• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Jonbrooks chucking Megathread

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah Pratters, you don't get to accuse us of not being serious about the topic when you haven't given anything solid to back up your arguments at all. How can we be expected to take your posts seriously then
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Middleton sent me another paper, published in Sports Biomechanics, which questions the entire basis of how illegal actions are measured. Rene Ferdinand and Uwe Kersting argue that the speed of the extension rather than the degree is more important in determining whether an action is illegal. "Even if it is accepted that most bowlers who throw violate the current 15-degree limit," the report said, "this study has shown there are bowlers who can achieve throw-like actions while remaining within this limit… If it is decided that these actions do not conform to aesthetic requirements of a cricket bowl, then further measures such as elbow-extension angular velocity through release and absolute elbow angle may need to be considered."
 

cnerd123

likes this
Elbow-extension angular velocity != 'flex velcocity'

You do not get to invent your own phrase to replace existing scientific terminology and then get all uppity about people calling you out on speaking BS.
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Elbow-extension angular velocity != 'flex velcocity'

You do not get to invent your own phrase to replace existing scientific terminology and then get all uppity about people calling you out on speaking BS.
Instead of understanding the point, you are the one going all uppity and speaking BS.
 

cnerd123

likes this
Instead of understanding the point, you are the one going all uppity and speaking BS.
No I get the point. I get how existing measures of measuring chucking aren't perfect.

But that doesnt mean Murali chucked. It also doesnt mean that it is impossible to bowl the doosra legally. You can't use a quote from an article on a topic you have absolutely 0 expertise on to justify your stance on either of those issues, especially when that same article explicitly has an expert claiming that the doorsa can be bowled legally.

You can't paint a strawman and argue against it. No one is claiming existing methods are perfect.
 

indiaholic

International Captain
Can't find a non gated version of that paper. First this is a paper from 2007, so won't include any Ajmal analysis, I think.

From the summary it seems like when you use the 15 degree limit, the change in the degree of elbow flexion does not give us any way to separate the accused chucker from the bowlers who supposedly have pure actions. The difference between the two sets is in the angular velocity of the elbow extension.

This being said, the current mechanism has been able to weed out Ajmal, Narine etc.
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
No I get the point. I get how existing measures of measuring chucking aren't perfect.

But that doesnt mean Murali chucked. It also doesnt mean that it is impossible to bowl the doosra legally. You can't use a quote from an article on a topic you have absolutely 0 expertise on to justify your stance on either of those issues, especially when that same article explicitly has an expert claiming that the doorsa can be bowled legally.

You can't paint a strawman and argue against it. No one is claiming existing methods are perfect.
The doosra is an illegal delivery and Murali and any one who bowl it chuck it. However, current laws allow people to chuck it as long as they are within 15 degrees.
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Can't find a non gated version of that paper. First this is a paper from 2007, so won't include any Ajmal analysis, I think.

From the summary it seems like when you use the 15 degree limit, the change in the degree of elbow flexion does not give us any way to separate the accused chucker from the bowlers who supposedly have pure actions. The difference between the two sets is in the angular velocity of the elbow extension.

This being said, the current mechanism has been able to weed out Ajmal, Narine etc.
Yeah, the current law at least gets any one beyond 15 degrees out. That's good but more needs to be done. Hopefully necessary amendments will take place. Recently Ashwin was asked about the doosra and he said he didn't bowl it, so he is not under scrutiny. At least as Indian fans, we can breathe a sigh of relief that our best bowler doesn't bowl this delivery.
 

AndyZaltzHair

Hall of Fame Member
It's possible to bowl doosras legally under current law.

Of the 18 doosras Kaushal delivered to a satisfactory standard during his test, nine were found to be within the 15-degree threshold. Elbow extension for his doosra was measured at as low as 12 degrees, with the highest measurements coming in at 21 degrees, for two separate balls. The average flexion for his doosra was 16 degrees. In the 18 offbreaks Kaushal delivered, his elbow did not exceed nine degrees of extension.
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Found this image from one of the co-authors in question, Ferdinand. This could lead to a substantial discussion.



Anyone have $41 to spare for the paper? :happy:
 
Last edited:

indiaholic

International Captain
This is the part that makes me feel a bit dirty: "If it is decided that these actions do not conform to aesthetic requirements of a cricket bowl, then further measures such as elbow-extension angular velocity through release and absolute elbow angle may need to be considered."

Shouldn't the criteria be something like the velocity or the revs on the ball? Seems a bit weird to classify people into two categories: the chuckers and the ones with a pure action based on visual reporting and then finding ways to justify your earlier decision to put people into the chuckers bin.
 

smash84

The Tiger King
It's possible to bowl doosras legally under current law.

Of the 18 doosras Kaushal delivered to a satisfactory standard during his test, nine were found to be within the 15-degree threshold. Elbow extension for his doosra was measured at as low as 12 degrees, with the highest measurements coming in at 21 degrees, for two separate balls. The average flexion for his doosra was 16 degrees. In the 18 offbreaks Kaushal delivered, his elbow did not exceed nine degrees of extension.
wow, didn't know this. I thought Saqlain was the only one who had a reasonable doosra.

Suck it doosra haters
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Back to unsubstantiated claims I see. Well done.
One doesn't need a bio mechanist's degree to understand it really.

A) Laws didn't want third elbow used initially as the force of the elbow means a 'chuck'
B) The doosra uses the force of the elbow, so it's a chuck.

Obviously you don't agree but whatever.
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
What is also annoying is how a doosra is allowed if it's 14 degrees but not allowed if it's 16 degrees. It's the same ****ing delivery. Either allow both of them or outlaw both of them.
 

Top