Murali returns fire

[viktor]

One thing I am hoping (and I'm sure many Aussies out there are as well) is that we can all somehow work out some way to prove that Murali is worse than everybody else - and empirical evidence be damned.

The recent research has made this really hard, with the conclusion that everybody else is violating the tolerance levels too, but for me, it's impossible to believe these brown people (particularly a RACIST like Murali, who dares to make incendiary comments about decent, hardworking white bowlers) aren't trying to cheat our wonderful imperial game somehow.

Ignoring the messages from the report and fabricating "subcontinent hit-list" articles are OK for now, but something more long-term is needed, like maybe legislation to ban players with physical deformities from the game. All this stuff about McGrath and Pollock etc breaking the very same rules is nothing when you consider the fact that Murali is a CHEAT.

could a BROWN TRAITOR be made a part of this wonderful plan??

 

[C_C]

It's sarcasm - read the post with that in mind.

(Although it says something about the level of debate in this thread that somebody actually COULD take it seriously.)

apologies.
In my defence, all i gotto say is that given the viewpoint and reasoning ability of some in this thread, that above post wouldnt have suprised me if it was meant seriously.

 

[Slow Love™]

apologies.
In my defence, all i gotto say is that given the viewpoint and reasoning ability of some in this thread, that above post wouldnt have suprised me if it was meant seriously.

No problem - I guess that pretty much says it all really.

 

[Slow Love™]

could a BROWN TRAITOR be made a part of this wonderful plan??

NO!

Wait... YES! Your contribution can help to immunize us against accusations of racism from other subcontinentals and politically correct wimps that want to whine about our motives. But when our plan comes to fruition, you'll have to go back to your own country, I'm sorry.

 

[Warne is god]

Murali was tested in Perth and was found to be bowling at 3 times the legal limit. Keep in mind this was while bowling at 30 kms/h slower than he does in games. If Pidgeon was bowling at 28 degrees flexibility there'd be a bloody worldwide uproar. Why? Because he was bowling at THREE TIMES THE LIMIT. Murali has been 1-3 degrees over in the past and wasn't banned, but was told to revise his action. That I am ok with, wasn't a massive violation so was told to take care of it. The doosra is 3 times the fu**in limit. Surely that warrants a ban.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

My second contribution to this thread, after unwittingly lighting the proverbial touch-paper.....

McGrath has never been called for chucking throughout his Test career.

Murali has.

I am inclined to trust the umpire's word over a biomechanic who has never played the game at a high level.

After all, that's why we keep them, right?

 

[marc71178]

Gotta take a low blow at the Aussies

No, I do not.

But the fact is that the only ones going on about it so much are the Aussies.

 

[marc71178]

Murali was tested in Perth and was found to be bowling at 3 times the legal limit. Keep in mind this was while bowling at 30 kms/h slower than he does in games.

And you have proof that he was bowling at 30 kph slower do you, or is this more things being fabricated?

The doosra is 3 times the fu**in limit. Surely that warrants a ban.

When it was 3 times the limit it was banned, but the limit has now changed and this ball is within the limit - hence it is not banned. Is it that hard to understand?

 

[marc71178]

I am inclined to trust the umpire's word over a biomechanic who has never played the game at a high level.

I'm inclined to trust the super super slow motion cameras that can concentrate on a bowler's action in much more detail than the naked eye.

Murali was called because his deformity provided an optical illusion - no other reason.

 

[Slow Love™]

My second contribution to this thread, after unwittingly lighting the proverbial touch-paper.....

McGrath has never been called for chucking throughout his Test career.

Murali has.

I am inclined to trust the umpire's word over a biomechanic who has never played the game at a high level.

After all, that's why we keep them, right?

Well, that and adjudicating every other aspect of the game.

But, IMO, this argument is flawed. It'd be simpler (and maybe have more weight) if all umpires were unanimous on this subject, but they aren't. So we end up with two umpires' opinion against, well, everybody else that umpired games that Murali bowled in. Now, I'd still be willing to go with this if I thought they were vastly superior judges, or more demonstrably vigilant, and that's all we had to go on. But if the science can provide a more accurate picture of the degree of straightening (this being the crucial issue), I can't see why we wouldn't use it.

 

[Scallywag]

No, I do not.

But the fact is that the only ones going on about it so much are the Aussies.

Yeah right marc you just keep on going on about the aussies, and whatever they dont say you will say for them so you can say they go on about it all the time.

Grow up.

 

[Son Of Coco]

No, I do not.

But the fact is that the only ones going on about it so much are the Aussies.

on here? yes i'd agree with you. In the International cricketing community? I think many more people than just the Aussies have had something to say about it.

