KANDYMAN record

[locky801]

CHUCKER

cant see what all the fuss is about, I called a 13yr old for chucking on the weekend and didn't get a mention anywhere

[smac]

CHUCKER

cant see what all the fuss is about, I called a 13yr old for chucking on the weekend and didn't get a mention anywhere

Was there any fuss from parents?

I reckon if all chuckers are called early, they then get taught to bowl properly and don't have any problems by the time they are adults. Sensible option, well umpired (don't expect me to say that over on the footy board though, off to wash my mouth out now).

[locky801]

Parents of course queried it, I gave them my reasoning and they seemed happy about it, as was the player concerned, as soon as it happened I approached the player and explained why, it was a once off, had bowled a few over prior to it and the action was ok, probably was just trying something different and got caught out

[MAY-Z]

well he has it now- collingwood bowled for 45

[smac]

Bloody Collingwood.

We'll hear Eddie has the interview next.

[locky801]

whipee dooo, i am just so overcome with uncontrolled emotion

[Booney]

There is no need to have an '*' next to Muarali's name in any record books.

Im 32,for as long as I live,I can tell people I saw him bowl,and that he didnt play the game as it should be played.

My son at 11 has the same view.Popular culture will ensure Murali is only ever recongised as just that,some one who did not play the game as it should be played.

[locky801]

Heard it all now, just was watching it on Foxtel and now they are comparing Murali with Bradman, saying that Bradman got a ton on average every three innings and Murali averages 5 wickets per innings every three innings

Sorry no comparison, pretty hard to go outside the rules when you are batting

[spell_check]

Sorry no comparison, pretty hard to go outside the rules when you are batting

I can hear Sri Lankans coming up with the squash ball again!

[spell_check]

Lets not forget that also Murali has had very little competition for wickets from his team mates. Warne had a bloke called McGrath who took 560 odd wickets at the other end plus others such as Gillespie, Lee, McDermott etc. all taking lots of wickets at the other end. Sri Lanka have basically just had Murali to take the wickets and no-one else so he had more chance of taking big bags.

plus he always bowls more overs than anyone else continually, usually around 40 to 45 per innings

I'm sure spelly will correct me if i'm wrong but doing some quick calculations Murali (before the current test) averages 55.19 overs per Test match in comparison to Warne 46.79.

Yep - balls bowled divided by 6, divided by matches.

[rod_rooster]

No too often i venture to BigFooty but i just came across this gem. Haven't been able to stop laughing.

[Dogwatcher]

That's an oldie but a goodie.

[rogernumber10]

Kandy was the scene of the original Sliding Doors moment.

The Australians who were at Kandy in 92-93 for his first-class debut, who quietly said behind the scenes to the senior Sri Lankans that they thought the kid chucked, should have instead have said it loudly and clearly to the world. Who knows if the Sri Lanka would have picked Murali as they did for his Test debut 10 days later if the touring team (a very powerful voice at the time compared to minnows with hardly any test victories) and the touring journos had spent 3-4 days writing 'young bloke with dodgy action bemuses border and senior australians'

As it happened on that tour, the four journos on the tour thought we were watching a chucker (100 metres away in the press box, no tv replays) and the aussie players and coaching staff were happily saying it off the record, but it wasn't written at that time because no one wanted to say it on the record. Also, it wasn't the done thing to trash a bloke's reputation, because everybody worked on the assumption he or his board would sort his action out, and it would change.

At the time, Dharmasena had a horrible action, as did another bloke whose name momentarily escapes me, but they were hardly picked. they also didn't take any wickets, which didn't really help their cause.

Once Murali played Test cricket a few weeks later and you got replays close up, the action looked horrendous for the deliveries he really tries to rip, compared to the conventional ones.

Sorry, but I'm in the chucker (of some of his deliveries) forever corner.

[smithy]

Test wickets: 710
(for Sri Lanka: 705; for ICC World XI: 5)
Against Australia
Matches: 13; Wickets: 59; Average: 36.1
Against Bangladesh
Matches: 9; Wickets: 76; Average: 11.9
Against England
Matches: 14*; Wickets: 99; Average: 19.2
Against India
Matches: 15; Wickets: 67; Average: 32.5
Against New Zealand
Matches: 12; Wickets: 69; Average: 21.0
Against Pakistan
Matches: 14; Wickets: 79; Average: 23.3
Against South Africa
Matches: 15; Wickets: 104; Average: 22.2
Against West Indies
Matches: 10; Wickets: 70; Average: 17.3
Against Zimbabwe:
Matches: 14; Wickets: 87; Average: 16.9

[Andy #24]

There is no need to have an '*' next to Muarali's name in any record books.

