Muralitharan best bowler ever?

The thing about the Murali "chucking" issue is that he's been cleared by the ICC and leading biomechanics experts who all say he doesn't chuck the ball, after being tested several times. I and the majority of Cricket fans I know think thats good enough for us to let him play.

So why do people, who arn't experts in this field, always have to question his action, suprisingly when he does well against their particular team? Why can't you let the man bowl and possibly accpet that he simply is a great bowler and one of the greatest ever.

And before you start, No I don't think it's racism. I just think it's ignorance by people who think they know more about the laws of the game then the ICC and other experts.
 
Because it's not a question of complex bomechanics, or umpire-level knowledge of the game

It's a question of knowing what chucking looks like. This is quite simple, almost as obvious as throwing underarm.

Anyway, you're fecking French so what do you know?
 
I'm actually Sri Lankan (albeit one that lives in Britian) by the way. Robert Pires was my favourite player so thats why I've decided to name myself after him.

Plechazunga, the reason why he appears to chuck the ball the ball is because he bowls with a bent arm creating the optical illusion that he chucks. The boffins at the university who tested him said that in some really long report (which I can't be bothered to find, but it's probably somewhere on the internet) which they produced after they tested him. He doesn't straigten his arm more then the allowed limit and so his action is legal and within the laws of the game.
I don't want to doubt your great intelligence and wisdom but surely the only way to conclusively check if someone is chucking is by carrying out tests on him and seeing if he actually chucks not by watching someone bowl on TV and immediately saying that he chucks just because you think he does.

Fact is the majority of cricketers and cricket fans around the world who also watch him don't think he chucks the ball and neither do the ICC which all that matters really and the not opinions of a minority of cricket fans.

You and the other couple of posters on here are obviously intent on labelling Murali a chucker and theres probably nothing I can say or do which will change your mindset at the end of the day, as you already seem to think you know more then the experts do. I just personally think it's sad that you can't appreciate that Muttiah Murilthieran is just simply an amazing bowler and you always feel the need to tarnish his name and legacy by labelling him a chucker.
 
RobertPires said:
I'm actually Sri Lankan (albeit one that lives in Britian) by the way. Robert Pires was my favourite player so thats why I've decided to name myself after him.

Plechazunga, the reason why he appears to chuck the ball the ball is because he bowls with a bent arm creating the optical illusion that he chucks. The boffins at the university who tested him said that in some really long report (which I can't be bothered to find, but it's probably somewhere on the internet) which they produced after they tested him. He doesn't straigten his arm more then the allowed limit and so his action is legal and within the laws of the game.
I don't want to doubt your great intelligence and wisdom but surely the only way to conclusively check if someone is chucking is by carrying out tests on him and seeing if he actually chucks not by watching someone bowl on TV and immediately saying that he chucks just because you think he does.

Fact is the majority of cricketers and cricket fans around the world who also watch him don't think he chucks the ball and neither do the ICC which all that matters really and the not opinions of a minority of cricket fans.

You and the other couple of posters on here are obviously intent on labelling Murali a chucker and theres probably nothing I can say or do which will change your mindset at the end of the day, as you already seem to think you know more then the experts do. I just personally think it's sad that you can't appreciate that Muttiah Murilthieran is just simply an amazing bowler and you always feel the need to tarnish his name and legacy by labelling him a chucker.
Click to expand...

Brainwashed by patriotism

The ICC only believe he doesn't chuck because they changed the rules to allow him to chuck

As for "expert panels", they're unnecessary and politically motivated. As I said, it's perfectly easy to see if a player's chucking or not.

I've nothing against Sri Lanka, I like Sri Lanka and I'd love them to win the WC. Muralitharan chucks almost every ball he bowls. Why not have the balls to admit it?
 
Plechazunga said:
Brainwashed by patriotism

The ICC only believe he doesn't chuck because they changed the rules to allow him to chuck

As for "expert panels", they're unnecessary and politically motivated. As I said, it's perfectly easy to see if a player's chucking or not.

