Brett Lee - Protected Species?

[Fiery]

How tough is it to distinguish between a person's head and their midriff?

I'm not going to argue with you about it marc if you haven't even seen any of it. Go and argue with Richard.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Username

Spot on - Lee's bowling attitude leaves a lot to be desired.

hold it, hold it!! i think something's wrong. pinkline jones has just made a post that can at least be construed as serious.

 

[mavric41]

How tough is it to distinguish between a person's head and their midriff?

Pretty hard, when they have no neck.

 

[social]

This whole argument is absolute drivel.

Let's deflect the attention away from the Black Caps' capitulation by saying that Brett Lee's bowling is against the spirit of the game.

What absolute crap!

Where was all this outrage when Lowe broke Carozza's nose or Meads ended Catchpole's career or when the All Blacks routinely resort to any level of thuggery.

Oh, I forgot. You won those games so it doesnt count.

 

[Richard]

Even when he's talking about changes in his action and when he was injured?

Which have actually had little or no effect on the line, length, speed or anything else of his bowling.

 

[marc71178]

No, of course being injured doesn't affect someone's bowling.

Likewise the coaching he received and mental outlook he's taken haven't changed him either have they?

He must be stupid to think such a thing, I mean what would he know about himself?

 

[Fiery]

This whole argument is absolute drivel.

Let's deflect the attention away from the Black Caps' capitulation by saying that Brett Lee's bowling is against the spirit of the game.

What absolute crap!

Where was all this outrage when Lowe broke Carozza's nose or Meads ended Catchpole's career or when the All Blacks routinely resort to any level of thuggery.

Oh, I forgot. You won those games so it doesnt count.

I was watching the bledisloe game in a pub in Sydney surrounded by Aussies when Lowe disgracefully smashed his elbow into Carozza's nose. That was an act of thuggery and cowardice that I was disgusted by and actually apologised to everyone watching the game with me on behalf of the nation for what it was worth. If you're comparing Lee's bowling to these two incidents then you must be something conceding Lee's bowling is against the spirit of the game also.

 

[Richard]

No, of course being injured doesn't affect someone's bowling.

Likewise the coaching he received and mental outlook he's taken haven't changed him either have they?

He must be stupid to think such a thing, I mean what would he know about himself?

Probably enough to be thinking differently, and therefore feel like he's bowling differently, just because a little while ago he'd started to get good figures.

 

[marc71178]

So you're still disputing what he's said about his injuries and his training?

How do you know more than he does about such things?

 

[social]

I was watching the bledisloe game in a pub in Sydney surrounded by Aussies when Lowe disgracefully smashed his elbow into Carozza's nose. That was an act of thuggery and cowardice that I was disgusted by and actually apologised to everyone watching the game with me on behalf of the nation for what it was worth. If you're comparing Lee's bowling to these two incidents then you must be something conceding Lee's bowling is against the spirit of the game also.

No, Im saying that its ludicrous to suggest the ball Lee bowled to McCullum or his bowling in general is against the spirit of the game when compared to acts like Lowe's.

Evidence suggests that he slipped and ......

His other bowling on tour has simply been good, aggressive fast bowling. If the batsmen dont like it (which they obviously dont) then all the better.

As Ive said earlier, although I didnt see it, circumstancial evidence suggests that the ball to Razzaq should have resulted in him being sanctioned in some way. Unfortunately he wasnt, so everyone should get over it and treat it like any other bad decision - regrettable but these things happen.

 

[username1234]

if I had the physical ability to bowl 150km/h+, I'd be wanting to use it and if that meant hitting or intimidating opposition batsmen, I'd be using it as much within the rules as I could!

Even if it means bowling bouncers at number 10 batsman in first class games that australia have already won by about 350 runs. And have u noticed before he bowl's most his beamers he's usually in a angry mood.

 

[Top_Cat]

I was watching the bledisloe game in a pub in Sydney surrounded by Aussies when Lowe disgracefully smashed his elbow into Carozza's nose. That was an act of thuggery and cowardice that I was disgusted by and actually apologised to everyone watching the game with me on behalf of the nation for what it was worth. If you're comparing Lee's bowling to these two incidents then you must be something conceding Lee's bowling is against the spirit of the game also.

He does have a point, though. Incidents which at the time just seemed like 'good rugby' by the All-Blacks, were considered thuggery by other teams and players and who knows, it may well be a function of which team is winning/losing. The incident you mentioned is an extreme example but how many 'less extreme' incidents were just brushed off as 'part of the game' by the Kiwi's?

Which have actually had little or no effect on the line, length, speed or anything else of his bowling.

Little changes DO make major differences to what a bowler bowls and how. Lee's had some pretty major changes to his action over the years. I've got some footage of him in his first Test and comparing that to recent footage, he's a vastly different bowler. His trajectory has changed quite a bit and he's more consistently quick these days.

