Cricket Player Manager
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 91 to 96 of 96

Thread: Why subcontinental bowlers get picked for chucking

  1. #91
    C_C
    C_C is offline
    International Captain C_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    World
    Posts
    6,990
    Some of you guys are really hardheaded and thick.
    Its frustrating really.

    How can SIMPLE logic of 'if Murali/Harby chucks, so does Shane Warne/McGrath/Pedo Collins and if Shane Warne/McGrath/Collins doesnt chuck, neither doe Murali or Harby' be so mindbogglingly hard for some of you to get ?

    The rule is simple - below 15 degrees, you are not a chucker. Above 15 degrees, you are a chucker.
    Murali, Harby, Akhtar, etc. are all below 15 degrees. So are McGrath, Warne, Pollock, Flintoff, Collins etc etc etc.
    So if the former group chucks, so does the latter group.
    And medical science has PROVED that EVERY BOWLER IN HISTORY OF CRICKET has flexed his elbow before delivering the ball.

    Whats so hard about this to understand and realise that saying 'murali is a chucker' when testing clerly proves him not to be is only a very blatent display of your ignorance and idocy ?

  2. #92
    C_C
    C_C is offline
    International Captain C_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    World
    Posts
    6,990
    Answer : Bull !! You mean to say, they are willing to "use" a delivery that just can not be bowled and willing to risk being called. That being the case, they do run the risk of their "bluff" being called.
    For the umpteenth time, grandpa, no delivery can be bowled without the presence of flexion at the elbow

    Got it ? good. I know decades of holding a notion as gospel is hard to get rid of but please do try. Because those are the facts.
    Anything else is pure, undaulterated rubbish.

  3. #93
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wishing Phil Hughes all the best
    Posts
    45,336
    Quote Originally Posted by C_C
    For the umpteenth time, grandpa, no delivery can be bowled without the presence of flexion at the elbow

    Got it ? good. I know decades of holding a notion as gospel is hard to get rid of but please do try. Because those are the facts.
    Anything else is pure, undaulterated rubbish.
    Far be it from me to demure, but I thought after the study at the Champions Trophy Sarwan's delivery was uniquely declared to be as pure as the driven snow?
    Cricket Web's 2013/14 Premier League Tipping Champion

    - As featured in The Independent.

    "I don't believe a word of Pietersen's book, but then I don't believe a word anyone else has said either."
    - Simon Barnes renders further comment on KP's autobiography superfluous in a sentence

  4. #94
    C_C
    C_C is offline
    International Captain C_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    World
    Posts
    6,990

    Far be it from me to demure, but I thought after the study at the Champions Trophy Sarwan's delivery was uniquely declared to be as pure as the driven snow?
    Closest to 'driven snow' as it gets- a 1.5 degree deviation for Sarwan, which is just .5 over the margin of error in the measurements.

    This whole 'straight arm and bent arm' stuff is a bit like conductors and insulators.
    There is no such thing as a perfect conductor or a perfect insulator. Everything is a conductor AND an insulator at the same time........its just a question of how much one aspect dominates the other that determines why we have copper for wire and ceramic for 'insulation'.
    But in reality, copper insulates as well and ceramic conducts as well....just like this whole chucking crappola.
    In reality, EVERYONE chucks.
    End of story.
    So either accept the 15 degree rule and make that a benchmark or screw bowling and get pitchers.
    Because that is what is reality
    There is NO SUCH THING as a perfectly legal delivery if legal is defined as 'utter absence of elbow flexion'.
    Some people just cant seem to accept that and are stuck in their antiquated little bubbles of 'straight arm-kink arm' BULLSHYTE!!!!!!

    This is like trying to educate a creationist in matters of evolution.
    ARGGGGGGGGGGGGH.

    PS: Brumbie boyo, this isnt directed at you. But more towards the hardheaded ones who refuse to listen to logic and reason.
    They know who they are.


  5. #95
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wishing Phil Hughes all the best
    Posts
    45,336
    I don't have a problem with the 15 degree tolerance limit; it's no more or less arbitrary than 10 or 20. My big issue is with the system the ICC had lumbered us with. As I've said previously in another thread the current system can only ever be applied retrospectively. It sort of begs the question about what should happen if, after post-mortem examination, an action is proven to be over the tolerance limit?

  6. #96
    C_C
    C_C is offline
    International Captain C_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    World
    Posts
    6,990
    after post-mortem examination, an action is proven to be over the tolerance limit?
    Ban the player.

    It is far more credible and consistent than 'going by the eye' where an illegal action can get away scot free because it looks sublime and a legal action can get cracked down upon because it looks dodgy.

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. ECB Fast Bowling directives
    By Swanny in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 06-06-2005, 04:32 PM
  2. Bowlers Reported As Chuckers in cricket history
    By JASON in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 17-05-2004, 08:52 PM
  3. Replies: 52
    Last Post: 21-01-2004, 08:37 AM
  4. Inness should have been picked over Bracken
    By Top_Cat in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 03-01-2004, 11:17 PM
  5. Aceptable econmy rates in ODIS
    By Craig in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 16-10-2003, 11:09 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
  •