Murali Reported

[Port01]

Funny, I only took a passing interest in the SriLanka-England series and there was quite a bit about chucking in what I read, from the Barmy army chants to the Hussain thing. Before that it was Bishen Bedi calling him a thief etc. Yet its only australians that have a problem apparently.

 

[Ray Nolan]

Originally posted by Cooldude
There you go again, it's all Australia's fault. It's an Australian conspiracy, it's the Australian media, it's the Australian umpires, it's because we're black and they're white. Don't you know that the English media raved as much as the Australians did about the illegality of Murali's new delivery? Didn't you realise Chris Bond is an ENGLISH?

The amount of crap you Sri Lankans spit out about Murali's action is just laughable, you blokes think everyone's against you coz you're black and we're racist, in fact, Sri Lankans are the most racist of all of them. We don't refer to Sri Lankans or Indians or Pakistanis as BLACK people, we never care about the skin colour, but most of you Asians do.

The only sad and pathetic thing to come out of it is that Murali will break the world record while having his action questioned. You are totally out of your mind if you think the Doosra is legal and will be cleared, he won't be. The Doosra is as blatant a throw as a slider thrown by a baseball pitcher.

Murali's been given enough leeway for 8 years with his action, he decided he's gonna cross the line by producing an illegal delivery, he brought it upon himself. As of you Sri Lankans, get a grip

Buddy, we have discussed this at length and yet you're such a lard 'ead that basic facts escape you yet again. First of all of course I am aware Chris Broad is English, a very good opening bat in late 80's for England. Made a century in the Bicentenary Test if I recall correctly. I merely stated that he was a stooge not that he was Australian, or are you too mentally undeveloped to understand the meaning of that term? As for the English media, I read it every day and I can recall 1, maybe 2 articles about Murali's action & most of that centered around the Hussien incident. There was some chanting from the Barmy Army but Brett Lee got the same if not worse treatment.

Second, how many times must I tell you I AM NOT A SRI LANKAN? I am as white as can be mate (of English background BTW), I have red hair and freckles to boot! So all this crap about racism and whatever is just ridiculous, you have the attention span of a gnat because you keep trotting it out. I've been through this a million times before you numpty, for f*cks sake how can you be such a f*ckin' dim wit time and again? Others seem to pick it up but seeing as you're as thick as pig sh*t it still needs to be explained for you obviously. Race has nothing to do with it, I've never suggested it does. I have suggested that this issue is only beaten up by one country - Australia. I know it might be hard to remember something for more than a second but do have a go this time eh!

 

[Cooldude]

Originally posted by Ray Nolan
It may have escaped your attention but I'm a fan of the Sri Lankan team (& England's for that matter) I followed the 2003 series very closely yet I can't recall any issue being made about Murali's action except for a sledge about chucking that Nasser Hussein made at Murali, by his own admission, to merely try and put him off his game. I don't recall the same level of histrionics from the English press & the English fans during that series as well in relation to chucking. What I do recall was an excellent hard fought series between both sides where the action of Murali was a virtual non-issue. As for never watching the game, well mate, I've seen Murali play in the flesh since before he was a Test Cricketer. I've seen him bowl in a variety of conditions (nets, matches, etc) over a period of some 12 years, far more than anyone else on here I expect. My opinion is that he is not a chucker. I believe he bowls with an arm bent at 32 degrees that does not and cannot straighten from that angle. The advantage that Murali has is the amazing flexibility of his wrist (the true secret behind the doosra if you take the time to have a look) and this allows him to turn the ball like he does. I don't think players should try to copy his action because Murali can only bowl like he does that due to his medical circumstances. It is an action that cannot be replicated by 'normal' people. Until I see any clear & incontrovertable evidence to contrary I will stand by my contention that he is legal.

Same old crap again, I met Wayne Carey before too, pretty damn nice bloke, but he did his teammates wife?

Murali's deformity is no longer an excuse, it is clear that he bents his arm far more than that 32 degree deformity for some of his deliveries. The optical illusion theory is about as solid as the Berlin Wall. They didn't have sufficent evidence to prove whether he straightens his arm or not, that's why he was cleared.

You are defending Murali on blind faith alone, just because you know the bloke doesn't mean he doesn't chuck, no Sri Lankan supporters think he chucks, it's as simple as that. Your opinion is unreliable and your evidence laughable.