I've nothing against Sri Lanka, I like Sri Lanka and I'd love them to win the WC. Muralitharan chucks almost every ball he bowls. Why not have the balls to admit it?
Click to expand...


Well for one the ICC changed the rules to accomadate all bowlers, not Murali. Why would the ICC go out all the way just to appease one bowler and one nation? I'm not sure if you know but when Murali was being tested they did a massive study into Bowling actions and found that the majority of bowlers were "chucking". Bowlers such as Lee, Akhtar etc were regulary bending there arms around the 10 degree mark. In fact interestingely Rameresh Sarwan was the only bowler they tested to be found to be bowling the ball with a 100% correct action. Thats why they had to change the rules otherwise cricket would have collapsed because nearly every bowler was chucking then. Thats why they changed the rules not because of Murilitheran.

I don't understand why the "expert panels" would be un necessary and politically moticated. Why would they go out all of there way just to appease the Sri Lankans? They have a perfectly good use; they check if a bowler is chucking and breaking the rules.

At the end of the day it comes to this difference of opinion between me and you
- you believe that you can tell if a person is chucking just by simply watching them on the TV whereas I believe the only way to check if a person is chucking is by testing them scientifically by experts in the field who can tell if a bowler is chucking.

It's quite similar to the old science vs religion arguement. I believe my point of view because there is stong scientific evidence to back it up whereas you believe your point of view because you've apparently seen it yourself.

If it really that obvious that he was chucking the ball, that you could tell if by simply watching him on a TV surely he would be banned by now? Surely the ICC wouldn't have let him play for the last 13 years? Surely Cricket fans and other international cricketing teams would be so outraged about such an obvious bit of cheating that they would be compiled to do something about it, either complain or make their opinions clear to everyone that they don't like this cheat playing the game? Surely the greats of the game such as Don Bradman ( who coincidentally supported Murali from the start, [RIP]), Botham, Steve Waugh, Mark Nicholas:lol: etc etc would be coming out and saying that this guy is a fraud and shouldn't be playing?

At the end of the day none of these people are complaining. It's just handful of bitter cricket fans (in my opinion) about Muttiah Muriliatheran simply because they majority can accept that scientific evidence is much likeiar to be true rather then the minority of people whose only arguement is that they think that he's chucking because it seems so when they watch it.

Oh yeah thanks for the Sri Lankan sentiments. I hope we do win on Saturday. :D
 
He still chucks almost every ball despite the rule change. The only time he doesn't is after remedial training and subsequent testing. He then goes back to chucking.
 
RobertPires said:
Well for one the ICC changed the rules to accomadate all bowlers, not Murali. Why would the ICC go out all the way just to appease one bowler and one nation? I'm not sure if you know but when Murali was being tested they did a massive study into Bowling actions and found that the majority of bowlers were "chucking". Bowlers such as Lee, Akhtar etc were regulary bending there arms around the 10 degree mark. In fact interestingely Rameresh Sarwan was the only bowler they tested to be found to be bowling the ball with a 100% correct action. Thats why they had to change the rules otherwise cricket would have collapsed because nearly every bowler was chucking then. Thats why they changed the rules not because of Murilitheran.

I don't understand why the "expert panels" would be un necessary and politically moticated. Why would they go out all of there way just to appease the Sri Lankans? They have a perfectly good use; they check if a bowler is chucking and breaking the rules.

At the end of the day it comes to this difference of opinion between me and you
- you believe that you can tell if a person is chucking just by simply watching them on the TV whereas I believe the only way to check if a person is chucking is by testing them scientifically by experts in the field who can tell if a bowler is chucking.

It's quite similar to the old science vs religion arguement. I believe my point of view because there is stong scientific evidence to back it up whereas you believe your point of view because you've apparently seen it yourself.

