Cricket Player Manager
Page 5 of 72 FirstFirst ... 345671555 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 1076
Like Tree387Likes

Thread: Ajmal Action Reported

  1. #61
    International Captain wellAlbidarned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    away from the palms
    Posts
    6,697
    Quote Originally Posted by Cevno View Post
    I think to a naked eye Slower bowlers with unconventional actions look more suspect always, but would like Some Fast bowlers reported as well.

    ICC needs to find a round that inherent bias in the system almost. Random testing maybe ?
    I honestly want to see Steyn tested. He's got a very pronounced wrist flick but I wonder if there's a bit more in it.
    indiaholic likes this.
    Exit pursuing a beer

  2. #62
    Cricketer Of The Year Bahnz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    On top of a pile of money, surrounded by many beautiful women
    Posts
    8,378
    Steve Finn's action looks a bit sus to my eye. And how Kyle Mills has gotten through a 13 year career without ever being reported as beyond me.
    Quote Originally Posted by HeathDavisSpeed View Post
    I can think of a list of Sydney Grade posters who would contribute a better average post than Bahnz.
    Maow like no one can hear you maowing.

  3. #63
    Cricketer Of The Year Bahnz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    On top of a pile of money, surrounded by many beautiful women
    Posts
    8,378
    Quote Originally Posted by wellAlbidarned View Post
    Being scientists and stuff I somewhat suspect they know how to conduct a trial to include all possibilities. They're not gonna pick one random delivery and be like "yep, here's our one". They'll definitely take into account the extremes.
    I remember listening to an interview with Simon Hughes on the BBC a month or two ago. He said that bowling the doosra legally entails a dramatic loss of pace, and that in most cases the fizzing, wicket-taking doosra involves a lot more bending and straightening in order to making up for this. It would be interesting to know to what extent current tests take account of factors such as bowling speed and revolutions on the ball, and whether there has been any change in procedure in the last few years.

  4. #64
    International Captain Migara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Posts
    5,884
    Quote Originally Posted by jonbrooks View Post
    There is no optical illusion. If it looks like a chuck, it is a CHUCK!
    If it looks like Malaria, it should be malaria, what ever the blood tests say? Meh!
    Member of the Sanga fan club. (Ugh! it took me so long to become a real fan of his)


  5. #65
    International Captain watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,467
    Quote Originally Posted by Migara View Post
    If it looks like Malaria, it should be malaria, what ever the blood tests say? Meh!
    It has been proven scientifically that the human eye CAN detect a 15 degree straightening - that's one of the reasons why 15 degrees was chosen back in 2004 as the cut-off. So yes, an Umpire can fairly and reasonably call a chuck without the help of a biomechanical scientist. And should.
    Last edited by watson; 11-08-2014 at 11:00 PM.
    Len Hutton - Jack Hobbs - Ted Dexter - Peter May - Walter Hammond - Frank Woolley - Ian Botham - Alan Knott - Hedley Verity - John Snow - Fred Trueman

    Victor Trumper - Bill Lawry - Don Bradman - Greg Chappell - Allan Border - Keith Miller - Adam Gilchrist - Alan Davidson - Shane Warne - Dennis Lillee - Glenn McGrath

  6. #66
    International Captain OverratedSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Chennai, India
    Posts
    5,488
    Quote Originally Posted by wellAlbidarned View Post
    I honestly want to see Steyn tested. He's got a very pronounced wrist flick but I wonder if there's a bit more in it.
    I've seen a lot of people say this. Looks like just the wrist to me.

  7. #67
    School Boy/Girl Captain
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    173
    Quote Originally Posted by watson View Post
    It has been proven scientifically that the human eye CAN detect a 15 degree straightening - that's one of the reasons why 15 degrees was chosen back in 2004 as the cut-off. So yes, an Umpire can fairly and reasonably call a chuck without the help of a biomechanical scientist. And should.
    Link appreciated. I can spot if some one is blatantly chucking but I am not sure about this 15 degree cut off.

  8. #68
    Cricketer Of The Year hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    7,625
    I've posted a million times on the quirk in Ajmal's action to do with shoulder abduction.

    He may well chuck in terms of elbow straightening too but given that he passed the test the first time around the focus on this will be proving that the tested action is identical to the match action, which is where the new testers appeared to really hammer Senanayake

  9. #69
    International Captain OverratedSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Chennai, India
    Posts
    5,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Migara View Post
    Don't understand why same could happen with an effort ball of any bowler even with clean actions
    True. Lots of bowlers probably do it. I just think it makes sense to start with someone whose action does look very dodgy. For all we know, Steyn might be chucking merrily away when he bowls his faster deliveries. Ideally, everyone should be tested.
    Migara likes this.

  10. #70
    U19 Debutant indiaholic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    India
    Posts
    390
    Quote Originally Posted by OverratedSanity View Post
    True. Lots of bowlers probably do it. I just think it makes sense to start with someone whose action does look very dodgy. For all we know, Steyn might be chucking merrily away when he bowls his faster deliveries. Ideally, everyone should be tested.
    Steyn's case is peculiar. Doesn't look like a chuck most of the time.. Especially when he is bowling a fuller length. But at times when he bowls that effort ball, there is definitely some elbow action.

