CC discussion thread 2014

[SaintPowelly]

He doesn't chuck, some of you love a conspiracy.

Bet you wouldn't care if he played for England

[D/L]

The picture was clearly taken after the arm had reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing and was quite clearly bent. For the delivery to have been legal, the angle at the elbow would have had to have stayed the same or not increased until the point of delivery, which would not be possible.

A still photograph can be a very valid means of assessing the legality of a delivery.

I may be wrong but i'm pretty sure you can bowl with a bent arm, it's the flex of the elbow that matters.

It would have been extremely difficult for the delivery to have been completed and propelled anywhere near the stumps from that position with no straightening of the arm.

[D/L]

He doesn't chuck, some of you love a conspiracy.

Bet you wouldn't care if he played for England

Of course he chucks. If he played for England, I'd be embarrassed about it.

[SaintPowelly]

You not liking his action and it being illegal are different.

Not banned=legal.

[Arthur Crabtree]

He doesn't chuck, some of you love a conspiracy.

Bet you wouldn't care if he played for England

If he played for England, I'd be mortified.

I don't think you can suggest there's no case to answer. His arm does straighten appreciably. His arm bends more than the ICC says it does. I'm not even happy with them measuring the flex just to the point he lets go of the ball. When you throw, you still have a bent arm when you let go. The ICC have redefined a throw to mean the arm is normally straight on release, allowing you to subtract degrees from the flex, based on how bent the arm is at that point. They seem to have lost sight of what a throw is.

But mainly the problem is that he bends his arm way over what the ICC claims.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Pleased for Rankin that he picked up wickets on his return. I thought he was given an unseemly booting, from some quarters in the winter. His useful limited overs bowling for England last summer seems to have done him little good.

[hopeforthebest]

The ICC walk on tip-toe around most things sub continental and the boards of Oz, NZ and England are afraid of accusations of racism. It's no coincidence that the rule over arm flex was brought in to accommodate players from that region.

[SaintPowelly]

If the ICC don't have an issue with it and no players, counties and boards have an issue, then nor should we, its pedantic.

[Hampshire]

The picture was clearly taken after the arm had reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing and was quite clearly bent. For the delivery to have been legal, the angle at the elbow would have had to have stayed the same or not increased until the point of delivery, which would not be possible.

A still photograph can be a very valid means of assessing the legality of a delivery.

As long as his arm was bent within 15 degrees of the angle it currently is in the picture (which is more or less the point of release) when the arm was at shoulder level then it's legal. There's no way you can tell this from a single picture.

[Arthur Crabtree]

England and Australian boards have spoked against it before. It might be that they now feel nothing can be done. Certainly some players have a problem with it, or Broad wouldn't have tweeted. Someone somewhere has passed an omerta. Look at how the commentators talk all around the subject.

[Arthur Crabtree]

As long as his arm was bent within 15 degrees of the angle it currently is in the picture (which is more or less the point of release) when the arm was at shoulder level then it's legal. There's no way you can tell this from a single picture.

That's true. BUt you can see the arm straighten in footage from the side. The picture represents a piece of the information we know from seeing him bowl, so it is informative. But on its own it doesn't mean that much.

[Hampshire]

As youve said, footage from the side shows a completely different angle. There was a brilliant video with Murali a while back showi.g how camera angles can be deceptive to his action.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Footage from the front, back and side looks like a throw...

[Hampshire]

Except I'm reffering to the real angles and not what you think it looks like .

[andy]

he chucks it. Always has done, and it's blatant..

there's no such thing as a legal doosra.