Meanwhile, the chucker gets another 5'fer

[Ram]

wrong assumption.... Saqlain pioneered and brought the doosra into prominence circa 98-99.... Murali with his bent arm took to it' date=' like a fish to water... [/quote'] If you can show me ONE news article referring to Murali's doosra dated prior to 2003 , I will accept what you are saying. I searched google. I couldnt find one. So the ball is in your court.

i am not the one.... i consider all of his deliveries illegal... the doosra even more so....

Then , why did reply to post of his record against good teams being as good as it is against the minnows with a " thats coz 2000 is when he started bowling his doosra" as if to suggest that its THIS illegal element of his bowling that has fetched most of his wickets ?

u r assuming, we dont know the law... u dont realise, we also know how he uses the law to cheat.... we have been thro this discussion before, so i will leave it there... but u will be using a different yard-stick if u consider shoaib and asif as druggies, cos they were also exonerated....

I know its no point flogging a dead horse ( vis-a-vis the debate about murali's action). But where am i assuming things here ? I stated that people , without proper understanding of the law , have called murali a chucker just because some sections of the media are out to defame him. Where is the assumption in that statement ?

[yoda]

but u will be using a different yard-stick if u consider shoaib and asif as druggies, cos they were also exonerated....

wrong comparison...one was a cover up by a board...the other is "within the legal limits of the game as defined by the sport's governing body". laws of all sports evolve and it is ok to criticize a law that you don't like. but to single out a guy makes no sense.

[gator]

wrong comparison...one was a cover up by a board.

and the SL board never got involved?????

[gator]

Quote: Originally Posted by gator wrong assumption.... Saqlain pioneered and brought the doosra into prominence circa 98-99.... Murali with his bent arm took to it, like a fish to water... If you can show me ONE news article referring to Murali's doosra dated prior to 2003 , I will accept what you are saying. I searched google. I couldnt find one. So the ball is in your court.

Mars-man... u mus know by now, i dont depend on Google... i have watched matches and i have seen him bowl doosra quite before 2003.... it is unfortunate, the search engine didnt find any articles....

Quote: Originally Posted by gator i am not the one.... i consider all of his deliveries illegal... the doosra even more so.... Then , why did reply to post of his record against good teams being as good as it is against the minnows with a " thats coz 2000 is when he started bowling his doosra" as if to suggest that its THIS illegal element of his bowling that has fetched most of his wickets ?

what is wrong in tht??? do all illegal types of deliveries have to fetch the same percent of wickets??? u lost me there....

But where am i assuming things here ? I stated that people , without proper understanding of the law , have called murali a chucker just because some sections of the media are out to defame him. Where is the assumption in that statement ?

the assumption is, u think either people who dont understand the law call him a cheat jus cos some sections of the media do... it is a false assumption.... to give u a simple example... if someone was tried for a murder, but he got away cos of good lawyers and legal loopholes..... yes, by law, he is acquitted.... but he is a murderer stilll ...

[gator]

I will and I shall keep reminding all my kids..:angry_smile:

well said, Lurks.....

[gator]

[Ram]

I will and I shall keep reminding all my kids..:angry_smile:

Well , that is so unfortunate Lurks , if you were keep reminding to your kids about Murali as "this chucker who cheated the entire world" rather than as " a bowling genius who came from a small part of Sri Lanka and went to on to dominate the world of cricket, A man who had to endure the public agony and humiliation of being called and booed and yet had the mental fortitude to bounce back , A man who combined talent with hardwork to achieve what no other bowler has ever done"...

[Ram]

Mars-man... u mus know by now' date=' i dont depend on Google... i have watched matches and i have seen him bowl doosra quite before 2003.... it is unfortunate, the search engine didnt find any articles....[/quote'] I know you dont go by google. I bought up that to show that i couldnt find any "proof" to show that Murali bowled the doosra before 2003. Just as you feel Murali had bowled that delivery in matched before 2003 , I also feel he started employing the doosra after 2003 only. He was the last among the major offies ( after Saqlain , Bhajji)to start using it. And Bhajji became a proper bowler only in 2001. So now , its your word against mine. But only , i dont mind being proved wrong , if somebody can come up with proof that he bowled that delivery before 2003.

what is wrong in tht??? do all illegal types of deliveries have to fetch the same percent of wickets??? u lost me there....

No , i said what i said in that post because the way you had said " thats coz 2000 was when he starting bowling the doosras" as if you were suggesting -- " Well, because the doosra is an illegal delivery , whatever records he has done after he started bowling that wouldnt stand".

the assumption is, u think either people who dont understand the law call him a cheat jus cos some sections of the media do... it is a false assumption....

I am pretty bloody sure niether you or for that matter any of us understand how the chucking rule works. So, where is the question of coming to judgments based on a law nobody understands ?

to give u a simple example... if someone was tried for a murder, but he got away cos of good lawyers and legal loopholes..... yes, by law, he is acquitted.... but he is a murderer stilll ...

Using the same analogy , i would like to think the arcane cricket laws using which Murali has been labeled a chucker are as good as the military junta courts run in the dictatorships around the world. Aung San Suu Kyi is considered a criminal and put behind bars by the military junta in myanmar. Its all done according to law, only the law in this case is trash.

