-
Guest - BigFooty Tipping 2026 - Get on! - $500 first prize - Weekly Prizes - Click to Join
PLUS Your club board comp is now up!
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Opening Round
The Golden Ticket - Official AFL on-seller of MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Murali Reported
- Thread starter Kenny_01
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2003
- Posts
- 1,174
- Reaction score
- 4
- Location
- Base Camp
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Geelong
What are you talking about?
Until the last post by Zyban, no one had suggested any 'conspiracy', or that they would be dishonest.
I dont for a second think Murali or Bruce would do anything untoward.
However, I lost count of the number of times Bruce said there isnt anything wrong with his action during the Test series. He fervently defended him and openly admitted to absolutely loving watching him bowl.
It simply makes me wonder if he is the most partial judge.
After watching the tests on the news I have no doubts these tests are a waste of time, murali was barely bowling a warm up ball.
All these tests will prove is that he didn’t chuck in the test itself, the question of whether he chucks in a game will remain unanswered as long as a process as idiotic as this is allowed to be the only gauge.
All these tests will prove is that he didn’t chuck in the test itself, the question of whether he chucks in a game will remain unanswered as long as a process as idiotic as this is allowed to be the only gauge.
Totally agree. Its a joke to suggest this tells us whether he throws or not.
And having Yardley there is also pointless. It would be like having the coach of a football team determine whether one of his players should be suspended or not.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
very surprised to read they only used six deliveries for the testing. I would have thought they would use 5 or 6 overs worth to also measure the variation from one delivery to the next.
report lodged
That, along with the fact that the Sri Lankan Cricket Board are aware of the result and haven't said anything has set off a little alarm in my head that's telling me Murali's not getting the all clear he was hoping for.
And yes I am aware it was only the preliminary results that the Board have been notified of.
Am i reading too much into this?
report lodged
That, along with the fact that the Sri Lankan Cricket Board are aware of the result and haven't said anything has set off a little alarm in my head that's telling me Murali's not getting the all clear he was hoping for.
And yes I am aware it was only the preliminary results that the Board have been notified of.
Am i reading too much into this?
And that goes to the very heart of the matter.
I would love to know what the procedures were.
Without it, all this would show is that Murali didn't chuck during the test. It won't say anything about what he does in test matches.
I agree with your assessment of Yardley, but...
what is it that Bruce will use to compare Murali's testing Doosra to Murali's Test match Doosra?
One assumes it will be his "eye" and from memory?
If so, that is purely subjective and not scientific at all.
It doesn't prove anything.
As has already been stated surely a far more objective and "scientific" method would be through the use of video, comparing that of the test match to footage of a judiciously placed camera(s) during the testing.
If ICC was really dinkum about this I cannot see why this can't be done.
Was there a batsman, preferably one who'd faced him before, meeting these deleveries to confirm they were of his normal match quality?
DKA
All Australian
Ah, yeah. They'd fly him a few thousand miles just for him to bowl his normal off breaks.
Have a think about it, really.
Just because the news may show footage of 1 or 2 balls, it means EVERY SINGLE ONE of them will be like that?
Just because the public hasn't seen it, doesn't mean the correct testing hasn't occured.
I'm sure if his action comes back legal, the testing would be "rigged" or something along those lines.
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2000
- Posts
- 33,931
- Reaction score
- 22,938
- Location
- South of the river
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Peel Thunder
If it comes back legal, it means Murali didn't bowl the doosra for the high speed cameras in the same way as he does in test matches.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2003
- Posts
- 1,174
- Reaction score
- 4
- Location
- Base Camp
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Geelong
Well they see fit to fly Murali a few thousand miles to test him, so why not? If they are going to go through all this hoo-haa you'd think they would try and re-create match conditions as much as possible, and take every caution to ensure he is bowling like he does in the Tests. Have a think about it, really.
Ive read several different reports that suggested that his action was much more relaxed compared to the tests. And when you consider the complete different circumstances under which he was tested, its hardly surprising.
DKA
All Australian
And you were there, present, to see all that were you?
