Cricket Player Manager

View Poll Results: title

Voters
14. You may not vote on this poll
  • Cook

    2 14.29%
  • Bell

    0 0%
  • Trott

    0 0%
  • Root

    2 14.29%
  • Morgan

    0 0%
  • Buttler

    0 0%
  • Bopara

    3 21.43%
  • Bresnan

    0 0%
  • Broad

    1 7.14%
  • Swann

    0 0%
  • Anderson

    2 14.29%
  • Warner

    4 28.57%
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 69
Like Tree5Likes

Thread: who is the english player most likely to scratch the ball

  1. #16
    So finally someone has found some of Ravi sad sack Bopara's much vaunted talent. Glad he got the ball moving around corners against Sri Lanka...
    National Scrabble Champion 2009, 8th, 11th and 5th in 2009/2011/2013 World Championships, gold medal (team) at Causeway, 2011 Masters Champion
    Australia’s Darren Lehmann is a ‘blatant loser’ insists Stuart Broad
    Countdown Series 57 Champion
    King of the Arcade
    Reply from mods to my prank bans in public:
    Reply from mods to my prank bans in private:


    MSN - evil_budgie @ hotmail.co.uk

  2. #17
    International Coach flibbertyjibber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Mrs Miggins pie shop
    Posts
    11,944
    Quote Originally Posted by MW1304 View Post
    Surely with all the cameras around the ground we could actually see some evidence before making a judgement on this?
    Seems Bob Willis already has. Up to the England squad to challenge it now.

  3. #18
    International Coach Cabinet96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    10,000
    Quote Originally Posted by Spikey View Post
    Didn't I hear them say Ravi had taken over Cook's shining job for the Champs T? .......
    Ravi got a strong talking too from the umpire in the final NZ game as well....

    Edit: And why is the poll not public FFS? Fix it Spikey you ****.

    I voted for Ravi btw.
    RIP Philip Hughes - 1988-2014

  4. #19
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    #banblocky
    Posts
    20,384
    Quote Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber View Post
    Totally disagree after the way our nation have made such a fuss over the years. Do as we say not as we do springs to mind.
    I couldn't give a **** what our nation has said about it. If fielding teams want to try and get the ball moving, then as long as they're not using foreign objects then let them do wbat they want IMO.
    ​63*


  5. #20
    International Vice-Captain MW1304's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Central
    Posts
    4,221
    If Furball's Law comes into effect I can see teams lining up for this guy's services:

    edward-scissorhands-original.jpg

  6. #21
    International Coach Cabinet96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    10,000
    I doubt they actually tamper with the ball. They obviously do things that are a bit naughty, such as throwing it in on the bounce, in order to scruff it up, but I'd be very surprised if they actually dug their nails in.

    You don't need to really. Reverse swing isn't half as difficult to achieve as people seem to make out. I get it swinging the other way in club games quite a bit if it's a dry day.

  7. #22
    International Debutant Adders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    ***RIP THE PRINCE***
    Posts
    2,600
    Quote Originally Posted by social View Post
    Lots of criticism of Willis' comments in the media BUT why would an Englishman, working for an English company, accuse an Englishman of cheating in a match played in England and being broadcast to millions of Englishmen?
    Because it is Bob Willis. He's built a career on shock factor.

    Having said that though I'm not dismissing this out of hand and I agree with flibbertyjibber, if there is any evidence then it needs to be dealt with. Trouble is, say it is Bopara and they can dig up evidence to show he was doing something untoward with the ball then he'll take the fall for something that MUST be a team plan.........not sure that's right.

    And the cynic in me is now wondering if that's why Ravi is now on ball shining duty and not Cook.........Bopara is dispensable, Cook isn't.

    But, all this speculation is a bit of nonsense until something official is said and some evidence put on the table, right now it's just Bob Willis grabbing some headlines.

  8. #23
    International Captain hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    7,339
    Quote Originally Posted by Cabinet96 View Post
    I doubt they actually tamper with the ball. They obviously do things that are a bit naughty, such as throwing it in on the bounce, in order to scruff it up, but I'd be very surprised if they actually dug their nails in.

    You don't need to really. Reverse swing isn't half as difficult to achieve as people seem to make out. I get it swinging the other way in club games quite a bit if it's a dry day.
    yeah this.

    It was frikken dry conditions with a practice block.

    I strongly dislike how the umpires are also asking the players to keep the ball off the ground when throwing into the wicket.

    That is not the place of the umpires.

  9. #24
    International Debutant Adders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    ***RIP THE PRINCE***
    Posts
    2,600
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    yeah this.

    It was frikken dry conditions with a practice block.

    I strongly dislike how the umpires are also asking the players to keep the ball off the ground when throwing into the wicket.

    That is not the place of the umpires.
    Perhaps some of you more knowledgeable folk can explain this to me, cos this is something I've never understood...........