I'll put my head, my house, and my mum on the table that if a full invesitgation into Murali's action by match footage, you'll find that he chucks quite a few of his deliveries and that includes the off spinner.

 

[Demonheart]

Originally posted by Ray Nolan
Why did it take that long? One reason, they weren't playing Australia. No other country has an issue with Murali's action, only Australia does. The histrionics about this only started again when Robert Craddock et al in the Australian Press, I expect with the backing of Cricket Australia, beat it up for the millionth time. Cricket Australia have found their stooge in Chris Broad and they've p*ssed on Murali's parade now that he will beat Warne to the record. They've got what they wanted and it all comes across as a bit sad and pathetic really. At the end of the day his action will be cleared, will be ruled legal and he will go on to take more wickets. There is very little doubt about that, Australia can carry on all it likes but on this issue they will find beggar all support in the rest of the Cricket world. Frankly, I am more interested in awaiting the investigation into Brett Lee chucking his quicker ball, but I'm not going to hold my breath on that score given the double standards that seem to exist when it comes to Australian players and chucking ...

As Port01 stated, ask Bedi what he thinks of his action. His action will be cleared becuase the ICC are scared ****less about losing the subcontinent and their $$$. He is not the first bowler to chuck and he won't be the last.

From memory didn't Lee had to change his action

 

[Cooldude]

Originally posted by Ray Nolan
Buddy, we have discussed this at length and yet you're such a lard 'ead that basic facts escape you yet again. First of all of course I am aware Chris Broad is English, a very good opening bat in late 80's for England. Made a century in the Bicentenary Test if I recall correctly. I merely stated that he was a stooge not that he was Australian, or are you too mentally undeveloped to understand the meaning of that term? As for the English media, I read it every day and I can recall 1, maybe 2 articles about Murali's action & most of that centered around the Hussien incident. There was some chanting from the Barmy Army but Brett Lee got the same if not worse treatment.

I didn't even bother to respond to your stooge theory, what you said was just as childish and as stupid a crap as anyone would ever say and it wasn't worth responding to. icket Australia have found their stooge in Chris Broad and they've p*ssed on Murali's parade now that he will beat Warne to the record. HAHAHA, you are priceless, mate, your stupid Australian conspiracy theory. Wake up to reality, buddy.

Second, as of Murali squealing to the match referee about Hussain allegedly calling him a ****ing chucker and a ****ing cheat, Hussain was not charged because there wasn't evidence, so there you go.

Third of all, it's only Langer who spilled his beans on the Barmy Army on calling Brett Lee a chucker, frankly I agree with the Barmy Army.

Originally posted by Ray Nolan

Second, how many times must I tell you I AM NOT A SRI LANKAN? I am as white as can be mate (of English background BTW), I have red hair and freckles to boot! So all this crap about racism and whatever is just ridiculous, you have the attention span of a gnat because you keep trotting it out. I've been through this a million times before you numpty, for f*cks sake how can you be such a f*ckin' dim wit time and again? Others seem to pick it up but seeing as you're as thick as pig sh*t it still needs to be explained for you obviously. Race has nothing to do with it, I've never suggested it does. I have suggested that this issue is only beaten up by one country - Australia. I know it might be hard to remember something for more than a second but do have a go this time eh!

Sri Lankan, Sri Lankan supporter, it's around the same thing.

Yes, Sri Lankans don't go out and say Whites persecute them, when that's exactly the same thing they're saying about Murali being reported.

Australia wants to fix up the chuckers, so what's wrong with that? We're the only one with enough guts to actually front up to the problem, how many chuckers have Australia produced for the last 10 years, 1, that's Brett Lee. How many did Sri Lanka produce? So many that I can't count with both hands.

Your intelligence is laughable when you think Australians are the troublemakers, when there wouldn't be any problem if there ain't no chuckers around. Murali brought it upon himself.

 

[Minkus_Swan]

I have a question for people.

What's the difference between clearing Murali and then not letting youngsters bowl with the same action? Apart from discouraging the action itself.

If Murali is cleared, does that means it's a legal action - therefore any bowler that has a similar benefits like Murali should technically be allowed to bowl with the same action?

 

[Ray Nolan]

Originally posted by Cooldude
Sri Lankan, Sri Lankan supporter, it's around the same thing.