What would a member of the University Of WA be doing on here?
So many experts out there, that think just because they themselves didn't see anything, that it didn't occur.
Utter ignorance.
DKA
All Australian
Why not try make some sense......
Let's see here, now, if they want to fly him a few thou miles to test him, why not let him bowl his normal off breaks. And because, they've created all this "hoo-haa" they will let him get away with it.
That's your argument?
If you had any sort of brain cells, you'd think that BECAUSE they're creating all this hoo-haa, the more LIKELY they are to make sure the proper delivery is tested.
You talk utter crap.
Next time try think about it, yes, really.
DKA
All Australian
Immaturity runs deep here, is that something that was in your genes? Unlucky break there mate.
I can guarantee you, I'm not Ray. I'm aware he's been on Murali's side, and I can assure there are heaps of people who are also on Murali's side, yet don't waste time posting on this site.
But, I'm willing to. Yet can't seem to find a genuine argument against murali, other that what people "have seen on the news" and what ever they think, basically is correct.
And if it doesn't go their way, it's rigged or something.
Play the ball mate.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2003
- Posts
- 53,708
- Reaction score
- 41,419
- Location
- Melbourne
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Bombers/Liverpool FC
What have you "seen" that makes you think he either doesn't chuck or is good for the game?
90% of the cricket community think that Murali throws the ball, the other 5% are either Sri Lankans or Sri Lankan supporters.
A genuine argument is simple: Murali is damaging the game with his questionable action. It is now no longer the issue whether he chucks or not, it's the kids around Sri Lanka and around the world copying his action that is becoming a genuine concern.
There are cricketers who go to Sri Lanka and watch some local club cricketer "bowl" in the nets, and they can't believe how many of them are chucking it.
Bowling the ball is the unique-ness of cricket, it differs from throwing. It's been around for 100 years, but the principles of the game are damaged and ignored nowadays with so many chuckers are the international scene, it's not only Murali, there are many others. ICC are prepared to turn a blind eye to it, or have their half-@ssed throwing remedy program that hardly fixes anything.
From 10 years' time, you'll see many bowlers emeraging with the carbone copy of Murali's action, some of them WILL chuck it, because they don't have the physical abnormality that Murali possesses, then what do we do with them? Let them play even though we know they're illegal? Or ban them, then what'd they say, how come you don't ban the highest wicket taker ever even though we're copying his action?
Murali is leaving a black black mark on the game, whether he chucks it or not (which I believe he does), for the good of the game he should be banned. How can you abandon the integrity of this great game just to accomodate one man?
Who are the remainding 5%? The UWA human movement staff?
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2003
- Posts
- 1,174
- Reaction score
- 4
- Location
- Base Camp
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Geelong
What Im saying is that Murali was bowling in a completely different environment - and if they are going to go to the trouble of flying him all that way and doing these tests, they should have put more effort into ensuring that the conditions matched those he faces in a Test match as closely as possible.
Can you not understand this?
Originally posted by DKA
If you had any sort of brain cells, you'd think that BECAUSE they're creating all this hoo-haa, the more LIKELY they are to make sure the proper delivery is tested.
You talk utter crap.
Next time try think about it, yes, really.
You finally seem to have got my point. So according to you, I talk crap, but you agree. What were you saying about brain cells?
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Of course not. You're just a brand new BigFooty member who happens to agree with him, and also somehow knows the entire history of this debate on this site.
I'm sure there are, so what?
For what it's worth, I'm not on anybody's "side". I gave up years ago giving a **** about whether Murali's bowling is legal or not, as it was made pretty clear that he's going to be allowed to continue doing it. I'm still not 100% convinced either way, but I don't lose sleep over it. I do find it interesting at times, however, to enter the ongoing debate on the topic. But if you look back at my posts, you won't find me anywhere saying conclusively he does or does not chuck.
Most people's argument is based on what they have personally seen. Why is that inferior to an argument based on results of testing done away from match conditions, using procedures that no-one knows about?
