Bradman thought Muralitharan's delivery was OK

[nookie_lk]

check this out !

http://msn.foxsports.com/story/3217884

[JASON]

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

I doubt that this would placate the many who are steadfast in their belief that he 'chucks' !!

Murali and his many millions of supporters (of which I am proud to be one) can atleast gain some satisfaction from the fact that at least the game's greatest had no doubts about Murali !!

[Eclipse]

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

[JASON]

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

Expected Response !!

[Jono]

Go Don.

[Beleg]

It may be the expected response but what Eclipse says is correct. Don Bradman may be the greatest batsman of all time but he isn't a UWA biomechanics expert and hence for me, and I am sure thousands of others, his opinion is pretty subjective and carries much less weight then a certified expert's.

[honestbharani]

You can always argue that Bradman's judgement of players was not the greatest, but certainly, I think he would know quite a bit about legal and illegal actions, if not because he was a great cricketer, atleast because he has seen so much cricket over the years and would obviously have seen a quirky action or two, in his time.

[Beleg]

Same arguement can be used for a lot of people who have lived a healthy span of life. But their is a difference between simply watching/observing and actually knowing what you are looking for. And you also have to bring factors like physical decay and limited human capabilities into the fray.

He may have had a keen eye, good enough to detect a blatant change, but I believe it is impossible for the naked eye to monitor shifts in single digit degrees. That Is why I feel we should leave this to the biomechanic experts which are actually paid to get this stuff done instead of wizened ex-pro's who feel its their obligation to put in a word or two about every new controversy in cricket.

[Slow Love™]

It may be the expected response but what Eclipse says is correct. Don Bradman may be the greatest batsman of all time but he isn't a UWA biomechanics expert and hence for me, and I am sure thousands of others, his opinion is pretty subjective and carries much less weight then a certified expert's.

Totally agree, and I'm a recent convert to the argument that Murali ain't doing anything worse than just about everybody else in the game - so I'm firmly in Murali's corner to the extent that the debate still exists.

One of the most annoying things about the Murali debate was the passing off of "celebrity" opinion as some kind of proof of one side of the argument or the other.

"This guy says he chucks, so it PROVES Murali's a dirty cheat!"
"This guy says Murali doesn't chuck, so there can be no argument now that he's being unfairly treated!"

None of it meant anything. Neither does this.

[honestbharani]

But in this instance, wasn't he right? I mean, Murali's action was passed off as legal because he had a physical deformity that showed it as though he was chucking more than was permitted. I believe that this is what the biomechanics guys came up with and I think it only proves the Don's statements. I think the doosra happened after his time.

[Slow Love™]

But in this instance, wasn't he right?

From what I understand, Murali was absolutely borderline (pre-doosra), on a level of straightening imperceptible to the human eye. The thing that's changed everything is that we now know that nearly every bowler in the game is actually violating the established guidelines (which are actually looser than they used to be, even before the upcoming amendments).

Did the Don know that? If so, he was indeed right.

[GotSpin]

Congrats to murali for getting a supporter

But regardless of how good the don was good at batting his opionon in not that important

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

You can always argue that Bradman's judgement of players was not the greatest, but certainly, I think he would know quite a bit about legal and illegal actions, if not because he was a great cricketer, atleast because he has seen so much cricket over the years and would obviously have seen a quirky action or two, in his time.

He also played cricket at a time when batting and bowling was done in a different fashion to modern day and when there was close to none of the scrutiny over bowling actions.

[Neil Pickup]

Fire extinguishers on standby...

[Richard]

Thread padlock on standby?