Australia wants to fix up the chuckers, so what's wrong with that? We're the only one with enough guts to actually front up to the problem, how many chuckers have Australia produced for the last 10 years, 1, that's Brett Lee. How many did Sri Lanka produce? So many that I can't count with both hands.

Sri Lankan & Sri Lankan supporter is around the same thing? OK mate, just try and strain that brain cell of yours a bit and just try to think a little harder about what you said there. A bit nonsensical innit, even more so considering that I don't hold Sri Lankan citizenship, or a Sri Lankan passport, I have no Sinhala or Tamil blood in me, I don't speak either of those languages as well. Yeah mate, they're the same thing.

I agree that guys who do chuck should be sorted out, I just don't believe that Murali chucks and I've seen nothing to convince me otherwise. That's not to say Sri Lanka hasn't produced a chucker. How Jayananda Warnaweera ever played Test Cricket is beyond me. His action was atrocious and was the most blatant chucker I have ever seen. I think he got lost on his way to the Pitchers Mound and found himself on the Cricket Pitch instead!

The Indian spinner Rajesh Chauhan was another whose action was a shocker as well and he was never dealt with properly. You keep thinking I'm defending Murali because he's a Sri Lankan, that's just not the case. It is my opinion based on the evidence I have seen that he does not throw the ball. If Murali played for Bangladesh I'd have the same view.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Originally posted by Ray Nolan
My opinion is that he is not a chucker. I believe he bowls with an arm bent at 32 degrees that does not and cannot straighten from that angle. The advantage that Murali has is the amazing flexibility of his wrist (the true secret behind the doosra if you take the time to have a look) and this allows him to turn the ball like he does.

Finally, someone else who hasn't jumped the gun. Murali has a double jointed wrist, which allows him to impart freakish amounts of spin. He would be just as dangerous whether his arm was bent or straight, because it is not the arm that contributes to the doosa, big spinning off break or any other delivery he bowls.

 

[Cooldude]

Originally posted by Ray Nolan
Sri Lankan & Sri Lankan supporter is around the same thing? OK mate, just try and strain that brain cell of yours a bit and just try to think a little harder about what you said there. A bit nonsensical innit, even more so considering that I don't hold Sri Lankan citizenship, or a Sri Lankan passport, I have no Sinhala or Tamil blood in me, I don't speak either of those languages as well. Yeah mate, they're the same thing.

You have completely missed my point, I was saying they have the same attitude towards Murali's action: They think it's either Australians or Whites perscuating them. Your brain cells don't seem that flash either

Originally posted by Ray Nolan

I agree that guys who do chuck should be sorted out,

Okay, good...

Originally posted by Ray Nolan

I just don't believe that Murali chucks and I've seen nothing to convince me otherwise. That's not to say Sri Lanka hasn't produced a chucker. How Jayananda Warnaweera ever played Test Cricket is beyond me.

Richie Perera? The blatant chucker of a quickie? Dharmesea? I probably can produce a few more names if I remember them but I can't.

If you don't believe Murali chucks, you should take off whatever glasses you're wearing and watch more TV of him bowling, you can't tell me that everyone of his deliveries look normal.

Originally posted by Ray Nolan

The Indian spinner Rajesh Chauhan was another whose action was a shocker as well and he was never dealt with properly. You keep thinking I'm defending Murali because he's a Sri Lankan, that's just not the case. It is my opinion based on the evidence I have seen that he does not throw the ball. If Murali played for Bangladesh I'd have the same view.

Bangladesh already has a chucker, so they don't need Murali

Harbhajan's doosra is also the same as Murali's, he chucks it, no one takes notice coz Harbhajan wears long sleeve shirt and you can't see it.

You're defending Murali because you know him personally, if my brother's accused of murder, of course I'd stuck by him as well, even if he really did kill somebody.

All the evidence I myself have seen has shown that Murali throws the ball, and there's nothing that can suggest otherwise either.

 

[The Spornstar]

Originally posted by Ray Nolan
Why did it take that long? One reason, they weren't playing Australia. No other country has an issue with Murali's action, only Australia does. The histrionics about this only started again when Robert Craddock et al in the Australian Press, I expect with the backing of Cricket Australia, beat it up for the millionth time. Cricket Australia have found their stooge in Chris Broad

So you really think Chris Broad has done all this and put his reputation on the line just to please Cricket Australia (even though he's English)?