 

[Scallywag]

on here? yes i'd agree with you. In the International cricketing community? I think many more people than just the Aussies have had something to say about it.

Marc thinks this is the international cricketing comunity.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Well, that and adjudicating every other aspect of the game.

But, IMO, this argument is flawed. It'd be simpler (and maybe have more weight) if all umpires were unanimous on this subject, but they aren't. So we end up with two umpires' opinion against, well, everybody else that umpired games that Murali bowled in. Now, I'd still be willing to go with this if I thought they were vastly superior judges, or more demonstrably vigilant, and that's all we had to go on. But if the science can provide a more accurate picture of the degree of straightening (this being the crucial issue), I can't see why we wouldn't use it.

I suppose I'm inclined to agree.

But veering off track here, then why are Hawkeye and the snickometer lying unused when such apparently shocking decisions marred the Border-Gavaskar Trophy?

Shouldn't umpires embrace technology fully, or simply not at all?

 

[Slow Love™]

I suppose I'm inclined to agree.

But veering off track here, then why are Hawkeye and the snickometer lying unused when such apparently shocking decisions marred the Border-Gavaskar Trophy?

Shouldn't umpires embrace technology fully, or simply not at all?

I'm not absolutely certain about Hawkeye's accuracy, but I'm heavily in favor of snickometer being used, as well as third-umpire replays for close bat-pad calls.

 

[SJS]

I'm not absolutely certain about Hawkeye's accuracy, but I'm heavily in favor of snickometer being used, as well as third-umpire replays for close bat-pad calls.

I fully agree. I think snickometer MUST be introduced and the hawkeye can be used to check whether the ball pitched in line with the stumps or outside of it. Rest is dicey for present, particularly the height when it passes the stumps.

 

[age_master]

Murali was called because his deformity provided an optical illusion - no other reason.

but apparently he can straighten his arm now... i remember them talking about it when he was using a brace of some sort......

 

[honestbharani]

Im not saying the ICC analysis is wrong and I am of Indian Origin and I am Indian Born so I don't believe any race is 'some super-race of Hercules-Einstien-Julius Caesar fusion.'

He may be cleared by scientific backing, the ICC analysis is probably right, but he shouldn't say what he said to guys like McGrath and Gillespie especially after the amount of crap he's had to put up with.

It was an unwise tactical move in sledging two of the best fast bowlers in the world, and this whole episode is turning into a farce. I do know that Murali is turning into the bad guy and isn't gaining many people's sympathy in World Cricket.

Murali could've chosen his words more wisely or just stayed out of it. But instead he decides to stir the crap even more and even deeper.

He only said that they are bending their arms to similar degrees. He did not even use the word 'chucking' when mentioning them. And until now, not even McGrath and Gillespie have said that they don't bend their elbow to that extent. So why are you guys getting so angry? Plus, it was just shocking for me to read people saying stuff like Murali should be attacked and stuff. Dudes, if you all think he has a bad bowling action, then the maximum you should want should be for him to stop playing cricket. All this stuff about violence is just sick, guys. He is not Bin Laden.

 

[garage flower]

some of the aussie players certainly have been whiners without class etc, but after years of complaining about how they've treated him unfairly, hasnt he just shown that he has just about as much class as those aussies?
if murali were infact the dignified humble player that people make him out to be, he wouldnt really have singled out any player, let alone 3 aussies.

I'm not sure that many people are holding Murali up as an exemplar of dignity and humility.

As far as I can tell he's made some fairly innocuous comments on the issue. He was speaking to an Australian media organisation and so naturally used existing Aussie bowlers as examples of others who are apparently exceeding the tolerance levels.

He would perhaps have been better advised to keep it general and not mention individual bowlers, but I think we're talking mountains and molehills here.

 

[honestbharani]

What I fail to understand is that why Murali had to specifically name McGrath, Gillespie and Lee. ICC has proved that 99% of the bowlers chuck, then why in the blue hell should Murali only mention the three he did. Those three never commented on Murali, if I'm not wrong. Just because the Prime Minister of the country they hail from made a comment doesn't mean Murali has to be a kid about it, and lash at anyone he wishes...

You know, Sudeep, I read his exact quoted comments and he was not lashing at anyone other than those who were crying out that Murali is a chuck? He simply asked them "what about McGrath, Gillespie and Lee who all go over 12 degrees of flexion?" He has even clarified now that he never even called them chuckers. Perhaps, he was over-reacting but that is as far as he can be called. Some of the names that he was called in this thread is just sick.