If some geezer who always middled in the TDF was a known doper who got away with it, would anyone be as bothered by that as Armstrong's antics? Of course not and nor should they be.
To say it should only be brought up when you've beaten the team containing the chucker is ludicrous, given his flouting of the rules significantly lessens your chance of victory.
"It was an easy decision to sign. I could have gone elsewhere, I had calls, but it never entered my mind it's not about the money."
RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.
Yeah, basically this.
There's apparently no effort being made to have live, real time technology to confirm the legality of deliveries within a match.
I love watching Saeed Ajmal bowl, and I believe that he's certainly proved that he can bowl the doosra within the 15 degree limit.
But every bowler can bowl with their foot behind the bowling crease too.
Coming around the wicket to a right hander and bowling a doosra seems to me like something that would be very, very difficult to do legally.
Not saying it's impossible, just that there are certain scenarios in which a bowler may be more likely to be less rigid with his action.
That's why there needs to be some goal towards live match technology.
You're trying to get your wrist right around the ball, so your elbow ends up more inward than a stock delivery. It makes the ball harder to push out in a straight line, but easier to pull across your body. Just like what you do from around the wicket to a right hander.
The way people still going on about it you'd think it's 1990s again, it's been 2 decades already, just buckle up and get on with the game. Expect the whining poms to start whinging again, 3-0 was a long time ago.
Can we at least agree that
1) his action looks ugly and dodgy as ****
2) we don't really know the process behind analyzing his action so saying the results are all wrong and he's chucking because i can see it is really a poor argument.
3) he's probably bowling within the legal limit (unless he'svsome sort of scheming mastermind that alters his action by a few degrees during lab tests) but this legal limit should be changed (what uv wants iirc)
4) ajmal > swann
5) amla is now an atg
15 degrees is fine by me but it's the italics part that we have no means of testing. That's the issue. Bowling in a lab simply does not mean you're going to bowl that way on the field.
not the limit. the idea that a degree of simple straightening constitutes a chuck
for instance i can roll my arm over quite easily with a very low degree of bend change with a chucking action. i can also roll my arm over with a greater than 15 degree change in bend (hint: straighten the elbow slowly) and it's no chuck
Definitely do not agree with 3).
The very fact his action sometimes looks worse than others suggests he puts more elbow into some deliveries so, when he's aware he's being observed, he's likely to put as little in as possible.
Hawthorne effect and all that.
Cricket Web's 2013/14 Premier League Tipping Champion
- As featured in The Independent.
"The committee discussed the issue of illegal bowling actions, and believed that there are a number of bowlers currently employing suspect actions in international cricket, and that the ICC's reporting and testing procedures are not adequately scrutinising these bowlers."
- Even the ICC's own official press release thinks things must change
Hawthorn effect is never being able to beat Geelong post-2008 I believe
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)