    So the theory behind reverse swing is that you want one side of the ball scuffed up while maintaining the shine on the other. Throwing the ball back in on the bounce is done to assist scuffing up the rough side, but when they throw the ball in on the bounce how on earth do they know what side will hit the dirt?? Surely there is just as much chance of damaging the side they are looking after??

    Clearly the theory works but it just doesn't make sense to me.

  10. #25
    International Coach social's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    12,822
    Hate to tell you guys but throwing the ball into the ground on purpose can be construed as ball tampering and the umps have every right to put a stop to it

  11. #26
    International Captain hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    7,339
    Quote Originally Posted by social View Post
    Hate to tell you guys but throwing the ball into the ground on purpose can be construed as ball tampering and the umps have every right to put a stop to it
    obviously if you're just going to be throwing it on the ground then yes, but it sets a pretty dangerous precedent. People throw in on the bounce if they're trying to hit the stumps. That's perfectly legitimate. If there's a byproduct that means the ball gets scuffed up, so be it.

    To me it's perfectly reasonable for a fielding team to try to avoid the ground when they're looking to preserve conventional swing, and throw in on the bounce more when they're looking to achieve some reverse with an older ball.

  12. #27
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    18,396
    I voted Cook because I thought he was the designated ball shiner, but if Ravi is doing it - its likely it was him. Obvious joke answer is Broad though, since he's likely to have manicures.
    NRL Tipping Champion 2014

    Over 0.2: Putland to Nevill, OUT, no run, full ball swings in late to crash into his pads. Nevill is almost falling over trying to get bat on it but can't. Huge shout for LBW and Umpire Martell eventually raises the finger! P.Nevill - lbw b:Putland 0 (1 ball, 1 minute).

  13. #28
    International Debutant Adders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    ***RIP THE PRINCE***
    Posts
    2,600
    Quote Originally Posted by social View Post
    Hate to tell you guys but throwing the ball into the ground on purpose can be construed as ball tampering and the umps have every right to put a stop to it
    There are so many "grey" areas when it comes to so called ball tampering that I don't see how it is possible to legislate against. You object to the ball coming in on the bounce, but as Hendrix points out, it's done for a reason when having a shy at the stumps. What about a throw in from the boundary (think Monty Panasar) is that supposed to come in on the full every time? Of course sometimes it's done deliberately but who's to say what's OK and what's not??

    We'd all agree that the use of bottle tops or Afridi biting the ball are a step too far, but then surely just the mere shining of the ball is artificially manipulating it.......then you've got rubbing saliva onto it (mint induced or otherwise). How on earth can anyone say what's acceptable and what's not when every side is doing some form of it or another.

    Reverse swing is a wonderful and fascinating art and the game is better for it, but surely the whole phenomenon only comes about from what some people see as dodgy tactics?? Personally I think the game has been weighted too far towards the batsmen, and if this is something in favour of the bowler then some leniency needs to be given. Just don't know where the line is drawn is all.

  14. #29
    Dan
    Dan is offline
    Global Moderator / Cricket Web Staff Member Dan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse
    Posts
    7,013
    Quote Originally Posted by Adders View Post
    Perhaps some of you more knowledgeable folk can explain this to me, cos this is something I've never understood...........

    So the theory behind reverse swing is that you want one side of the ball scuffed up while maintaining the shine on the other. Throwing the ball back in on the bounce is done to assist scuffing up the rough side, but when they throw the ball in on the bounce how on earth do they know what side will hit the dirt?? Surely there is just as much chance of damaging the side they are looking after??

    Clearly the theory works but it just doesn't make sense to me.
    What you've outlined there is the conditions for regular swing. Reverse, IIRC, occurs when the rough side of the ball is roughed up so much that it begins to take on the characteristics of the shiny side, and the previously-shiny side is roughed up just enough take on the characteristics of the rough side. Hence it swings towards the shiny side, going the reverse of what you would expect.

    So you visually see a rougher side and a shinier side, but in terms of swing, what looks shiny acts as the rough, and what looks rough acts as if its shiny.

    I think the scientific explanation is to do with air pockets and pressure as the air flows around the moving ball or something.

  15. #30
    U19 Debutant Senile Sentry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Circus
    Posts
    377
    What we are also witnessing is an unofficial ICC clampdown on England's habit of throwing the ball into the stumps on the bounce to deliberately roughen up the ball. The technique is entirely legal - and it is adopted by England not just because it can hasten the arrival of reverse swing but because it gets the ball to the stumps faster. You can hardly legislate against that.
    David Hopps, taking sucking up to new levels. Ravi Shastri would be proud.

    Lots of rumour, but no evidence in ball-tampering claims | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 38
    Last Post: 17-06-2013, 06:13 AM
  2. Replies: 47
    Last Post: 26-09-2009, 08:59 AM
  3. Player who never hit the ball in the air
    By ramkumar_gr in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-05-2007, 08:25 AM
  4. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 23-03-2006, 06:34 AM
  5. Starting from Scratch: A Zimbabwe Story
    By tassietiger in forum General
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 28-06-2005, 06:43 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •