Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 46

Thread: Fifteen degrees of freedom

  1. #1
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Bangalore/Washington
    Posts
    29

    Fifteen degrees of freedom

    With all the talk of the ICC's new rule change re. chucking, one wonders why there's so much of a fuss. Does chucking really give the bowlers an unfair advantage? How? Is it somehow 'unfair' to turn the ball too much or bowl too fast? We certainly don't have such limits on the non-chuckers, so what's the big deal if someone can do things a little better by bending his arm?
    http://thirdslip.com/2005/feb/ash-chucking.shtm

    - Third Slip

  2. #2
    SJS
    SJS is offline
    Hall of Fame Member SJS's Avatar
    Virus 2 Champion!
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Thane India
    Posts
    19,346
    Quote Originally Posted by thirdslip
    With all the talk of the ICC's new rule change re. chucking, one wonders why there's so much of a fuss. Does chucking really give the bowlers an unfair advantage? How? Is it somehow 'unfair' to turn the ball too much or bowl too fast? We certainly don't have such limits on the non-chuckers, so what's the big deal if someone can do things a little better by bending his arm?
    http://thirdslip.com/2005/feb/ash-chucking.shtm

    - Third Slip
    Really !!

    If you play cricket and have a good strong throwing fielder in your side, ask him to throw at you as hard as he can and then come back and report.

  3. #3
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer Greg Blewett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Australia, Sydney
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by thirdslip
    With all the talk of the ICC's new rule change re. chucking, one wonders why there's so much of a fuss. Does chucking really give the bowlers an unfair advantage? How? Is it somehow 'unfair' to turn the ball too much or bowl too fast? We certainly don't have such limits on the non-chuckers, so what's the big deal if someone can do things a little better by bending his arm?
    http://thirdslip.com/2005/feb/ash-chucking.shtm

    - Third Slip

    Yes it really does give an unfair advantage. Many people can generate much higher speeds via throwing or chucking the ball as opposed to actually bowling it.

  4. #4
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Bangalore/Washington
    Posts
    29
    But what is unfair about throwing fast?

    - TS


  5. #5
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Bangalore/Washington
    Posts
    29
    > many people can generate much higher speeds ...

    really? A baseball thrower almost never throws faster than 100 mph, which is only marginally higher than the fastest that Akhtar or Lee has ever bowled. What are you basing your claim on?

    My guess is that a spinner can bowl much faster than he would by chucking, but even at that, I don't see why speed alone is a problem. Batsman can score less on the offside if they were forced to cut out reverse-sweeping, but no one seems to mind that 'innovation'.

    - TS

  6. #6
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    18,542
    Quote Originally Posted by thirdslip
    > many people can generate much higher speeds ...

    really? A baseball thrower almost never throws faster than 100 mph, which is only marginally higher than the fastest that Akhtar or Lee has ever bowled. What are you basing your claim on?

    My guess is that a spinner can bowl much faster than he would by chucking, but even at that, I don't see why speed alone is a problem. Batsman can score less on the offside if they were forced to cut out reverse-sweeping, but no one seems to mind that 'innovation'.

    - TS
    Speed alone isn't a problem, you can also turn it more than you otherwise would. The reason both of these are a problem is because the game was set up to be played in a certain way and the rules stipulated that the arm action used to bowl wouldn't include something regarded as a throw. If you want to watch a game where throwing is used to manipulate what is done with the ball - watch baseball.

    Reverse sweeping is a high risk shot - not necessarily something that's guranteed to heighten the flow of runs on the off-side. It's also not something that's considered illegal. Throwing a ball is not an innovation, it's illegal within the laws of the game.

  7. #7
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Bangalore/Washington
    Posts
    29
    The rules/laws are biased towards batsmen, so to point to them isn't really an explanation of the why/why not. Batsmen can even switch hands and bat the other way, surely the game wasn't set up to be played that way!

    Chucking is risky too. Try running 25 meters to a crease, and breakiing stride in mid-air to chuck instead of bowl. Most people that i've asked to do this have difficulty breaking their stride and end up throwing high or wide instead.

    - TS

  8. #8
    SJS
    SJS is offline
    Hall of Fame Member SJS's Avatar
    Virus 2 Champion!
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Thane India
    Posts
    19,346
    Quote Originally Posted by thirdslip
    Try running 25 meters to a crease, and breakiing stride in mid-air to chuck instead of bowl. Most people that i've asked to do this have difficulty breaking their stride and end up throwing high or wide instead.

    - TS
    You really dont understand what you are talking.

    Have you seen jonty Rhodes break the stumps from short point with a lightening throw with a batsman having just stepped a few inches out of his crease as he square drove ?

    Did Jonty take a 25 mtr run up to do that ? If chucking is legalised the canouflage of a run up wil become superfluous. Have you seen a baseball picher with a run up ????

  9. #9
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    18,542
    Quote Originally Posted by thirdslip
    The rules/laws are biased towards batsmen, so to point to them isn't really an explanation of the why/why not. Batsmen can even switch hands and bat the other way, surely the game wasn't set up to be played that way!

    Chucking is risky too. Try running 25 meters to a crease, and breakiing stride in mid-air to chuck instead of bowl. Most people that i've asked to do this have difficulty breaking their stride and end up throwing high or wide instead.

    - TS
    It's not that risky in the cases I presume you're referring to in International cricket. Anyone who has a good action will probably struggle to blatantly throw it without a great deal of practice (throw it accurately anyway). The problem is when it becomes part of a bowler's normal action. Anything as blatant as I presume you're referring to would never be allowed to make it to international level anyway (you'd hope).

    The rules aren't biased towards batsmen at all. Using this as an excuse for being able to throw is no excuse at all. I'm a bowler, but I don't believe that the batsmen have an advantage to the point where I wish I was allowed to throw it.

  10. #10
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer Greg Blewett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Australia, Sydney
    Posts
    91
    Charlie Griffith is proof you can gain an advantage via 'chucking'. Read the Trueman, Compton or Barrington autobiographies if you want to know more.

    All recall playing him in 1959 and him being nothing special and of average pace. Then they recall him 3-4 years later bowling extremely quick, getting a lot of bounce off the English wickets (more than they claimed Trueman or Wes Hall could do) and winning the Windies v. England series for them as he was the top wicket taker. Why did he go from average to outstanding? Because he changed his action so he was throwing the ball.

    Yet again I can further divulge parts of Truemans or Ken Barringtons books for proof but I don't think it is really needed unless your a sceptic.


    So yes i would have to say you can gain pace from throwing and extra bounce out of a wicket which can gain you wickets and 'cause injuries (which Barrington sustained from Griffiths and not too long after had a heart attack). Chucking is against the rules and it is dangerous, it DOES give bowlers an unfair advantage and to claim otherwise is wrong.

  11. #11
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Bangalore/Washington
    Posts
    29
    Griffith's example is neither here nor there. There are plenty of people who've had a second wind better than their first chance.

    Second, no one is proposing an outright green light to chucking. But clearly, at the level of detail at which the controversy has been going on, there is no substantial difference between one action and another with a slightly more bent arm.

    Here's a test of your theory - can you name a few bowlers who, in your opinion, will now do much better than they have so far because they can bend their arms a little more? It will be interesting to track such people going forward.

    - TS

  12. #12
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,957
    Quote Originally Posted by thirdslip
    Here's a test of your theory - can you name a few bowlers who, in your opinion, will now do much better than they have so far because they can bend their arms a little more? It will be interesting to track such people going forward.
    Of course not. For a start, the actual difference between a 5-10 degree allowance and a 15 degree allowance is minimal. Secondly, even if it was enough to make a difference in what a bowler can do with their arm, chances are the losses from changing an established action to one with 5-10 degrees more flexion would not be worth the gains. Finally, if you accept the findings at the Champions Trophy last year, the majority of bowlers already broke the established limits, but would not break the new ones, so there is no actual room for change because the rules were already being broken.

    But yes, there would be an absolutely massive difference between cricket as it exists today and cricket with no throwing restrictions. Bowlers would not need to run up, practically any bowler could bowl at a much faster speed if they desired and could maintain their spells far longer. Imagine how hard a yorker would be to score off with the angle a thrower could get, and how much easier they would be to bowl. I'm not sure spinners would even exist any more, but if they did they could certainly turn the ball a great deal more.

    And if you are comparing it to baseball, remember that a pitcher in baseball not only has a different ball and length of pitch to deal with, but they are also limited to a relatively small area in which they can place the ball on a pitch, and cricketers do not have that limitation. I guarantee you Barry Bonds would hit far less home runs if he had to deal with pitches bouncing on his toes.

  13. #13
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    FDO's hit the nail on the head.
    The best option, I'd have to repeat, would be to force everyone to obey the old ideals by adding an armbrace to the equipment list - at all levels of the game.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  14. #14
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Bangalore/Washington
    Posts
    29
    I think what would have been more sensible is for the ICC to have separated the question of throwing for fast bowlers from the question of throwing for spinners. I think quite different advantages may accrue (or not) in the two cases.

    There's a lot of 'evolution' in the sport, some of which I don't like, but may happen anyway, thanks to television ratings and such. A likely next step beyond 20-20 is a 'must-run' rule which requires batsmen to run every time they touch the ball. That would probably narrow the differences between cricket and baseball. Incidentally, far more baseballl batters are thrown out or struck out than caught out; what really hurts batters in that sport is the must-run rule, which cricket does not have.

    The 'bounce' is clearly a significant difference between the pitching/bowling actions of the two sports, but I also tend to think that the 'face-forward' run-up is an important differentiator. Retaining this, along with some sort of 'bauling' rule, might ensure that bowlers really 'bowl', without getting into the arm-angles business.

    - TS

  15. #15
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Marburg, Germany
    Posts
    27,072
    On Charlie Griffith, having seen some footage of him bowling, his action seems to resemble the hyper-extension of Shoaib Ahktar than a genuine chuck. Disregarding the opinions of former players, I'd be interested to see what Griffith's testing at the U of WA would have been. I suspect he wouldn't be considered a chucker but more along the lines of Shoaib i.e. an unintentional and non-repairable hyper-extension of his bowling arm which generates a 'whip' and plenty of pace.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Titmus 17 Degrees
    By Pinkline Jones in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 22-11-2004, 08:32 PM
  2. Freedom of speech in the cricket world
    By Slow Love™ in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 28-07-2004, 12:23 AM
  3. South African Freedom Day
    By Magrat Garlick in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 30-04-2004, 03:22 PM
  4. Should the first fifteen overs rule in ODIs be changed?
    By full_length in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 13-10-2002, 04:10 PM

Posting Permissions

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