• 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.

The biggest spinner of the cricket ball?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Saeed Ajmal's action deteriorated rapidly between the first time he got reported/tested and when he eventually go banned. It was pretty blatant.

I reckon Narine still chucks it but avoid scrutiny by not playing international cricket anymore lol
Yeah Narine still seems bad tbh. Chris Green's action is/ was terrible too.

Cameron Gannon as well. Can't recall seeing him bowl an over without thinking every ball was a throw. I/'m surprised he moved States in that I can't believe anyone would want someone who's so likely to be ruled out after getting tested.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
So the umpire operating under the then rules should have just ignored them and not called him? Is that what you're saying? This is a level of bizarro which is out there even by your usual standards

And his doosra was tested under the new rules. Why do you have a problem accepting that?
Yes, unless he did a TJB and protractor measured his bend. Which is the point. The fact that the call was predetermined.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yes, unless he did a TJB and protractor measured his bend. Which is the point. The fact that the call was predetermined.
^The ****ing state of this post. Honestly.

The rules at the time allowed umpires to call bowlers who they believed chucked.

That was it.

No referrals for testing, no protocols.

That was the law and he applied it as he saw fit.

There was no 15 degree rule to apply at the time Hair called Murali. It was left in the hands of the umpires. So if he'd broken out a protractor and found Murali straightened his arm by 3 degrees he could arguably have called him if it looked to him like he straightened his arm.

You might not like the rule as it was then and the current one may well be better, but you can't expect an official standing in a game in 1995 to apply a standard for dealing with suspect bowling actions which literally didn't exist at the time. You can't bag someone for applying the laws as they were at time.

As I said in reply to Migara yesterday, it was a different story by the time Emerson called him, but when Hair did it he was acting precisely as the rules provided.

[This post was proudly brought to you by the New Guard]
 
Last edited:

GoodAreasShane

International Captain
Yeah Narine still seems bad tbh. Chris Green's action is/ was terrible too.

Cameron Gannon as well. Can't recall seeing him bowl an over without thinking every ball was a throw. I/'m surprised he moved States in that I can't believe anyone would want someone who's so likely to be ruled out after getting tested.
Abso****inglutely. There's having a suspect action and there is completely taking the piss, and Gannon is certainly the latter
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Yeah Narine still seems bad tbh. Chris Green's action is/ was terrible too.

Cameron Gannon as well. Can't recall seeing him bowl an over without thinking every ball was a throw. I/'m surprised he moved States in that I can't believe anyone would want someone who's so likely to be ruled out after getting tested.
Taskin Ahmed has a variation ball that's a straight up chuck. He cleverly doesn't bowl it very often and because he's a quick (and probably because he's from Bangladesh) people don't really see it as a different delivery. Really should be reported.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
^The ****ing state of this post. Honestly.

The rules at the time allowed umpires to call bowlers who they believed chucked.

That was it.

No referrals for testing, no protocols.

That was the law and he applied it as he saw fit.

There was no 15 degree rule to apply at the time Hair called Murali. It was left in the hands of the umpires. So if he'd broken out a protractor and found Murali straightened his arm by 3 degrees he could arguably have called him if it looked to him like he straightened his arm.

You might not like the rule as it was then and the current one may well be better, but you can't expect an official standing in a game in 1995 to apply a standard for dealing with suspect bowling actions which literally didn't exist at the time. You can't bag someone for applying the laws as they were at time.

As I said in reply to Migara yesterday, it was a different story by the time Emerson called him, but when Hair did it he was acting precisely as the rules provided.

[This post was proudly brought to you by the New Guard]
Does a lot of the work here, I think.

And while Hair may well have believed what he did was right, the point that he had pre-determined that he was gonna call is the issue here. You can cry till the cows come home but it wont change that fact.

And nice job on shifting the goalposts again. The point is even if what Hair did was legally permissable and correct at that time, it does not mean Murali actually chucked it.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
It actually does mean that under the rules as they previously were because t was purely up to the umpire's discretion to call a filthy chucker a filthy chucker, and I'm not moving any goal posts.

If he thought the bloke was chucking it he did the right thing in calling him. If he'd gone ahead and called him after the protocols came in, as Emerson did, then that's a very different thing and he would have been wrong to do so.

His job was to apply the laws as they were, and he did it. The man is a hero to cricket and deserves a place in the Hall of Fame.
 

Line and Length

International Captain
Does a lot of the work here, I think.

And while Hair may well have believed what he did was right, the point that he had pre-determined that he was gonna call is the issue here. You can cry till the cows come home but it wont change that fact.

And nice job on shifting the goalposts again. The point is even if what Hair did was legally permissable and correct at that time, it does not mean Murali actually chucked it.
It's easy to claim that Daryl Hair had "pre-determined that he was gonna call" Murali without examining the all the facts.

Firstly, a number of umpires, including Hair, had previously raised concerns about Muralitharan's action with the ICC, with those reports forwarded to the Board of Control for Cricket in Sri Lanka (BCCSL, now Sri Lanka Cricket). Those reports apparently fell on deaf ears.
As Hair said in an interview in 2020, "You try your best to say that it had to stop, or had to change."
The BCCSL must take responsibility for what followed as they failed to act on the reports forwarded by the ICC.

According to the rules of the day and the observations of several umpires, Murali was a 'chucker' and the authorities were failing to act. This left Hair with a dilemma. He said, "You understand it's a drastic step to take but when you feel like nothing is going to change, if six or seven wickets fall and you know those balls were illegal, in my mind I wouldn't have been doing my job."

The subsequent modification of the rules defining a legal delivery, and the testing of Murali may have legitimised his action but, at the time he was 'called', his action was illegal by the letter of the law in place and Hair had no option. To use your quote, " You can cry till the cows come home but it wont change that fact."
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't think that's the case at all tbh. There's ****s still banging on about Lara vs Tendulkar vs Ponting vs Kallis with new threads being made about it and half of those blokes have been retired for a decade or so.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Best ball tamperers were England 05. Easily.

It's not different at all. Discussion is about biggest turners of the cricket ball and the blight on cricket which is chucking, particularly at lower levels where people have worked out they can game the system after watching Murali (and others tbf) at test level. Perfectly acceptable topic of conversation.
 

TheJediBrah

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Best ball tamperers were England 05. Easily.
Without question. Incredibly effective and have managed to get away with it with minimal scrutiny or controversy.

If they were overseen by the Cricket Australia of 2018 the whole team would have been banned for life
 

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
The subsequent modification of the rules defining a legal delivery, and the testing of Murali may have legitimised his action but, at the time he was 'called', his action was illegal by the letter of the law in place and Hair had no option. To use your quote, " You can cry till the cows come home but it wont change that fact."
This is wrong. Hair called on what he saw, but what he saw was an illusion. Even at that point every bowler was extending their elbows more than zero degrees, barring Sarwan. Technically not calling every other bowler by Hair is also wrong judgement. You can argue any way you like, it is not a secret that the worries umpires and players were either Australian, New Zealand or English. Indian, Pakistani, South African or West Indian umpires had no issues with Murali's action. Very simple observation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top