 

[scmods]

Originally posted by The Spornstar
So you really think Chris Broad has done all this and put his reputation on the line just to please Cricket Australia (even though he's English)?

Of course, that's why Langer knocked the bails off the other day - to provide a cover story for his secret meeting with Broad where he passed on CA's secret instructions.

 

[Zyban]

Ray you're a dip***** please shut up.

Truth be told most in the world think he chucks...it's you and a few Lankans that find hard to swollow, tell me something Ray, why does it have to be a conspiracy..? what do people like me have to gain from apparently in your opinion knowing he does not chuck yet declaring he does....why the **** would i say it if i did not beleive it Ray, why would a lot say it if they did not beleive it ray, and if the wrist does all the work then why does his arm bend more while bowling the Doosra Ray....watch the ****ing footage peanut it's as clear as the nose on your face.

 

[luthor]

Murali has more chucks than a bulimic at a banquet.

Dead set Ray Nolan, you are blind.

Congenital defect eh?

Can't straighten his arm eh?, poor chap.

Ray, have a GOOD look at a slo-mo of your hero chucking (sorry "bowling")

If his arm doesn't straighten at the moment of delivery, then I'm not here.

Get a STILL frame of his arm AT THE POINT OF DELIVERY ....RAY....and tell me it's not straight, or pretty close to it......having been straightened from this 32 degree angle, or whatever it is.

Quite an effort for a poor chappie with a congenital defect.

Wake up Ray....it's got nothing to do with conspiracies or racism or Aussie plots or Warnie-phobia or jealousy or surpressing Sri-Lankan cricket.

It's got everything to do with the fact that Murali is a chucker.

 

[luthor]

And now I have a question for you Ray.

Bishen Bedi, one of the most respected proponents of the art of off-spin bowling that has ever graced a cricket field, has described Murali as a "disgrace to the art" and a "thief",

So what's your take on Bedi?

Another Aussie stooge?....like Chris Broad.?

If so we now have an English and an Indain stooge running around doing the bidding of the evil Aussies.

Gee, that conspiracy just keeps growing , don't it?

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by luthor
And now I have a question for you Ray.

Bishen Bedi, one of the most respected proponents of the art of off-spin bowling that has ever graced a cricket field, has described Murali as a "disgrace to the art" and a "thief",

So what's your take on Bedi?

Another Aussie stooge?....like Chris Broad.?

If so we now have an English and an Indain stooge running around doing the bidding of the evil Aussies.

Gee, that conspiracy just keeps growing , don't it?

Thats about the crux of it. Is there any possible reason for Chris Broad to be a stooge for Australia as you seem to think Ray?! Any reason for Bedi??

Put simply, some of Murali deliveries are not legal. 5 minutes with a rulebook and a VCR will convince any unbiased individual of that fact.

He's a cheat, plain and simple, and no matter how many wickets he takes, he will remain so in the eyes of anyone who knows anything about cricket.

 

[pav_is_god]

So what? He's been reported for an obviously dodgey action, doesn't mean anything is gonna change. I can't really see the ICC risking a Sri Lankan revolt and being called racists because they banned his 'doorsa'. Ain't gonna happen, he'll be cleared.

 

[Cooldude]

Murali's been bowling the doosra for 5 years


That's even more of a worry, he's been bowling an illegal delivery for 5 years and it took it THAT LONG for him to be reported and investigated.

 

[EssJayW]

Originally posted by scottywiper
Although on further investigation it seems the doing of something will actually not lead to anything being done any time soon

....and when that is finished, nothing will be done.

 

[Ray Nolan]

I think a lot of good points are raised in this article, most of which I'd agree with. Perhaps it is indeed time for a total rethink to try and sort this issue out once & for all.

From the Crincinfo website:

http://aus.cricinfo.com/link_to_dat...NEWS/2004/FEB/076229_COL-WORLD_24FEB2004.html

Wanted: a radical rethink on suspect bowling actions

Kamran Abbasi

February 24, 2004

Whisper it softly, but cricket is on the verge of destruction. Fifth-columnists are bringing the game to its knees, distorting records, and cheating the public. We — the faithful — must react by any means necessary to rid our sport of this cancer. Indeed, we must over-react —because that is what the sages and the administrators want us to do. We must, we are being told, reclaim our game from the filthy ravage of chuckers and throwers, cheats and necromancers, who are as bent as their elbows.