Im 32,for as long as I live,I can tell people I saw him bowl,and that he didnt play the game as it should be played.

My son at 11 has the same view.Popular culture will ensure Murali is only ever recongised as just that,some one who did not play the game as it should be played.

Your son has that view because you have it. Just recognise a very good bowler. Fair enough most people think Warne is a better bowler, I share this view, but you are to caught up by the a statistic not confirming your view. Stats aren't the be all and end all of cricket. Just get over bagging him, I would say indoctrinating a child to dislike a player for no good reason is not in the spirit of cricket.

[smithy]

Yes Andy....Stats are like mini-skirts.......revealing but don't show you the bigger picture...

[Booney]

There is no need to have an '*' next to Muarali's name in any record books.

Im 32,for as long as I live,I can tell people I saw him bowl,and that he didnt play the game as it should be played.

My son at 11 has the same view.Popular culture will ensure Murali is only ever recongised as just that,some one who did not play the game as it should be played.

Your son has that view because you have it. Just recognise a very good bowler. Fair enough most people think Warne is a better bowler, I share this view, but you are to caught up by the a statistic not confirming your view. Stats aren't the be all and end all of cricket. Just get over bagging him, I would say indoctrinating a child to dislike a player for no good reason is not in the spirit of cricket.

WTF are you on about? My son has the ability to make his own mind up.He and his mates spend hours trying to emulate the action of Murali and only come to the conclusion that its a throw.

I would recognise him as a good bowler,if I thought he bowled the ball.

I heard Robert Craddock say yesterday,the ICC go to the U/19 World Cup now and pick out any one with a susupect action and send them home for corrective work.Making Murali a 'one off',so you have to ask yourself,why is he a one off?

Answer: The ICC allowed him to play,from day 1 when his action was called,he should have been banned then.For fear of Sub-Continental back lash the ICC felt it easier to remove an umpire or two from the game (white ones) than it would be to remove a Sub-Continent hero from the game.

If the call was left in the umpires hands,the 'way the game should be played' (as I stated in my post) then Murali would be a distant memory.

[Andy #24]

So 11 year olds can't emulate Murali... he must be a chucker. I'm amazed how impartially you and your son can decide someone is a chucker. Maybe you should replace the bozos with all that fancy gear that cleared him of chucking. Better still, why don't we have a poll on here and send it of to the ICC, it would be the definitive answer.

The only person who still whinges is Terry Jenner. This is because like the whingers on here he is in disbelief that Warney doesn't have the record. If Murali wasn't going to be the record holder we wouldn't have this discussion.

[am Bays]

So 11 year olds can't emulate Murali... he must be a chucker. I'm amazed how impartially you and your son can decide someone is a chucker. Maybe you should replace the bozos with all that fancy gear that cleared him of chucking. Better still, why don't we have a poll on here and send it of to the ICC, it would be the definitive answer.

The only person who still whinges is Terry Jenner. This is because like the whingers on here he is in disbelief that Warney doesn't have the record. If Murali wasn't going to be the record holder we wouldn't have this discussion.

Wrong!!

Bishen Bedi....Col Egar....

but to be fair Botham and Healy think he is legal (as quoted in the news limited press)

FWIW I have no problem with his stock ball but like most orthodox spinners I have problem with his toppy and doosra, His doosra more so and his toppy (an he is no orphan when it comes to the toppy) when he is fatigued and wants to give it a big rip to make it drop.

There in lies the rub if he was just limited to his stock ball which IMHO is legal would make him cannon fonder as his variations are limited to changes of pace and flight. Put in the extra variations toppy and the doosra and the doubt immediately increases in the batsman which maks him more hesitant and the thing every bowler wants is confusion in the batsmans mind.

The bozos didn't clear him of chucking (I know I spoke to one of the bozos at a conference not long afterwards). What the bozos also found is that most bowlers appear to straighten the arm between 3 -5 deg (some more so than others) Murali un-questionably straightens his arm for certain deliveries - 10 deg (on a good day). So to make all bowlers "legal" the ICC decreed that a 15 deg level of tolerance (to allow for teh standard error of measurement associated with the lab tests), funny how the ICC under the strong influence of teh sub-continent bloke set the tolerence to make Murali legal...

[Rik E Boy]

Come on Andy, we all know why Murali was cleared and Booney stated as much. The reason why 'we are having this dicussion' is because the guy has gotten away with something that Ian Meckiff and Gordon Rorke did not. Tassie, you're wasting your time bring up facts with this bloke.

Murlidaran*

regards,

REB