posted Nov 8, 2007

BRad..thats an oxymoron...

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 8, 2007

lol. Yes sorry about that Pearls, just trying to humour our anti-Muralis. I don't think they got it!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 8, 2007

yeah, the full was changed to accomodate fast bowling really. afterall, on muralis doosra was out with the 5 degrees rule, thus they wouldn't have had to ban him just ban his doosra. It was the fast bowlers that were bending and flexing all over the place and hence the rule was changed.

I really fail to see why this is still a source of great debate.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 8, 2007

I sound drunk in that post.

the "rule" not "full"

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 8, 2007

Alan....its 15 not 5...There are guys who even despite the recent changes and constant review of his action feel that the breaking of Warnes record (which he will no doubt) is tarnished because they believe he chucks it...I would imagine James Kirtley is grateful for the change as he was almost out of the game becausehe too was called for chucking time and again...Its the fact Warne the greatest bowler ever is about to be superceded by Murali who will then become the greatest..Warne will be just the greatest "legger" of all time..the fact its in their backyard is upsetting them even more and hence all the PI55 and Bile...

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 8, 2007

no, only the doosra flexes upto 15. the rest of his deliveries where completely legal even within the old rules.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 8, 2007

just so you know I was defending murali. that while his doosra was illegal (along with many others) under the old rule. that not all his deliveries were, so the decision to increase the degree could not primarily been for murali as he could have still bowled his own action minus the doosra.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 8, 2007

It wouldn't have mattered what degree of flex was in Muralli's arm for his doosra or any other delivery, the ICC would have just allowed 1 degree more than what ever he tested. That way, no problem, his records would never be questioned and anyone who complained about him can just be called a racist, no matter how obscene his action is. It can be easier to quiet the opposition than fix the problem.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 8, 2007

http://www.hindu.com/2004/11/13/stories/2004111303921800.htm

above link gives a good overview of initial reactions, after the 15 degree rule

My reading of it is

There was no scientific way of quantifying what was legal and what was not and it became too technical in measurement, taht is the naked eye could not be trusted as the final authority, and just to allow umpires to 'call it as they see it' was not going to work with this issue

Now that is the huge step away from how suspected chuckers were handled, and I can see why traditionalists were annoyed in what they perceived as techno mumbo jumbo that neutralized umpires from doing their job and covered up Murali's disputed action.

All ICC members agreed a uniform approach needed to be adopted as it plays with player's careers and what might be a perfectly acceptable action for one may be be, what's the word 'diabolical' for another.

It was obviously stoked by Sri Lanka and supported by the Adian bloc and to that extent the Issue was politicised so it went to the top of the table.

But from the scientific analysis and conclusions even by doubting thomases like Holding, I hardly see a cover up or attempt to do all this just to legalize Murali.

If we have faith in the scientific approach, the highly technical slo mo camera/bio mechanical evidence that showed flexion among many bowlers, why single out Murali and say this rule was implemented to legalize Murali's action?

I believe Murali's case precipitated a need for such rules and action, as there were many that thought Murali was being treated unfairly, rather than what is percieved as a blatent politically strong arm tactics by the Asaian bloc to force ICC into sneaking a law in to give Murali's action legality

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 11, 2007

it will be absolute disaster to be living in this world and see chucker king surpassing truly great warney

sir shane warne u will always be missed

add comment | complain about this comment