If it really that obvious that he was chucking the ball, that you could tell if by simply watching him on a TV surely he would be banned by now? Surely the ICC wouldn't have let him play for the last 13 years? Surely Cricket fans and other international cricketing teams would be so outraged about such an obvious bit of cheating that they would be compiled to do something about it, either complain or make their opinions clear to everyone that they don't like this cheat playing the game? Surely the greats of the game such as Don Bradman ( who coincidentally supported Murali from the start, [RIP]), Botham, Steve Waugh, Mark Nicholas:lol: etc etc would be coming out and saying that this guy is a fraud and shouldn't be playing?

At the end of the day none of these people are complaining. It's just handful of bitter cricket fans (in my opinion) about Muttiah Muriliatheran simply because they majority can accept that scientific evidence is much likeiar to be true rather then the minority of people whose only arguement is that they think that he's chucking because it seems so when they watch it.

Oh yeah thanks for the Sri Lankan sentiments. I hope we do win on Saturday. :D
Click to expand...

They don't act not because there's any doubt he chucks it, but because he's the best "bowler" in Sri Lanka and the whole subcontinent, and experience has shown them that everyone would get very very angry and accuse them of racism if they acted. (This is borne out by comments in this thread and any about Murali.) So they took the courageous option of bottling the decision and changing the rules.

The notion that scientific expertise is required to prove this is a nonsense. For a start, scientific tests applied to Murali bowling under experimental conditions, when it was totally in his interest to pretend he bowls. Whereas my observations, while mediated by close-up TV images, are at least of the matches under consideration themselves. The attempt to technicalise the issue is also ludicrous. It's not the origin of species we're talking about, where the evidence is in some way hidden and needs science to unearth it. It's a bloke chucking a ball in front of everyone. If I claimed it required "expert witnesses" to prove Maradona handballed it in '86, say, you'd think I was talking bollocks. But it really isn't much harder than that to see that Murali chucks it. Bowling is a very specific, unusual way to release a ball, very easy to tell apart from chucking. He chucks.

You think most of the world believes he bowls. I very much doubt it. In all likelihood, most unbiased cricket fans thinks he chucks.

The "bitter" argument is tosh. I've far more reason to be bitter about Shane Warne, who plays for our biggest, indeed bitterest, rivals, and has munched his way through our entire order more times than I can remember. Yet I think he's the best spinner I've ever seen.
 
I like Murali, but no way do I class his action as being legal. Arm should be straight as an arrow. Warnie could have got thousands more by using a dodgy action.
 
During testing

scnich070704.jpg
 
Er, some background into that picture.

He bowled three balls - the off-spinner, the top-spinner and the doosra - as he would in a match and was filmed by four cameras at varying amounts of frames per second and from various angles. On each occasion a kink, jerk or quirk was evident in his action that seemed to come from the straightening of a bent elbow.

Then he bowled the same three balls with a brace that is made from steel bars, which are set into strong resin. This brace has been moulded to his right arm, is approximately 18in long and weighs about 2lb.

There is no way an arm can be bent, or flexed, when it is in this brace. I am sure of this because I tried. All three balls reacted in the same way as when bowled without the brace. They were not bowled quite so fast because the weight of the brace restricts the speed of Murali's shoulder rotation, but the spin was still there. Murali has a quick arm, as quick as most fast bowlers. This, along with his strong wrist, imparts dramatic energy on the ball.

With the brace on there still appeared to be a jerk in his action. When studying the film at varying speeds, it still appeared as if he straightened his arm even though the brace makes it impossible to do so. His unique shoulder rotation and amazing wrist action seem to create the illusion that he straightens his arm.

....
I wouldn't say we have solved the mystery but the example of the brace shows he gains little or no advantage beyond other bowlers who also have degrees of flexion. Murali has a case and he should be heard.



The brace *was* meant to see what he could do without flexing his hand.

EDIT:

This article is written by Mark Nicholas. That's who the 'I' in the quoted text is.
 
FFS

'Using the most complex biomechanical technology around, a team of boffins in really thick glasses and with multiple degrees have concluded that his action is not illegal. That, and the fact that he has a physical abnormality that prevents him fully straightening his arm, strongly indicates that he's not a chucker'

'Yeah but that's only because they changed the rules for him (and about a thousand other fecking players)... and he just LOOKS like a chucker.'

