Jonbrooks chucking Megathread

[TheJediBrah]

If it was irrelevant this thread would be about 100 pages back by now - it is true that his basic action was proved to be fair, and then the law was tweaked to allow him to bowl a doosra. It shouldn't have been though and Pratters is right - that delivery should have no place in the game

don't really want to restart an argument, but this is patently false. And you shouldn't have to have any training in scientific method to understand why. Nor was it proved to be unfair either.

edit: I'll add that it's not an indictment of his bowling action at all, there just wasn't anything even approaching a sufficient method to test it.

 

[fredfertang]

don't really want to restart an argument, but this is patently false. And you shouldn't have to have any training in scientific method to understand why. Nor was it proved to be unfair either.

It's either one or the other - there's no fence to sit on

 

[TheJediBrah]

It's either one or the other - there's no fence to sit on

also patently false. Any stance other than "fence sitting" would be purely an opinion.

 

[fredfertang]

also patently false. Any stance other than "fence sitting" would be purely an opinion.

No - he was allowed to bowl on after folk in a position to do so decided his action did not infringe the laws - you can argue the semantics about words like 'fair', 'legitimate' and 'legal' and which is the most appropriate to use but to my mind you don't allow a bowler to bowl unless happy he does so fairly

 

[TheJediBrah]

No - he was allowed to bowl on after folk in a position to do so decided his action did not infringe the laws - you can argue the semantics about words like 'fair', 'legitimate' and 'legal' and which is the most appropriate to use but to my mind you don't allow a bowler to bowl unless happy he does so fairly

Good for you. Doesn't change basic facts.

Of course they kept letting him bowl. He wasn't proven to have an illegal action, yet it was impossible to prove that he bowled with a "legal" or "fair" action in matches so there really wasn't any other choice. How stupid would it have been had they banned him because they didn't have sufficient technology to prove his action legal.

 

[Shri]

The test proved he got as much turn as match circumstances, didn't it?

 

[TheJediBrah]

The test proved he got as much turn as match circumstances, didn't it?

Firstly, no, not even remotely and I'm pretty sure they didn't test for that and how could they possibly control for variation in pitch conditions etc.

Also pretty sure he was bowling on synthetic "pitches" during testing anyway.

Secondly, still wouldn't come close to proving anything.

Whether or not the tests were scientifically valid is not in question, unless you're seriously challenged. Of course they weren't. You shouldn't need to be spoon fed basic logic ffs. And this is exactly the kind of "argument" I didn't want to get into, but people just can't help themselves.

 

[Shri]

Firstly, no, not even remotely and I'm pretty sure they didn't test for that and how could they possibly control for variation in pitch conditions etc.

Also pretty sure he was bowling on synthetic "pitches" during testing anyway.

Secondly, still wouldn't come close to proving anything.

Whether or not the tests were scientifically valid is not in question, unless you're seriously challenged. Of course they weren't. You shouldn't need to be spoon fed basic logic ffs. And this is exactly the kind of "argument" I didn't want to get into, but people just can't help themselves.

You keep using the word logic, it doesn't mean what you think it means.

 

[TheJediBrah]

You keep using the word logic, it doesn't mean what you think it means.

I feel embarrassed for you

 

[honestbharani]

One is not allowed to straighten arm 'above shoulder' beyond 15 degrees.


Of course you and others will just buy the cast experiment blindly without going into detail about the demerits of the doosra. Any ways.

You have proof that Murali had an elbow flex greater than 15 degrees from the point of starting his delivery stride to the time he delivers the ball? If you don't, and I am sure you don't, you are just sprouting out untrue BS in the guise of your "opinion".

 

[Pratters]

I don't care if it is 15 degree or 10 degree or 20 degree. The doosra is an illegal delivery according to the old laws. The third joint (elbow) is used to give force to the ball. This wasn't allowed as per the old law.

 

[Pratters]

you are just sprouting out untrue BS in the guise of your "opinion".

This is exactly the kind of remarks why I have no respect for you. You just bash any one who doesn't believe what you believe in. Keep living in your little bubble.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

I thought it was because he's Indian.

 

[Pratters]

There is another aspect. The testing agency which did testing during the time of Murali was found to be unreliable and the ICC changed to another agency later. That's besides my point though.

 

[Daemon]

There is another aspect. The testing agency which did testing during the time of Murali was found to be unreliable and the ICC changed to another agency later. That's besides my point though.

That's a strange reason to hate hb

 

[honestbharani]

I don't care if it is 15 degree or 10 degree or 20 degree. The doosra is an illegal delivery according to the old laws. The third joint (elbow) is used to give force to the ball. This wasn't allowed as per the old law.

Every bowler "bowled" by giving force with the third joint. If you are not aware of this basic fact, it explains almost all your posts being what they were in this thread. And you asking anyone to live in their own bubbles is the very definition of the word "irony". You have no idea of actual facts and the practical stuff that happens with bowling or the fact the old laws were plain wrong. That bubble must be one sweet place given you spend so much of your life there.

 

[Pratters]

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.

 

[Pratters]

Every bowler "bowled" by giving force with the third joint. If you are not aware of this basic fact, it explains almost all your posts being what they were in this thread. And you asking anyone to live in their own bubbles is the very definition of the word "irony". You have no idea of actual facts and the practical stuff that happens with bowling or the fact the old laws were plain wrong. That bubble must be one sweet place given you spend so much of your life there.

New law legitimises doosra upto 15 degrees. It shouldn't be legitimate.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Should just make all bowlers bowl with a cast.

 

[TheJediBrah]

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.

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