Senanayake banned

[Dan]

AWTA.

Stunning ignorance.

 

[Adders]

I have no opinion on the legality of Senanayake's action as the rules currently stand, but if it was up to me, throwing would be legalised. Anything that makes the batsmans life more challenging should help to readdress the balance between bat and ball and make cricket a more interesting and engaging game all round. If someone with a "dodgy" action came along with the talent and skills to terrorise batsmen like Waqar Younis, Sydney Barnes, Muttiah Muralitharan or Malcolm Marshall have done in the past, surely the sport would be much the poorer for their absence, even if their action did not meet the current rules regarding legal bowling. Other than tradition, what possible reason can there be for this insistence on bowling the ball?

This post here got a bit of a negative response, and on the face of it what AMZ is suggesting is unrealistic and unworkable. But to an extent I agree with it or the basic sentiment.

To me spinners "chucking" is the biggest non event in cricket and as much leeway as possible should be afforded those with "suspect" actions. I guess I view this subject different to most but I just can't see how people get so worked up over it, but each to their own. I love the doosra, I love that the game has had the Murali's and Ajmals to fox and bamboozle batsmen......I love that Sri Lanka had a weapon in Senanayake and I am sad that a talented bowler is now not allowed to play the game (although I also respect the testing and decision being enforced on current rules)

Some spinners have definitely pushed the envelope in terms of the 15 degrees rule, but I liken it too some of the things teams do to achieve reverse swing.......it pushes the envelope but the end result is good for the game. And what AMZ said about redressing the balance between bat and ball is very valid.

Now It don't want to see fast bowlers pitching it baseball style and I don't want to see teams hacking away at the ball with bottle tops, but I do want these "mystery" spinners and I do want reverse swing in the game. Where to draw the line I don't know.

 

[hendrix]

Well the doosra can and is achieved legally - at least within the same confines that other bowlers bowl conventional deliveries. And we can say the same thing about the carrom ball with even more conviction. I don't think mystery spin is at risk of disappearing.

The laws of the game make them difficult deliveries to bowl. But bowling itself is a difficult thing to do - try teaching an adult how to bowl; it's basically impossible.

If we relax the confines of the laws we remove the skill of the game. I don't want to see that happening.

 

[viriya]

Say throwing was made legal.. Baseball pitchers bowl at 100mph with no run-up, so I expect fast bowlers to be able to bowl in the 110-120mph range. Spinners who blatantly throw will probably get more purchase but I don't see how it makes it harder to pick them..

I'm curious to see someone doing an "anything goes" experiment to see how it is.. in 20 years time might eventually be the "solution" to all this for all we know..

 

[watson]

AWTA.

Stunning ignorance.

It's not stunning because I haven't got around to reading Law 24/ Clause 3, or got into a discussion about the minutae of the law before because it's not my favourite all-time topic.

3. Definition of fair delivery - the arm

A ball is fairly delivered in respect of the arm if, once the bowler’s arm has reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing, the elbow joint is not straightened partially or completely from that point until the ball has left the hand. This definition shall not debar a bowler from flexing or rotating the wrist in the delivery swing.

But now I know then more the good.

I suppose the confusion arose because from the age of 8 when first started to play cricket the coach kept yelling at me "keep your elbow straight!", and then occasionally no-balled me during the game with the explanation "you didn't have you elbow straight at the point of delivery." So for 40 years I hadn't really given the issue much technical thought at all because I didn't have to - up until now. So tar.

 

[hendrix]

Say throwing was made legal.. Baseball pitchers bowl at 100mph with no run-up, so I expect fast bowlers to be able to bowl in the 110-120mph range. Spinners who blatantly throw will probably get more purchase but I don't see how it makes it harder to pick them..
.

It's not just the amount of revolutions, it's the accuracy and the time spent learning the delivery.
There is no doubt that throwing is more biomechanically sound than bowling. That's the point. It's difficult.

 

[Maximas]

Legalize ball tampering before we start thinking about chucking - the 'solution' (if such a thing is required) would be to relax the limits rather than the law itself I'd think

 

[watson]

Incidently, for the unitiated like myself, the following assessment makes things very clear;

So all you need as a video Umpire are two frozen video frames and a protractor??? Simple???

 

[Dan]

This post here got a bit of a negative response, and on the face of it what AMZ is suggesting is unrealistic and unworkable. But to an extent I agree with it or the basic sentiment.

To me spinners "chucking" is the biggest non event in cricket and as much leeway as possible should be afforded those with "suspect" actions. I guess I view this subject different to most but I just can't see how people get so worked up over it, but each to their own. I love the doosra, I love that the game has had the Murali's and Ajmals to fox and bamboozle batsmen......I love that Sri Lanka had a weapon in Senanayake and I am sad that a talented bowler is now not allowed to play the game (although I also respect the testing and decision being enforced on current rules)

Some spinners have definitely pushed the envelope in terms of the 15 degrees rule, but I liken it too some of the things teams do to achieve reverse swing.......it pushes the envelope but the end result is good for the game. And what AMZ said about redressing the balance between bat and ball is very valid.

