• 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

honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Pratters said:
I knew the every bowler but will come up. McGrath never used the third joint to give force to the delivery. There is a difference between what McGrath bowled and what Muesli bowled. Don't evade this. This is why velocity has to come into the law.
Click to expand...


No..he was found flexing the elbow as much as Murali. Again, the irony when you use the word "Evade". You are the evading every single fact about this issue and sticking to your own factually inaccurate opinion.
 
Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
TheJediBrah said:
huh. I never considered that but it make sense in a way. I can see the logic behind saying that if you're bowling faster, with a faster arm action, you're likely to inherently have more natural "bend" and hence should be allowed more leeway than a spinner.

Not sure if that's what you're saying, if it's not just ignore me
Click to expand...
Yeah exactly.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
TheJediBrah said:
huh. I never considered that but it make sense in a way. I can see the logic behind saying that if you're bowling faster, with a faster arm action, you're likely to inherently have more natural "bend" and hence should be allowed more leeway than a spinner.

Not sure if that's what you're saying, if it's not just ignore me
Click to expand...

Many spin bowlers have fast arm actions, some quicker than seamers. You are confusing the fact that bowlers can get some speed in through their run up and strength neither of which has anything to do with the arm speed. And spinners as they run in shorter tend to have more work in their delivery stride anyways. This was one of the reasons ICC abolished the stupid system that was put in earlier.
 
smash84

smash84

The Tiger King
Pratters said:
The current law is not correct. I have already explained why several times.
Click to expand...
dude, there are no correct or incorrect laws. They are just laws. And they are to be followed. You might dislike them but that does not make them incorrect
 
OverratedSanity

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Pratters said:
The current law is not correct. I have already explained why several times.
Click to expand...
Chucking is defined by the limit set by the authorities. Saying that the limit they've set is "wrong" is utterly meaningless. The law wasn't changed just to have a giggle.
 
Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
TheJediBrah said:
huh. I never considered that but it make sense in a way. I can see the logic behind saying that if you're bowling faster, with a faster arm action, you're likely to inherently have more natural "bend" and hence should be allowed more leeway than a spinner.

Not sure if that's what you're saying, if it's not just ignore me
Click to expand...
The old law was against using the third joint as a force. It didn't talk any thing about degrees etc. When the elbow is used as a force it is a chuck. When a fast bowler bowls, some bent will happen naturally. I can't believe any one can compare it with a doosra.
 
Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
smalishah84 said:
dude, there are no correct or incorrect laws. They are just laws. And they are to be followed. You might dislike them but that does not make them incorrect
Click to expand...
OverratedSanity said:
Chucking is defined by the limit set by the authorities. Saying that the limit they've set is "wrong" is utterly meaningless. The law wasn't changed just to have a giggle.
Click to expand...
Every law ever made has been correct? Maybe you support countries banning gay marriage then.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Pratters said:
The old law was against using the third joint as a force. It didn't talk any thing about degrees etc. When the elbow is used as a force it is a chuck. When a fast bowler bowls, some bent will happen naturally. I can't believe any one can compare it with a doosra.
Click to expand...


Funny how that natural bend just happens to be more when the fast bowler is putting more "effort" into his ball, isn't it? And the elbow is used as a force to the same extent as it was for a spinner. That was the whole point of the whole bloody study that happened with respected academics and that was the basis for changing the law. Seriously, how hard is it to accept facts and not refuse them?
 
Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
honestbharani said:
Funny how that natural bend just happens to be more when the fast bowler is putting more "effort" into his ball, isn't it? And the elbow is used as a force to the same extent as it was for a spinner. That was the whole point of the whole bloody study that happened with respected academics and that was the basis for changing the law. Seriously, how hard is it to accept facts and not refuse them?
Click to expand...
Bring in velocity. Without it you are just talking in the air without any proof.p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top