  11. #71
    International Captain watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,467
    Quote Originally Posted by simonlee48 View Post
    Link appreciated. I can spot if some one is blatantly chucking but I am not sure about this 15 degree cut off.
    The article is from November 2004;

    The tolerance levels had been set at five degrees for spinners, seven-and-a-half for medium-pacers, and ten for quick bowlers, a situation that invited much criticism from past greats such as Ian Chappell. But the study, conducted by three prominent biomechanics experts, suggests that the human eye can only detect a kink in the action if the straightening is more than 15 degrees.

    .....The biomechanics men - Dr Marc Portus, Professor Bruce Elliott and Dr Paul Hurrion - used cameras shooting at 250 frames per second (ten times the speed of a TV camera) to illustrate phenomena such as adduction and hyper-extension, which can convince an observer watching with the naked eye that the bowler is chucking.

    Research was also undertaken during the ICC Champions Trophy in England, where it was found that 13 of the 23 bowlers filmed straightened their arms more than the current permissible levels. Ramnaresh Sarwan, he of the fairly innocuous legspin, was the only man observed who didn't straighten his arm at all.

    Based on these findings, the ICC is to extend the tolerance limit to 15 degrees for all bowlers, regardless of whether they bowl at Shane Warne's pace or Shoaib Akhtar's. Match officials will still be expected to note down suspicious actions, and pass on the information to the ICC.


    ICC study reveals that 99% of bowlers throw | Cricket News | Global | ESPN Cricinfo
    Last edited by watson; 12-08-2014 at 01:59 AM.

  12. #72
    International Captain OverratedSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Chennai, India
    Posts
    5,488
    *sigh* Watson, not this again? I'll make it as simple as possibl.

    Yes, apparently the human eye can only detect 15 degrees of straightening, true. That doesn't mean that if the human eye detects some straightening, it's necessarily 15 degrees or more. If the arm has a pre-existing bend, it will seem to the naked eye to be an illegal straightening of the arm.

    The scientific fact that only 15 degrees and above is detectable assumes that the arm is perfectly straight before delivery. But that's not the case for several bowlers, hence the illusion.

  13. #73
    International Captain watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,467
    Quote Originally Posted by OverratedSanity View Post
    *sigh* Watson, not this again? I'll make it as simple as possibl.

    Yes, apparently the human eye can only detect 15 degrees of straightening, true. That doesn't mean that if the human eye detects some straightening, it's necessarily 15 degrees or more. If the arm has a pre-existing bend, it will seem to the naked eye to be an illegal straightening of the arm.

    The scientific fact that only 15 degrees and above is detectable assumes that the arm is perfectly straight before delivery. But that's not the case for several bowlers, hence the illusion.
    Which is why Ajmal is still playing cricket and not banned till he has done the biomechanical tests.

    But you can't have a situation where the Umpires simply do nothing just because there may or may not be an 'illusion'. If that were the case then no bowler would ever be cited by the Umpires unless his dodgy action fell into the category of the bleeding obvious (ie. "shot-putting").

    And that's face it, most bowlers are not born with a congenital birth defect of their bowling arm. The vast majority of bowlers are anatomically typical and so the '15 degree naked-eye rule' (or whatever you want to call it) holds for the vast majority of bowlers.
    Last edited by watson; 12-08-2014 at 02:30 AM.

  14. #74
    International Vice-Captain Riggins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The Prince
    Posts
    4,935
    Quote Originally Posted by OverratedSanity View Post

    Yes, apparently the human eye can only detect 15 degrees of straightening, true. That doesn't mean that if the human eye detects some straightening, it's necessarily 15 degrees or more.
    I feel like it does mean that.
    The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament.

  15. #75
    Cricketer Of The Year hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    7,625
    Some revision of the wording in that article


    "detect" : as a word in isolation might be said to read as: "make a discrete, live action evaluation conclusively judging whether the arm was more or less than 15 degrees. If you detect a "kink", it's more than 15 degrees. If not, it's less." I very much doubt that is true. We detect "kinks" in bowling actions that have been conclusively proven to be below 15 degrees.

    You cannot look at a 14 degree straightening and make a discrete judgement that it was more legal than a 16 degree straightening in real time. It just seems very, very unlikely.

    The confounding factors seem to be adduction and hyper-extension...but I'd wager that there are many more (viewing angle seems an obvious one).

    "detect" is very poor wording in that quote. This is why Watson is so confused.
    Last edited by hendrix; 12-08-2014 at 02:36 AM.

Page 5 of 72 FirstFirst ... 345671555 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Sunil Narine's action reported (not to the ICC)
    By jonbrooks in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 292
    Last Post: 06-10-2014, 06:55 PM
  2. Williamson's action reported!
    By jonbrooks in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 24-06-2014, 04:13 AM
  3. Saeed Ajmal reported for chucking
    By TT Boy in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 210
    Last Post: 27-04-2011, 02:07 PM
  4. Harbhajan Singh's action reported
    By andyc in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 21-12-2004, 06:25 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
  •