'Yes well sorry to dispute that thoroughly convincing arguement, but he was tested in a lab.'

'Yeah well that's because he doesn't chuck when he's in the lab (despite having to bowl in controlled conditions under intense scrutiny from a team of experts who are no doubt taking into account the amount of turn he's imparting to make an educated guess as to whether he's bowling with the same degree of straightening as he does in matches). As soon as he leaves the lab, he goes back to chucking. And you don't need science to prove that anyway'

5 fecking pages.

He's not a chucker you gimps.
 
Bollocks. It is like trying to challenge a speeding fine from being followed by a police car by saying "I'm not a speeder because I never set the speed camera up the road off".

He can pass the test, no dispute, he just goes straight back to chucking after the tests are completed.
 
zing said:
All three balls reacted in the same way as when bowled without the brace.
Click to expand...

All this means is that he chucks as well as he "bowls". Wibble's photographs also tend to suggest he's hypnotising you guys who think he's not a chucker. Never seen such manic eyes.

It a travesty that he will go on to beat Shane Warne's total of test victims.
 
roonaldo78 said:
:D

Met Tufnell in Lord's a couple of months ago, came across as a decent bloke.
Click to expand...

Heard Tuffers in a radio interview. When asked why he was nicknamed Cat, he said 'it's because I go out at night and crap in nextdoor's garden' :lol:

Prize fruitcake
 
Melbourne Red said:
FFS

'Using the most complex biomechanical technology around, a team of boffins whom possess really thick glasses and multiple degrees have concluded that his action is not illegal. That, and the fact that he has a physical abnormality that prevents him fully straightening his arm, strongly indicates that he's not a chucker'

'Yeah but that's only because they changed the rules for him (and about a thousand other fecking players)... and he just LOOKS like a chucker.'

'Yes well sorry to dispute that thoroughly convincing arguement, but he was tested in a lab.'

'Yeah well that's because he doesn't chuck when he's in the lab (despite having to bowl in controlled conditions under intense scrutiny from a team of experts who are no doubt taking into account the amount of turn he's imparting to make an educated guess as to whether he's bowling with the same degree of straightening as he does in matches). As soon as he leaves the lab, he goes back to chucking. And you don't need science to prove that anyway'

5 fecking pages.

He's not a chucker you gimps.
Click to expand...
Thank you. Get over it people, its absurd how those that refuse to believe he doesnt chuck are actually the ones coming back with rubbish retorts.
 
Wibble said:
The difference is plainly only an optical illusion. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Huh?

Read the article.

They wanted to see whether he could spin the same without bending his elbows and strapped it so that he wouldn't be able to bend his elbows. That's why there's a difference in the actions. The picture you supplied of him is from the article that I have quoted.
 
At the very least the first photo shows that he can bowl without bending his elbow to 45 degrees.

The two Sri Lankan bowlers in question would never have made it out of Junior cricket in Australia with actions like that.
 
Melbourne Red said:
FFS

'Using the most complex biomechanical technology around, a team of boffins in really thick glasses and with multiple degrees have concluded that his action is not illegal. That, and the fact that he has a physical abnormality that prevents him fully straightening his arm, strongly indicates that he's not a chucker'

'Yeah but that's only because they changed the rules for him (and about a thousand other fecking players)... and he just LOOKS like a chucker.'

'Yes well sorry to dispute that thoroughly convincing arguement, but he was tested in a lab.'

'Yeah well that's because he doesn't chuck when he's in the lab (despite having to bowl in controlled conditions under intense scrutiny from a team of experts who are no doubt taking into account the amount of turn he's imparting to make an educated guess as to whether he's bowling with the same degree of straightening as he does in matches). As soon as he leaves the lab, he goes back to chucking. And you don't need science to prove that anyway'

5 fecking pages.

He's not a chucker you gimps.
Click to expand...

I can't tell whether you're channeling Swift or Orwell

"Using the most complex biomechanical technology around", indeed. What a joke. It's a man throwing a ball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.