• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Bradman thought Muralitharan's delivery was OK

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
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

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

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
Eclipse said:
good for bradman.. but really just because he was the greatest batsman of all time does not make everyting he says correct..
Expected Response !! :) :D
 

Beleg

International Regular
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

Whatever it takes!!!
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

International Regular
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™

International Captain
Beleg said:
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

Whatever it takes!!!
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™

International Captain
honestbharani said:
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

Hall of Fame Member
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

Request Your Custom Title Now!
honestbharani said:
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.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
JASON said:
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 !!
Murali supporters have said again and again that scientific evidence has proven that his action is ok (something I agree with by the way) and his action is an optical illusion that can't be correctly judged as legal or otherwise by the naked eye...........and now Don Bradman comes out and says he thought it was ok that's held up us being proof!? Did the Don have a degree in biomechanics that the rest of us don't know about? If you're being realistic with your argument for Murali then you can't hold out for scientific evidence to be taken as the sole indicator of his innocence and then go "Oh, and by the way.....Don said it was ok".

If the shoe was on the other foot and the anti-Murali supporter's beliefs were upheld by a quote from the Don would you be saying "Oh, the Don said it was a chuck, so it must be"? I don't think so.
 

Langeveldt

Soutie
I so badly want to rip into the one man tragedy that is Muralitharan, but nothing is there any more, I'm a spent force.. I serve very little purpose in these discussions now..
 

dinu23

International Debutant
Beleg said:
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.

well the experts say the same thing as the Don. Murali doesn't chuck no more than 99% of other fast bowlers.
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
Son Of Coco said:
Murali supporters have said again and again that scientific evidence has proven that his action is ok (something I agree with by the way) and his action is an optical illusion that can't be correctly judged as legal or otherwise by the naked eye...........and now Don Bradman comes out and says he thought it was ok that's held up us being proof!? Did the Don have a degree in biomechanics that the rest of us don't know about? If you're being realistic with your argument for Murali then you can't hold out for scientific evidence to be taken as the sole indicator of his innocence and then go "Oh, and by the way.....Don said it was ok".

If the shoe was on the other foot and the anti-Murali supporter's beliefs were upheld by a quote from the Don would you be saying "Oh, the Don said it was a chuck, so it must be"? I don't think so.
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 :D ) , 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 !!
 

Camel56

Banned
Yes the don might have said he thought murali didnt throw but then again the don was 90 odd and could barely see at the time.
 

Top