Bobby Simpson — neatly before Australia's trial by Murali — demands action, as does the ICC with statements and a reconnaissance unit at the Under-19 World Cup. With Bishan Bedi singing his favourite tune as well, you might think that cricket's edifice is about to be destroyed. Excuse me for dissenting, but this criminalisation of bowlers is starting to grate. This is a witch-hunt that Joe McCarthy, the zealous American anti-Communist senator of the 1950s, would have been proud of. It is one that I would suggest is just as abominable.

ICC's stance on throwing is flawed for four central reasons. The first is familiar to epidemiologists and statisticians: increase monitoring, screening, and awareness of any particular condition, and the rate of detection will inevitably rise. More people have a diagnosis of cancer now because we have more comprehensive and sophisticated methods of detection. More children are diagnosed with autism because doctors are more aware of the diagnosis. Throwing is no different. Our apparent modern-day epidemic is more to do with what can be detected by super slo-mo and square-on cameras than with a genuine increase in bowlers with bent arms. Why should today's cricketers be penalised for playing the game exactly as it has always been played?

Next there is the issue of defining normality. Shoaib Akhtar and Muttiah Muralitharan are perhaps the two most exciting and destructive bowlers on the planet. Yet both are abnormal by some definitions — Shoaib with hyper-extensible joints and wide carry angle (elbow) that place him outside the letter of the law but within the spirit of it, and Murali with a fixed-flexion elbow deformity that means he is not an outlaw technically speaking, but just an unusual human being. Yet both are easy targets for cricketers past and present who are blissfully ignorant of the rules of the game they claim to have mastered. Nonetheless the trauma of the bowlers' experiences reveals that the rules are ill-designed to cope with natural human variation. It's also abnormal to have the wrist power of VVS Laxman or the height of Joel Garner, but no-one suggested banning them.

ICC's process is also too complex: too many stages, too many mechanisms for review, too many doubts as to who is supposed to be doing what. Also there are issues of conflicts of interest. A cricket board pays an academic institution — like the University of Western Australia — to provide a report on its tarnished bowler and advise on how to legitimise his action. In effect, the board is paying for a judgment. I have no reason to doubt the University of WA: indeed, it is a highly esteemed institution. But you can see how the system could be distorted, certainly if you believe that he who pays the piper calls the tune.

The fourth flaw is one of perception, but it is the most damaging. The single most powerful reason why ICC's current process is devoid of credibility is because it is perceived to be an issue of race. In recent years, too many Asian cricketers have had the legitimacy of their actions questioned by white players and officials. The point of this is not to say that their judgment is flawed — although I believe at times it might have been — but the point is that there is a strong perception that race is a factor. Unfortunately, the current process is tainted because it is seen as an issue of race. This impression is unlikely to change.

What to do? How do we take colour out of the equation? Certainly, this can never be achieved with the current laws and the current process. A tweak here or there will not work either. Cricket's players and lawmakers need to get together and rethink the whole throwing issue. Is it cost-effective — or even desirable — to be poring over people's actions in minute detail? Look hard enough and all of us are flawed, all of us are criminals. A more reasonable question might be what degree of straightening at the elbow is acceptable, or even inevitable? An academic institution could be commissioned to help answer this question and inform the debate with evidence.

Secondly, do the laws properly consider that there are as many definitions of normality as there are human beings? Cricket should be inclusive not discriminate on the basis of anatomy or physiology. Ironically, the current law is simple, but too ill-defined. It allows too much scope for arguing over minutiae. A new law with greater definition would remove many of the subjective analyses that spawn accusations of racial bias.

A final requirement would be a streamlined review process, independently administered by ICC. Answering these questions will address the real crisis, which is not one of a modern game devalued by cheats but of a law that has failed to keep up with our understanding of the human body and a process that overcomplicates decision-making.

George Orwell wrote: "Sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealousy, boastfulness, and disregard of the rules." For most of the last century, in contrast, cricket was deemed to be the finest example of fair play and complete regard for rules. Bodyline and Apartheid were mere aberrations in a grand history of a game run by chaps with stiff upper lips and played by men who wouldn't dare rub their balls the wrong way.

