Jermaine Lawson : OMG what a chucker

[knuckles]

Saw some footage of him yesterday. Forget Murali, lee, Akhtar etc - we have a winner. Has there been a more obvious chucker? I have trouble picking the Lee, Murali and Akhtar chucks, but sheesh, Mr Magoo could pick this one.
HTF does a player get to that level, with that action? FFS why wasn't he called??G. Matthews commented that nearly every young cricketer he has seen in in India and WI, chucks. Reign it in boyz. He has been booked by the ICC which for some reason, means he is now open to being called - why not before?I don't see much press on it. I hope that is not another thing being accepted as just "part of the game".


Also these deliveries were lodged as "concerns":The umpires nominated a number of deliveries that were of concern including over 19, ball 2; over 21, balls 2,3, and 6; over 23, ball 4; over 25, ball 4; over 33, ball 5; over 37, ball 1; over 67, balls 2 and 4; and over 71, balls 1 and 2.

Why weren't they no balled?



After he "corrects" his action, will he be put in the too hard draw with Murali?

In the meantime, get a long sleeve shirt Lawson:p

[St-KriS]

So you think Lawson is more of an obvious chucker than Murali? :confused:

I think you could put Lawson on the same sort of level that Lee is on. Only chucks when he goes for extra pace. As soon as he gets that outta of his game, he'll be sweet.

[EagleBlue]

Originally posted by knuckles
Saw some footage of him yesterday. Forget Murali, lee, Akhtar etc - we have a winner. Has there been a more obvious chucker? I have trouble picking the Lee, Murali and Akhtar chucks, but sheesh, Mr Magoo could pick this one.
HTF does a player get to that level, with that action? FFS why wasn't he called??G. Matthews commented that nearly every young cricketer he has seen in in India and WI, chucks. Reign it in boyz. He has been booked by the ICC which for some reason, means he is now open to being called - why not before?I don't see much press on it. I hope that is not another thing being accepted as just "part of the game".


Also these deliveries were lodged as "concerns":The umpires nominated a number of deliveries that were of concern including over 19, ball 2; over 21, balls 2,3, and 6; over 23, ball 4; over 25, ball 4; over 33, ball 5; over 37, ball 1; over 67, balls 2 and 4; and over 71, balls 1 and 2.

Why weren't they no balled?



After he "corrects" his action, will he be put in the too hard draw with Murali?

In the meantime, get a long sleeve shirt Lawson:p

You obviously have not seen Murali bowl. If you had, you would not even mention Lawson as in the same league !!!

[knuckles]

Originally posted by EagleBlue
You obviously have not seen Murali bowl. If you had, you would not even mention Lawson as in the same league !!!
No way EB and SK. The straightening of the arm by JL is as severe as it gets e.g. about the same as when someone throws the ball at the stumps fielding. Don't get me wrong, I'm looking forward to the next WI flame thrower to bring some buzz back to the game, but JL's action is a shocker.

Plus, have a look at the umpire's reports above. Does Murali still get these, or once cleared can you never be charged again i.e. Double Jeopardy?

[Nige_Bix]

Originally posted by knuckles
No way EB and SK. The straightening of the arm by JL is as severe as it gets e.g. about the same as when someone throws the ball at the stumps fielding. ....

.... Plus, have a look at the umpire's reports above. Does Murali still get these, or once cleared can you never be charged again i.e. Double Jeopardy?

Agree on both counts - think Murali has a free go to throw!! - I am trying to convince myself that he is ok after reading and hearing support for him - but just cant do it!!

[Ray Nolan]

Originally posted by dezzmo
Agree on both counts - think Murali has a free go to throw!! - I am trying to convince myself that he is ok after reading and hearing support for him - but just cant do it!!

If you need to convince yourself of Murali's legality go and meet the bloke, try bending his arm past 32 degrees yourself to see that it can't be done and get him to perform the tricks he can do with his wrist. He can touch halfway up his forearm with his fingers just by bending his wrist. It's quite uncanny, his wrist is like rubber, the flexibility of it is amazing.

The only way Murali can move the arm at the elbow is through the double-joint he has where he can dislocate his arm at 32 degrees (it's a bit sick to watch him do it!) I've been into the nets from every angle to watch him bowl close-up (I was able to do this because my school team used to train same night as the Sri Lankan team at the SSC Grounds Nets when I lived in Sri Lanka), and the area where the magic happens is all in the wrist. Bending the arm, which he cannot do, would give him nothing.

The purchase, flight and spin he gets on the ball is due to the party-tricks he performs with his wrist. From certain angles it may look like the elbow is moving but that is an optical illusion, you have to concentrate hard to see that the joint doesn't move. I may be biased because I think he's a superb cricketer, but having seen him play in the flesh from his first test match vs Australia in 92, and before that in club cricket in Sri Lanka I think I've seen enough of him to make my judgment.

As for Lawson, I can't really comment as I haven't seen him as close up and as often as I have seen Murali, but just from the TV pictures he doesn't look any worse than Brett Lee does when he goes for his quickest deliveries.

[Holycrap]

First time l saw Lawson, l thought, 'Hmmmm... he's going to get called!!'
The big difference between Murali and Lawson, Lee and Aktar is that he (Murali) is a spinner and that is why is able to get away with it, natural bent arm or not. But fast bowlers, different story all together.
As for Lawson, a call to the fast bowling doctor in D.K.Lillee should straighten him out. As for his action coming into suspect only when he tries to bowl fast, l watched the whole series he's been in and even Holding as commented about improving his technique and that is where his problem is, technique.

[Nige_Bix]

Its not just his faster shorter ball that looks sus - its all of them - I couldn't help but notice it the other night - it was the 1st time I actually sat and watched him bowl -and it was before the media follow up.

He is way more obvious than Lee and Akhtar - which is sad because it will be good for crickwet if the windoes can produce another great fast bowler. They seem to have found a few batsmen.