ICC Awards tonight!

[tooextracool]

and do you actually believe that the icc are certain that murali's action is legal? if they were then they wouldnt have monitored his action 1 zillion times.
if you ask me i believe that the icc believes that murali chucks, but because for whatever reasons that they allowed him to get away with it earlier on in his career(most likely because they never expected a sri lankan to go on to break the world record) they cant brand him a 'chucker' now.

 

[marc71178]

If they thought it were illegal, they'd review it again.

 

[Langeveldt]

Theres a young pakistani i think who has an identicle action...im sure i saw him playing in this years u19 world cup...im sure someone here knows who im on about and can put a name to them.

Tariq Mahmood..

And I am not allowed to say a bad word against him, because hey! the worlds leading wicket taker bowls in the same manner.. Good luck to the bloke...

 

[Sehwag309]

ICC Awards - Download

OR

Pathan, Dravid Award - Quick clip

 

[Tom Halsey]

if you ask me i believe that the icc believes that murali chucks, but because for whatever reasons that they allowed him to get away with it earlier on in his career(most likely because they never expected a sri lankan to go on to break the world record) they cant brand him a 'chucker' now.

No matter how riff raff the ICC can appear to be, how the hell can you believe that? They're not that bad.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Theres a young pakistani i think who has an identicle action...im sure i saw him playing in this years u19 world cup...im sure someone here knows who im on about and can put a name to them.

Sky put the side-on slo-mo camera on him, and it looked horribly like a throw.

 

[tooextracool]

If they thought it were illegal, they'd review it again.

and they've done that time and time again havent they?but the fact is that even if they thought it illegal now and made it known, they would only be disgracing themselves to have allowed someone to get 500+ wickets before labelling him as a chucker. indeed there is no step back for them now, once you clear someones action you cant go back and say that hes a chucker 10 years later.

 

[biased indian]

if you ask me i believe that the icc believes that murali chucks

how can u believe what icc believe

 

[tooextracool]

No matter how riff raff the ICC can appear to be, how the hell can you believe that? They're not that bad.

its my opinion...i cant say for sure that that icc believes that but thats what i get from the fact that they banned the doosra and yet called his normal deliveries as 'legal' despite the fact that even murali acknowledges that his doosra is bowled with the same arm bending angle(or whatever its called)

 

[tooextracool]

how can u believe what icc believe

its my opinion......if you can prove otherwise then go ahead and do so.

 

[biased indian]

and they've done that time and time again havent they?but the fact is that even if they thought it illegal now and made it known, they would only be disgracing themselves to have allowed someone to get 500+ wickets before labelling him as a chucker. indeed there is no step back for them now, once you clear someones action you cant go back and say that hes a chucker 10 years later.

i dont know how many of u watched it on TV but i saw murali bowling all his variation to slater with his arm beltted with a sling and i dont think u can chuck with such a thing tied to u r hand

 

[marc71178]

i dont know how many of u watched it on TV but i saw murali bowling all his variation to slater with his arm beltted with a sling and i dont think u can chuck with such a thing tied to u r hand

I watched it (with the cast in his arm) - before watching it I had no doubts his action was 100% legal.

Now I've watched it, and I have major doubts.

 

[tooextracool]

i dont know how many of u watched it on TV but i saw murali bowling all his variation to slater with his arm beltted with a sling and i dont think u can chuck with such a thing tied to u r hand

its quite simple for him to modify his action when he does this.....anyways i dont know much about how this whole thing works so i'll keep out of saying whether he chucks or not.

 

[biased indian]

I watched it (with the cast in his arm) - before watching it I had no doubts his action was 100% legal.

Now I've watched it, and I have major doubts.

and that would be because???

 

[marc71178]

As I've said many times before.

When he bowled with the cast, the arm remained as straight at the start of delivery as it did at the end.

When he bowled without - there was a big differential in his starting position compared with the cast version, but by the end of the delivery action that differential had gone.

 

[Tom Halsey]

once you clear someones action you cant go back and say that hes a chucker 10 years later.

Yes you can, because people's actions change - it's natural.

 

[tooextracool]

Yes you can, because people's actions change - it's natural.

and has muralis action changed? no it hasnt.

 

[biased indian]

and has muralis action changed? no it hasnt.

it has because he started bowling doosra only recently

 

[tooextracool]

it has because he started bowling doosra only recently

the doosra doesnt change his overall action though, its just one delivery that hes modified his action for since then. and if i remember correctly that delivery got banned.

 

[honestbharani]

I can see 2 reasons Warne got picked over Murali ( apart from bias ).

1. In their head to head encounter, Warne 'won', on Murali's home turf. ( yes, Aus batsmen are probably better, but home ground advantage makes it balanced enough for a comparison ).

2. Murali spent the entire period bowling a delivery which was later proved to be illegal. Apart from the wickets taken with it, others would have been taken while batsmen were looking out for it, etc. We'll never know what effect that had.

I'm not saying the selectors chose correctly ( or not ), just that they did have legitimate reasons to consider Warne better.

In the end, like all these choices the selectors made, it's a judgement call.

Personally, with these and Warne only playing half a season, I'd have been looking closely for a third option...of course, that would have upset everyone

I would agree that he did get a few wickets with the doosra but he only started bowling that delivery recently and he has gotten wickets with his other deliveries as well.



And as far as leaving him out of the Test XI, that is just pure crap. I don't know how they did it and why they did it but it is just plain wrong. Juz the same as having Kallis at 7 and having Lara in the ODI side at all. Lara and Sehwag didn't deserve to be there. And I love both of those guys, if you have read my earlier posts but if the selection is based on the past year, then both Lara and Sehwag should not be there in the ODI XI and neither should Warne in the test side. 5 tests, 2 of them against Zim, I don't think he proved to anyone that he was better than Murali based on these tests. Sure, he did better than Murali in that series but if you are gonna select based on a single series, what about Sehwag? He averages 58 in tests in 2004? Shouldn't he be there too?