If they're going to investigate his action, why not do it under match conditions or as close to as possible? Surely it's not impossible to have cameras at a match dedicated to examining his delivery action? Wouldn't get as many decimal points as lab tests with electrodes up and down his arms, but at least you'd know you were testing what you want to test.
Even people who are on "Murali's side" should be concernced about the way these tests were done, as they are not going to satisfactorily resolve the issue whatever the result.
That's only the Essendon fans.
Happy to, so long as it's legally delivered!
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2000
- Posts
- 33,931
- Reaction score
- 22,938
- Location
- South of the river
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Peel Thunder
That's right. I've never seen Murali bowl. Ever. You d*ckhead.
I've seen enough of him and his doosra at multiple camera angles to know that his arm extends from about a 90 degree bend to a 10 degree bend, i.e a blatant chuck. The side on shot shows it perfectly. If he was bowling the same deliveries for the UWA cameras, there is no possible way that it could not be called a throw. i.e If it comes back legal, then he was not bowling his normal doosra.
And given a mate of mine who saw Shoaib's UWA tests reckoned he was going at about half pace sending them down at about 120km/h, I don't really rate the credibility of them anyway. All it really says is that the bowler is just capable of bowling legally.
I just can't understand why they can't perform exactly the same tests during a test match. There were enough gaps in the outer for any of the Sri Lankan games to fit in as many high speed cameras as necessary.
Murali’s half arsed attitude to the tests really disturbed me, if he truly believed he didn’t chuck (as he so often has said) he would have bowled as if the world cup final was on the line, I always thought that if he did chuck it wasn’t his fault and that it wasn’t deliberate, his patently poor attitude towards the tests shows that he may in fact be deliberately using an action he knows is suspect that makes him a common cheat.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2003
- Posts
- 11,601
- Reaction score
- 2,991
- Location
- Kensington Gardens
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- B'ham CityFC Adelaide United FC
Just for the record this DKA geezer is not me. I always put my name to what I have to say, whether it's popular or not. I don't hide behind an alias, never have, never will. I also don't feel the need to create phantom users to back up my point of view. I'm not bothered if I'm in a minority of one. I'm sure the administrators can confirm that DKA is not me, and I would appreciate it if they did. Cheers.
DKA
All Australian
You know the 90/10 degree angles do you? So you got a ruler and so forth out, went upto the tv a proved it?
Look, there's no doubting that murali is different, that's just the way he is. He can't change that about himself. The way he bowls his normal off break, is not normal, nor is the doosra - but as far is his off breaks are concerned, this has been cleared, so people having a go at that one, are basically never going to win, as that will not be taken away from him.
The ball he delivers, is with his palm almost facing the sky. The conventional way, is for the hand/palm to be angled to the ground, like warne and any other spin bowler.
The only stand out benefit he gets, is the air. Warne or any spinner can use any amount of force as they rip down over the ball. They also have the air benefit of tossing the ball up. Thus warne's use of variation.
Murali's talent does not lie in his finger or his arm. It's his wrists that do the damage, if you've seen on the cricket show, where he's bent that thing to all sorts of angles.
If you had a rubber wrist, wouldn't you be bowling wrong-un's too?
Everyone man and his dog can't do what murali does. You can't teach a person to cheat or chuck.
People will always have their opinion, no matter what verdict is given.
If he's called, it's a good thing - others say not
If he's cleared, it's a bad thing or it was rigged - others say not.
I just hope it all ends soon, either way.
BTW - I don't think he should tour Zim, until this is all settled.
I'm not Ray Nolan either, I don't say "geezer" and don't say "cheers" - just that's I've read most of the cricket threads, and it's actually quite good, so I decided to join.
DKA
All Australian
Hang on a sec here. Your against murali, and I say seeing that they flew him out here, they WOULD MAKE SURE he bowled the doosra so the proper delivery can be assessed.
You disagreed, saying that because THEY ARE flying him here, and causing all this hoo-haa, its more LIKELY they WONT make him bowl the doosra.
Where is the sense in that, please, explain it. And no, I'm not in agreeance with you.
Cooldude, apprec your arguments, good ones, least someone can hold a decent argument in here.