Now It don't want to see fast bowlers pitching it baseball style and I don't want to see teams hacking away at the ball with bottle tops, but I do want these "mystery" spinners and I do want reverse swing in the game. Where to draw the line I don't know.

Yeah, this is definitely something I've grappled with in the past.

The chucking law was, initially at least, designed to prevent blokes from running up and pitching the ball at the stumps as if it were baseball (cough Marlon Samuels quicker ball cough), rather than being an attempt to legislate the doosra out of existence. 15.1 degrees really isn't giving more of an unfair advantage than 14.9; it's just the arbitrary mark at which the line was drawn as to what constitutes a 'chuck'.

When people complain about Murali chucking his way to 800 Test wickets, I don't see the issue. He was a guy playing cricket to the best of his ability; he wasn't trying to gain an unfair advantage in the slightest. To me, that's what the rule is about -- preventing people from gaining an unfair advantage.

Similar is the front foot no ball rule. Realistically, when a foot lands with 1mm of rubber behind the line compared to the foot landing exactly on the line, there's no unfair advantage gained. The rule is designed to prevent bowlers from running 15 metres down the pitch to bowl from 5 yards away. Obviously though, there has to be a line drawn somewhere (in this case, literally).

I tend to agree with Adders here; I don't want to see guys forced out of the game (or losing their effectiveness) because they're borderline on breaking a modern technocratic interpretation of a law initially designed to prevent people from taking the piss and pitching the ball. Guys like Murali, Ajmal, Senanayake etc etc are all good to watch, and add to the game of cricket. It would be a shame if their ilk were forced out; cricket would be poorer for it.

 

[Maximas]

If Ajmal/Murali can work within the tolerance range then I don't see why anyone else shouldn't be able to

 

[Daemon]

Incidently, for the unitiated like myself, the following assessment makes things very clear;

So all you need as a video Umpire are two frozen video frames and a protractor??? Simple???

Nah that's a really, really crude measurement. I don't think you can use 2d footage accurately in this case.

 

[Athlai]

Everytime I see CW post about chucking I want to gouge my eyes out.

Yes my own personal experience from watching the camera angles provided by my magical video box gives my full knowledge of the exact geometric position of a players arm at the point of release. I am after all the Terminator.

The facts at this point are, Senananana was tested and passed and later tested and failed.

Arguing the legality of his bowling at any point in time is stupid as only the above is relevant. If you want to argue if 15 degrees is fair though, then armchair it all you want, but at least try to keep in mind that only Sarwan had a totally straight arm when they actually tested it.

The issue at hand in my opinion, is exactly what Dan said. Does the bowler gain an advantage? The rule against chucking should reflect this and I personally think it's absolutely fine. The game is not being dominated or ruined by players who are breaking the rules and never has been.

 

[Furball]

I had no idea this was possible. A post with literally 0% understanding of the subject.

Chucking wasn't an issue in the 1980s so it's not surprising.

 

[Spikey]

Should there be a harsher ban on players who fail the tests?

Some sort of penalty could be enforced, but only if the player was reported by the match referee, so the onus would be on the boards to send their players to get tested regularly or risk losing them for extended periods.

pretty good idea

 

[Spark]

Say throwing was made legal.. Baseball pitchers bowl at 100mph with no run-up, so I expect fast bowlers to be able to bowl in the 110-120mph range. Spinners who blatantly throw will probably get more purchase but I don't see how it makes it harder to pick them..

I'm curious to see someone doing an "anything goes" experiment to see how it is.. in 20 years time might eventually be the "solution" to all this for all we know..

Ever tried throwing an off-break?

 

[watson]

Chucking wasn't an issue in the 1980s so it's not surprising.

Yes, and wasn't it nice.

Up until the Doosra came along we had real off-spinners bowling real off-spin, and taking wickets with their usual skill and guile. Tayfield, Laker, Prasanna, and Gibbs didn't need a dodgy delivery because they were actually very good at what they did. In fact, if the Doosra was banned then 95% of the chucking problem would go away.

 

[Maximas]

Watson back for some more

 

[Adders]

Jeez watson you're on a roll here for clueless posting today.

 

[Furball]

Yes, and wasn't it nice.

Up until the Doosra came along we had real off-spinners bowling real off-spin, and taking wickets with their usual skill and guile. Tayfield, Laker, Prasanna, and Gibbs didn't need a dodgy delivery because they were actually very good at what they did. In fact, if the Doosra was banned then 95% of the chucking problem would go away.

dear god

 

[Adders]

I think the thing that annoys me most about this whole chucking thing is that there are so many ill informed clueless people that have such strong opinions on it.

Ban the Doosra........FMD.