Bradman thought Muralitharan's delivery was OK

[Deja moo]

^ So whats your excuse ?

 

[Nate]

well bradman was a batsman!

 

[Son Of Coco]

What are you on about man ?

Cant you figure out what I have said ?

Or are you just trying hard to pick an argument !!

Read what I have said, think about it , then have a cup of coffee (or Milo if you like ) , think again, then come back and pour out whatever you have to say, if you still think that is different to what I have said (without blabbering off) !!!

Where did I say in my post that it was proof !! Read clearly and then try and comprehend it , Mate !!

I've read it, mate, and I think what I wrote is an appropriate response. If you can't figure out what I was responding to then maybe you should read it again.

By the way, the milo idea was outstanding, thoroughly enjoyable!

 

[marc71178]

Good on the Don for atleast supporting Murali 'from his grave' as it were !!

Yes, for declaring a ball he never ever saw as legal - what a great thing to do!

 

[Richard]

Except I don't think he actually did that.
Maybe you are pointing-out precisely that?

 

[JASON]

Yes, for declaring a ball he never ever saw as legal - what a great thing to do!

Where in this has he ever mentioned the 'Doosra' ? I don't think he was commenting on a delivery he has not seen !!

If you read it carefully you will find he is referring exclusively to the Hair no balling saga !!

You will find his comments were with regard to Murali's stock deliveries other than the Doosra, which is what most Aussies (in particular Protractor specialists like Jarman and Hair) have been giving their expertise on!!

As the greatest batsman his expertise counts more IMO than some of the other less illustrious characters !!

 

[JASON]

I've read it, mate, and I think what I wrote is an appropriate response. If you can't figure out what I was responding to then maybe you should read it again.

By the way, the milo idea was outstanding, thoroughly enjoyable!

I think you and I have to agree on one thing !! We read the same thing but obviously interpret it to our own liking !! Let the others make their judgement on this !!

But some times expert's,past great's opinion that is not to our liking can hurt !! And we may try other means to appease our frustration by trying to interpret more than what is written may be ..... and then try to pick an argument perhaps ....

I am going to stop this pointless interaction right now....

 

[SJS]

There are enough people with high credentials who think Murali does not throw and enough people also with high credentials who think he does.

One more saying he does or does not neither adds weight to the argument nor takes away from the counter view point. It will fail to will convert the believers or disbelievers as the case maybe.

So this whole excercise and the arguments stemming from it are quite childish really. Let the Don rest in peace and lets all realise that we have all taken our position and nothing is going to change that.

 

[marc71178]

So the Don thought a ball that has been proven legal by the scientists was legal - why exactly has this thread been made then?

 

[Deja moo]

So the Don thought a ball that has been proven legal by the scientists was legal - why exactly has this thread been made then?

Because there are some idiots out there who still confuse the stock delivery with the doosra and consider both illegal.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I think you and I have to agree on one thing !! We read the same thing but obviously interpret it to our own liking !! Let the others make their judgement on this !!

But some times expert's,past great's opinion that is not to our liking can hurt !! And we may try other means to appease our frustration by trying to interpret more than what is written may be ..... and then try to pick an argument perhaps ....

I am going to stop this pointless interaction right now....

I am not actually anti-Murali so your idea that what he said is not to my liking is a bad one.

The line of your post suggested that Don saying what he did leant strength to Murali's case simply because he was 'the Don', and from the replies up to this point I don't think I'm the only one who interpreted it as such.

Don's a great ex-player, but he's not an expert on this matter - it's been stated previously that the only expert in this case would have a biomechanical background (or did the Don have extra special eyes too?)

 

[sir middle stump]

extra special eyes?

Well, he couldnt have made so many runs without knowing how to decipher the bowling of bowlers....I think he might be able to analyse bowler actions better than most other people. Surely he knew about the bend in Muralis arm that makes it seem that he throws. But obviously he could see past that and come to a conclusion that it is after all ,an illusion.

I would take his word on such matters most days, rather than rely on some grudging past player who uses a protractor in the local pub .Yeah! Like its that simple.

And besides, the UWA experts have proved the Don right ,havent they ?

 

[Richard]

So the Don thought a ball that has been proven legal by the scientists was legal - why exactly has this thread been made then?

Look at who made it.

 

[Son Of Coco]

extra special eyes?

Well, he couldnt have made so many runs without knowing how to decipher the bowling of bowlers....I think he might be able to analyse bowler actions better than most other people. Surely he knew about the bend in Muralis arm that makes it seem that he throws. But obviously he could see past that and come to a conclusion that it is after all ,an illusion.

I would take his word on such matters most days, rather than rely on some grudging past player who uses a protractor in the local pub .Yeah! Like its that simple.

And besides, the UWA experts have proved the Don right ,havent they ?

They have yes, but the point is do you really expect the Don to have known something (conclusively that is - to the same degree of certainty as the tests proved) when a majority of the rest of the population saw this illusion?

I'm talking about at the exact moment he made the comment by the way, not in hindsight. If the Don had made the comment about a protractor being used would his words be held in such high esteem? By the anti-Murali crowd I'd say almost certainly, and the pro-Murali boys would be up in arms.

I just think throwing so much weight behind the comments of someone simply because of who they are is fairly poor form. After Murali has been proven to be ok by the Uni of WA is there any need to then come out and say 'oh, and the DOn says it's ok too'!? For mine it kind of undermines the original argument that it's an illusion in the first place.............oh, and is Barry Average's name (living at 145 Smith Street Perth) going to be dropped in here as well because he thought Murali's action was ok from the start?

 

[marc71178]

Look at who made it.

Good point.

We all know why he posted it, but the fact that Don was dead well before the ball in question it is irrelevant.

 

[Richard]

TBF did he actually say "Bradman thought the wrong-'un was OK?"
Certainly he didn't in the title or the opening passage - though he might have implied it.

 

[Will Scarlet]

good for bradman.. but really just because he was the greatest batsman of all time does not make everyting he says correct..

And I personally doubt he would have this opinion if he lost his wicket to Murali a few times. My apologies if this has be said.

 

[Richard]

You are possibly right.
The ones most vociferous tend to be those who've had most trouble with him - especially in Australia.

 

[Waughney]

Bradman can now join the MSC

 

[Richard]

Muttiah Sleepover Club?