Do you think Murali was a chucker?

[MrPrez]

Has there been a well known offy who hasn't been accused of chucking their doosra?

Irrelevant. Its not asking whether he chucks more than the others. Its whether he chucks.

 

[Expressway76]

Irrelevant. Its not asking whether he chucks more than the others. Its whether he chucks.

It was a genuine question, not a comment on his action.

 

[watson]

Has there been a well known offy who hasn't been accused of chucking their doosra?

I'm not sure. But even if they all do, Murali seems to chuck it louder than anyone else.

Mind you, he's not a patch on Tony Lock who simply threw everything. He should have been in the England track and field team doing shot-put.

(But let's not go there, it's a thread about Murali, not Lock)

 

[watson]

Anyway, to cut a long story short - rather than criticise off-spin bowlers for merely doing their job of taking wickets the best way they can, perhaps the ICC should look at banning the 'doosra' if it becomes established that it is a biomechanical impossibility to bowl without bending the elbow.

I suspect that it is a biomechanical impossibility to bowl the 'doosra' without bending the elbow.

 

[kyear2]

Basic fact is they changed the rule to accommodate him.

+1. Was going to say the same thing.

 

[Red]

....... along with everyone else, 'cept Ramnaresh Sarwan of course

I think the issue is complex.

Murali's delivery provides him with a lot more turn.

However, most pace bowlers elbow flex is a result of their shoulder movement, rather than a "chuck". It's unintentional (like Ahktar). Meckiff was different, his was a real chuck to get more pace (he probably wasn't deliberately cheating, just how he developed).

The rule has to be black and white though I guess.

 

[akilana]

+1. Was going to say the same thing.

to accommodate everyone.

 

[fishyguy]

Obviously if anyone doubts that they are delusional and blinded by bias. One of the biggest disgraces in cricket.

 

[Jono]

No.

 

[kyear2]

to accommodate everyone.

It may have helped others, but it was because of and primarily for him.

 

[Spikey]

....... along with everyone else, 'cept Ramnaresh Sarwan of course

god bless that man

 

[doesitmatter]

off-spin and off-spinners would have become extinct because of the shorter boundaries, big,broad modern bats ..Doosra helped the off-spinners to counter these..i say bend it that is both the rules and the elbow to accommodate the offies..

 

[ankitj]

I opened this thread to check if kyear got to it and started spewing his prejudiced, stubborn bull ****. You have become very predictable, kyear.

 

[silentstriker]

Basic fact is they changed the rule to accommodate him.

+1. Was going to say the same thing.

That is incorrect - he was the catalyst for doing the study which proved everyone chucked. If the study was done and only he was found to chuck, the rule would almost certainly would not have been changed.

 

[Top_Cat]

That is incorrect - he was the catalyst for doing the study which proved everyone chucked. If the study was done and only he was found to chuck, the rule would almost certainly would not have been changed.

Yep.

 

[kyear2]

I opened this thread to check if kyear got to it and started spewing his prejudiced, stubborn bull ****. You have become very predictable, kyear.

That is a really uncalled for attack, especially considering what some others have said. Never said he chucked and basically repeated what Watson said, didn't spew anything. I think the man is the second greatest spinner ever. How is that prejudiced? Didn't even vote for crying out loud. Would love to know why all of a sudden everyone here is on my case, unjustifyably at that.
He is within the rules, all is well.
Nice to see how bored you are though.

 

[Red]

That is incorrect - he was the catalyst for doing the study which proved everyone chucked. If the study was done and only he was found to chuck, the rule would almost certainly would not have been changed.

That may be true, I'd be interested in the data on that, particularly the degree Murali was straightening as opposed to other bowlers tested.

My conspiracy theory personality suggests that the ICC very strongly wanted Sri Lanka to be successful as a test nation, and therefore it was in their best interests to have Murali play a lot of cricket.

I don't really care to be honest, he was magic to watch, but I think the rules were bent a bit for him...

 

[Spikey]

The rules were bent for every bowler

 

[uvelocity]

the science may have been faulty

 

[Dan]

That may be true, I'd be interested in the data on that, particularly the degree Murali was straightening as opposed to other bowlers tested.

My conspiracy theory personality suggests that the ICC very strongly wanted Sri Lanka to be successful as a test nation, and therefore it was in their best interests to have Murali play a lot of cricket.

I don't really care to be honest, he was magic to watch, but I think the rules were bent a bit for him...

Extensive research conducted by the International Cricket Council has revealed that 99% of bowlers in the history of cricket have been chuckers. The study was undertaken in the wake of the furore surrounding Muttiah Muralitharan, whose doosra was banned earlier this year after Chris Broad, the match referee for the Tests against Australia, reported it to the ICC.

But an article by Derek Pringle in The Daily Telegraph suggests that Murali is no different from the vast majority of his fellow players. The current law states that there should be no straightening or partial straightening of the bowling arm during delivery, and research conducted with precise instrumentation has revealed that even bowlers like Glenn McGrath and Shaun Pollock, considered examplars of the classical action, occasionally go over the prescribed tolerance limit, bending their arms by as much as 12 degrees.
Source

Try this one as well: BBC SPORT | Cricket | Laws & Equipment | What is an illegal action?