But a hidden history unravelled in the 1990s — a murky world of match-fixing and ball-tampering, and a game divided by politics and issues of race. Cricket in this new century is a naked game, its sins laid bare, its prejudices seeping from every controversy, but there is somehow more honesty about a game that is prepared to face up to its Orwellian weaknesses instead of attempting to suppress its followers with doublethink. The throwing issue remains fuelled by unspoken prejudices and inexcusable ignorance. It is time for a radical rethink.

Kamran Abbasi is a cricket writer and deputy editor of the British Medical Journal.

© Wisden Cricinfo Ltd

 

[dr nick]

You just don't seem to get the fact, and neither does that so called journo (that article has more holes in it than a CIA weapons of mass destruction intelligence report) that his body abnormality has nothing to do with the issue of whether he straightens his arm or not.

And i think the only racist ones are the people who are pointing out that white people are accusing murali, whilst they themselves remain blinded (intentionally so) to the evidence.

this might help answer the claim by some that he bowls with his arm at full extension.

 

[CatManDo]

The difference in angle there nicko is clear to the eye, however the issue is whether he straightens it or not during the delivery, which that pic doesnt show. Someone posted some sequences a while back though which were pretty damning.

 

[dr nick]

Originally posted by CatManDo
The difference in angle there nicko is clear to the eye, however the issue is whether he straightens it or not during the delivery, which that pic doesnt show. Someone posted some sequences a while back though which were pretty damning.

that was me, but another thing Ray seems to think is that Murali is bowling with his arm at full extension. I could go on and on about the flaws in that article but i havent the time.

for those photos, look up the 6th page of this thread.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showt...136&perpage=15&highlight=chucker&pagenumber=6

More damning is the front on view in the super slow-mo that they have on the foxtel broadcasts.

Anyway, the article makes mention that it is only the increase in technology that is revealing his suspect action (i argue that it is the doubts and illusion theories which the cameras create that keep him in, 50 years ago the Hair incident would have been the end of it), but even if the technology allows us to better adjudicate the game, is that a bad thing? more people are getting run out these days too, and people are getting pinged by the video review panel in the footy which didnt happen 10 years ago.

 

[Ray Nolan]

Another interesting piece from a gentleman with vast experience in the fields of Cricket & Biomechanics.

No simple answers to chucking

Frank Tyson

March 28, 2004

The piece below appeared in the August 2003 issue of Wisden Asia Cricket.

Does Muralitharan throw, or not? That is the question that, in recent years, has thrown what promises to be the greatest Test bowling career ever into a spin. The throwing issue has repeatedly raised its head through the history of the game. In the early 1800s, John Willes was condemned for raising his bowling arm to shoulder level – the legacy of imitating his sister who was compelled to do so because she couldn't bowl underarm due to her voluminous crinoline skirt! Since that time, men such as Andrew Crossland, Arthur Mold, Gilbert Jessop, Ian Meckiff, Gordon Rorke, Geoff Griffin, Harold Rhodes, Tony Lock, Shoaib Akhtar and Murali have bowled – and been no-balled.

With today's game having assumed multinational proportions, the Murali issue has become an emotive controversy, coloured by Sri Lankan nationalistic support on one hand and purely subjective analysis on the other. This is to be expected. The Aussies were behind Meckiff in his day, almost to a man; nowadays one would have to go far to find a Pakistani who is not a Shoaib supporter. But woolly support must give way to the biomechanical logic: "The best use of flexibility is to start from bent positions in preliminary movements and move to straight positions at release."

This surprising scientific fact seems to suggest that many bowlers who have performed effectively in the past must have delivered with arms which, to some degree, moved from the bent to the straight - and their actions were never questioned. Films taken in the 1930s of my hero, England fast bowler Harold Larwood, clearly show some straightening of the bowling arm. A fellow Australian coach and tertiary lecturer in Human Movement, Brian Nettleton, backed up this theory by opining that spin bowlers could be differentiated by the way in which they bent their arms before delivery: offspinners pointing their elbows of their bowling arms down and leggies bending their elbows upwards.

