Should this be legal?

[coffee_rules]

 

 

 

[jf1gp_1]

Even before switch hit, my understanding is onus has always been on bowler to declare arm and side before bowling never on batsman. Bowlers want to bring variety then bowl underarm.

[velu]

1 hour ago, Under_Score said:

Not sure if it can be legal...if it becomes legal then there will be a lot more variety in future...like this 

 

 

rotating his right hand while holding the ball , then trasnfer it to his left hand and then bowls  

 

[zen]

It is unnecessary. 

[cric_fan]

What is illegal about it? Batsmen are able to pull off all sorts of **** at the crease and they call it ‘modern’ batting.

[speedheat]

Not needed, just stick to basic

[zen]

Just now, Under_Score said:

Starts with the ball in left hand, transfers it to right and brings it back to completely mesmerize the  batsman.

 .... when you do a 360, realistically for a spinner, you can only fire in the ball in so in fact doing that could make it easy for the batsman 

 

smart bowlers, esp. quicks, are not going to do that to hurt the momentum and chances of spraying the ball 

[flamy]

Should directly be drafted to IPL. Don't see an issue with it, but also don't see it having long-term impact. Ajanthaaaaaaaa

[Zero_Unit]

On 11/13/2018 at 12:45 AM, Under_Score said:

Not sure if it can be legal...if it becomes legal then there will be a lot more variety in future...like this 

 

LMAO i sincerely thought he was trying to stretch till he threw that ball. 

[Pollack]

A big fat no. Rules are fair enough in this regard.

[Global.Baba]

You can’t equate it to a switch hit. What if the guy distracts the batsman long enough and hit the batsman on a part where he should not be hit and could be lethal. It is different if a batsman gets hurt due to lack of technique or bowlers talent well within the rules of the game but this is not acceptable.

 

Good call by the umpire. This kid should focus on variations ( hopefully not too many like Ashwin) and get better rather than these gimmicks