I think there's one HUGE difference in Lee's bowling right now. In the early days, even though he was more consistently fast than Shoaib as far as maintaining pace, he'd still bowl, say, two overs at 150km/h+ speeds and the rest in the 140's. Now, he's bowling whole spells at 150km/h+ and so it appearing to having a more lethal edge to his bowling. That's aside to the vast improvements in trajectory and the rest he's achieved of late.

 

[Top_Cat]

Even if it means bowling bouncers at number 10 batsman in first class games that australia have already won by about 350 runs.

Yeah probably. I can't guarantee I wouldn't and I don't think anyone here (again, except for Richard) could.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Yep, it's a weakness on your part. How big and tough it is to bowl a rock hard cricket ball directly towards someone's head at 150+km. I don't see any problem with bouncers to batsman and the occasional one to a tail-ender but repeatedly bowling them at tail-enders
and bowling beamers is just cowardly. But you probably thought Jardine's bodyline theory was fine too.

Give me a break...Lee's full toss and bodyline theory - how did these two things become equated? Have you actually come up with any proof that the ball Lee bowled at McCullum the other night was deliberate? I've seen plenty of full tosses bowled at batsman and very rarely are they deliberate. It's often the case that a bowler is trying to put in that bit extra and things go horribly wrong, and while I agree that the ball Lee bowled at Razzaq looked to be in retaliation for the two bowled at the Aussies, I don't think you can draw any conclusions that the ball to McCullum was deliberate. I've never seen him bowl bouncers repeatedly (i.e more than one or two) at tail-enders, but if they stay around for a while they I'd imagine they'd get a couple more. Unless, of course, you're trying to claim that the batsman who got hit twice the other day is now a tail-ender

 

[Fiery]

Give me a break...Lee's full toss and bodyline theory - how did these two things become equated? Have you actually come up with any proof that the ball Lee bowled at McCullum the other night was deliberate? I've seen plenty of full tosses bowled at batsman and very rarely are they deliberate. It's often the case that a bowler is trying to put in that bit extra and things go horribly wrong, and while I agree that the ball Lee bowled at Razzaq looked to be in retaliation for the two bowled at the Aussies, I don't think you can draw any conclusions that the ball to McCullum was deliberate. I've never seen him bowl bouncers repeatedly (i.e more than one or two) at tail-enders, but if they stay around for a while they I'd imagine they'd get a couple more. Unless, of course, you're trying to claim that the batsman who got hit twice the other day is now a tail-ender

I'm getting a bit tired of arguing about it now to be honest but I will say one thing. Brett Lee's blood tends to boil over at times. If you watched the lead up to McCullum's beamer you'll see he was livid about a no-ball that was called for being too high. He then tried to take his anger out on McCullum by bouncing him which McCullum cut for runs. At this stage Lee lost his cool and bowled the beamer. That's how I saw it anyway. You may have seen it differently and we'll never know but I stand by my opinion that he bowls them on purpose.

 

[social]

I'm getting a bit tired of arguing about it now to be honest but I will say one thing. Brett Lee's blood tends to boil over at times. If you watched the lead up to McCullum's beamer you'll see he was livid about a no-ball that was called for being too high. He then tried to take his anger out on McCullum by bouncing him which McCullum cut for runs. At this stage Lee lost his cool and bowled the beamer. That's how I saw it anyway. You may have seen it differently and we'll never know but I stand by my opinion that he bowls them on purpose.

I actually thought that he had him set up for the yorker and slipped whilst trying to bowl it, hence the result.

BTW, you can tell from the wrist position, etc that he was attempting to gain reverse swing. Why bother with swing if you're attempting to bowl a beamer.

 

[Top_Cat]

BTW, you can tell from the wrist position, etc that he was attempting to gain reverse swing. Why bother with swing if you're attempting to bowl a beamer.

Quick question; if a deliberate beamer was bowled, wouldn't making it, say, an in-swinging beamer make it more difficult to get out of the way?

 

[Fiery]

I actually thought that he had him set up for the yorker and slipped whilst trying to bowl it, hence the result.

BTW, you can tell from the wrist position, etc that he was attempting to gain reverse swing. Why bother with swing if you're attempting to bowl a beamer.

Man, I haven't analysed it quite that closely. Anyway, I'm over it now and he's had enough **** over it that I doubt we'll see him bowl another one

 

[age_master]

Quick question; if a deliberate beamer was bowled, wouldn't making it, say, an in-swinging beamer make it more difficult to get out of the way?

most people go fairly straight down, depending on where it was aimed it could. depending on which way the batsmen perfers to duck.

 

[Scallywag]

Man, I haven't analysed it quite that closely.

I'm glad you didnt jump to any conclusions about it then.