD and so many other people still call Murali a chucker? His action has been proven fine, his spin is due to a incredibly flexible wrist due to being double jointed, and anyone on here who are double jointed or knows someone who is, will know he will get more spin that others, or should we ban people who are double jointed?

 

[cricket doctor]

Murali is not a chucker and he will keep getting wickets.

Q: Define chucker??
A: "A chucker is the one who has already been banned for an year by the ICC."

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Murali chucking it gives him an advantage in that he can obtain more spin. He is not a genius, he is a cheat.

But this is not what this thread is about. The debate about who chucks and who doesn't is for an entirely different thread (which I've started many times...).

But why would he go through the trouble? Spinning the ball is a small part of being effective. Sairaj Bahutule can spin the ball miles, some say even more than Warne, but he doesn't have the cunning or consistency, so you can see what happened to him. Murali uses his variations perfectly, bowls tirelessly, and confuses the best batsmen of his time. His wrist imparts the spin, regardless of what his arm does. Infact, it his because of his double jointed-ness that it might be impossible for him to use a regular action. He has bowled with this action since a kid, its not like he is doing this on purpose as an evil scheme to get tons of wickets in cricket. His action also has been cleared, so as long as he doesn't blantly chuck the ball, he is fine. How is he, in any way, a cheat?

And it is possible to bowl a doosra without chucking. I can. Albeit the bowling action may come out a bit differently...

 

[Sureshot]

As can loudon, his arm is as straight as a pencil.

Being double-jointed WILL make Murali able to spin it more, as his joints allow him too.

 

[sohum]

He bowls 80% of his sides overs so you'd expect him to take a few wickets, and has taken over 100 test wickets against crickets minnows in Zimbabwe and Bangladesh (I think Shane Warne has about 5) - genius? I think not.

Could you kindly explain how Murali can bowl 80% of his sides overs if you are not allowed to bowl two back-to-back overs?

 

[Jarryd]

Even though it's been proven he isn't a cheat! :

......Did you fail to read the first post of this thread?

 

[sachin]

I refer to Steve Bucknor as Ray Charles because he's black, blind and wears sunglasses.

Yeah and i COULD stereotype you mate,but then i'm not a fool like you :
He isn't blind,he managed to work out where the Seafood was at Subway

Anyway,supposedly they've cleared(or had no problem with) his action,but Perrera has a pretty crooked arm......What do we think?

 

[kodos]

Perera looks pretty fine to me but I expect Jarryd will argue and say he chucks. His action is rather like Brett Lee, by I mean that both have a slightly crooked arm.