Having postulated that perhaps most bowlers bend their bowling arm to some degree, and that perhaps Murali is not out of the ordinary in this respect, the question remains: where does he get his phenomenal turn from? The other day, at a Level 2 seminar for coaches in Bangalore, the participants were seeking to discover how Saqlain Mushtaq bowled his legspinner with an offspinner action. One of the participants claimed that he could demonstrate that it was due to exceptional wrist flexibility, which he, too, possessed. He was then able to demonstrate this remarkable malleability of the joint, spinning the ball towards second slip with an offspinner's action. It is this same suppleness which allows Aussie medium-pacer Ian Harvey to deliver a slower ball by imparting back-spin with the back of the hand pointing down the pitch towards the batsman. Murali appears to be even more flexible and able to spin the ball from 270 different degrees.

Some, seeking to emphasise the suspicion surrounding Murali's action, attribute his exceptional and unusual spinning powers to his very open action. But such an action is shared by many others, who haven't raised any eyebrows among the ranks of the doubters. Bishan Bedi suggests that Murali's lack of follow-through makes him comparable to a javelin thrower, who simply stands there and lets fly. But a javelin thrower has quite a long, fast run-up and would follow through if the laws of his sport permitted him out of the throwing circle. No. Murali's lack of follow-through is merely because he is moving very slowly at the point of delivery. Were the follow-through totally absent, his length would vary immensely, since he would have to gauge the exact amount of force he would need to impart to each ball – a difficult enough task even with a short follow-through. This would be reflected in his economy-rate.

Many bowlers on being accused of having suspect actions respond that it is due to a physical handicap that prevents the straightening of the bowling arm. This has been cited in the case of Rhodes, who bowled with his arm in a sling to silence critics; also Meckiff, and now Shoaib and Murali. I can personally vouch that Brian Statham was double-jointed in the elbow of his bowling arm, which hyper-extended beyond the 180-degree mark and technically caused him to straighten his arm while delivering the ball, albeit very early in his action.

The Human Movement Departments of the universities of Hong Kong and Western Australia have produced hard scientific evidence that Murali suffers from a disability that prevents him from straightening his bowling arm, and have cleared him of deliberate contravention of the no-ball law. This evaluation is in direct conflict with the subjective opinions of at least two Australian umpires, and a host of ostensibly good judges of the game. But when one has to decide between scientific fact and emotive assessment in resolving a problem, who does one believe?

We now have to decide whether the 'chucking' law is enforceable. Biomechanics suggest that it is not and that most bowlers contravene it, albeit minimally. The law is in need of revision since there is no doubt that the 'bent-elbow brigade' enjoys the advantages of more spin and cut, greater impact off the pitch, and indeterminate release points (given that not every ball is "thrown"). Perhaps, therefore, we should be reframing the law to condemn those bowlers who bend the elbow more than a certain amount – say, 10, 20 or 30 degrees.

As for Murali, he is still a young man, and with the opportunities which must come his way in a Test field of increasing numbers and diminishing standards, it seems likely that, barring injury, he will surpass Courtney Walsh's tally of 519 wickets. I don't think he will be carried away by the achievement. After all, how many wickets would Lance Gibbs and Fred Trueman have taken, given the same opportunities?

Frank Tyson, a former England fast bowler, is a leading authority on biomechanics.

© Wisden Cricinfo Ltd

 

[Cooldude]

Frank Tyson is a tool to think that the game should give 10-20-30 degrees of tolerance.

Then it wouldn't be bowling

We are talking about the principles and integrity of the game here, just because one or two blokes have deformity that don't allow them to follow within the rules of the game, does not mean the laws have to be changed to accommadate them which in turn gives millions other bowlers that does not have deformity an undisputed advantage by allowing to straighten their arms.

There are bowlers that DO have a straightening of the arm regardless, but does that mean we have to put it in the rule book and say just coz a few does it, we'll allow everyone else to do it?

What about those who bowls legally and does not straighten their arm at all, Shane Bond has a totally legal action, his arm is totally straight, he bowls at 150 kph LEGITIMATELY, while Brett Lee and Shoaib Ahktar forms excuses of their hyperextended joints or deformity in their arms, so they're allowed to chuck to their heart's content in matches? How is that fair?

No one should be allowed to bowl with bent arms, straighten it up or else, that should be the new law. If everyone's arm is straight then they can't possibly chuck.

 

[JUBJUB]

Didn't Murali say he'd never come to Australia again ?
Well he's coming

http://uk.sports.yahoo.com/040330/3/2wg0.html

Didn't Professor Bruce Elliott raise majors concerns over Chuckie's new ball in the Sunday Herald-Sun about 4 or 5 weeks ago ?