[yoda]

and the SL board never got involved?????

of course they got involved. they are expected to get involved according to the process.

[Sachin_Rulez]

Hmm....Murali so far never missed an opportunity of playing a test match against BD or ZIM...wonder why? :P Besides that, which board invites a minnow like BD and schedule three match test series against them. When was the last time SL played 3-test match series at home???? It was back in 2004 against AUS (when they whitewashed the home team 3-0 :giggle:)....LOL... Congrats to murali but sad day to the game of cricket :sad_smile:

[the_samrat]

is this false?

you and that BS so what? he bowls within the rules and he's a genuis...regardless of people like him or not. Simple. Kumble has "great" average when playing away from the sub-continent... is that false?

[gator]

you and that BS so what? he bowls within the rules and he's a genuis...regardless of people like him or not. Simple. Kumble has "great" average when playing away from the sub-continent... is that false?

this thread aint about Kumble... open another thread for tht....

[gator]

No , i said what i said in that post because the way you had said " thats coz 2000 was when he starting bowling the doosras" as if you were suggesting -- " Well, because the doosra is an illegal delivery , whatever records he has done after he started bowling that wouldnt stand".

clearly, the doosra is delivered with more bend in his arm than his normal off-spinners... and the doosra is not necessarily the delivery tht has to bring in the wickets.... it is enuf to create doubts in the batter's minds for a normal off-break to do its work...

[gator]

Quote: Originally Posted by gator to give u a simple example... if someone was tried for a murder, but he got away cos of good lawyers and legal loopholes..... yes, by law, he is acquitted.... but he is a murderer stilll ... Using the same analogy , i would like to think the arcane cricket laws using which Murali has been labeled a chucker are as good as the military junta courts run in the dictatorships around the world. Aung San Suu Kyi is considered a criminal and put behind bars by the military junta in myanmar. Its all done according to law, only the law in this case is trash.

thanks for tht analogy.... i liked the part where u said the law in this case is trash and they could easily misuse it..... like a certain javelin thrower who is misusing a trash law, which didnt account for such high quality cheats when it was devised and it has become too late to account for it, cos there will be too much uproar....

[Predator_05]

Chuttiah Chutiahlitharan added the doosra to his repartoire in '98 - the first time the world saw him use it consistently with devastating effect was in England, when he took a 9 wicket haul in that one-off test. Now pre-'98, his career average was in the 30's. When he toured India in '97, he was averaging in the 30's. These are facts. It was only AFTER he started chucking that doosra that he became a prolific wicket-taker. Don't believe me ? Go to stats-guru and look through his cumulative career averages.

[Ram]

Chuttiah Chutiahlitharan added the doosra to his repartoire in '98 - the first time the world saw him use it consistently with devastating effect was in England, when he took a 9 wicket haul in that one-off test. Now pre-'98, his career average was in the 30's. When he toured India in '97, he was averaging in the 30's. These are facts. It was only AFTER he started chucking that doosra that he became a prolific wicket-taker. Don't believe me ? Go to stats-guru and look through his cumulative career averages.

Woah ! Murali started using the doosra in 1998 !! ?? That is certainly news to me, to be honest. And three words to your claim about Murali using the doosra in the one-off test against England -- You are wrong. I saw that test match , he certainly didnt bowl the doosra then. And just to make sure , i read ALL the match reports of that match. I didnt find a SINGLE mention of Murali's doosra. Here are the links for your reference anyway. Test Match: England v Sri Lanka, report from The Electronic Telegraph Test Match: England v Sri Lanka, report from CricInfo Test Match: England v Sri Lanka, latest report from CricInfo Test Match: England v Sri Lanka, report from The Daily News And to claim the upward trend in Murali's record is solely because he added the doosra to his arsenal is a bit naive. Players improve with age/experience. Their skill levels improve. I can point out several examples were players records have improved tremendously after a point.

[Predator_05]

Woah ! Murali started using the doosra in 1998 !! ?? That is certainly news to me, to be honest. And three words to your claim about Murali using the doosra in the one-off test against England -- You are wrong. I saw that test match , he certainly didnt bowl the doosra then.

LMFAO ! Keep reading your match-reports. I seriously doubt you watched that match, BTW. I did...and I found the video of that 9 wicket haul. http://www.veoh.com/videos/v284897kYm5y6rf?searchId=1661721519565991597&rank=0 Watch it. Tell me, which ball is he delivering from around the wicket ? :haha: ...and those are just the balls which took wickets. He bowled that doosra every other over in that match. First time i saw him bowl that delivery - he didn't use it when India played SL in 97

[Ram]

LMFAO ! Watch it. Tell me, which ball is he delivering from around the wicket ? :haha:

humph !.... I already knew he didnt bowl the doosra then. Yet , i spent 10 mins watching the video. WHERE is the doosra ? The balls which he did bowl from around the wicket ( to Butcher , Ramprakash etc) were pure off-spinners. Only the Gough dismissal of Gough gives some doubts. Even that is not clear.

[Predator_05]

humph !.... I already knew he didnt bowl the doosra then. Yet , i spent 10 mins watching the video. WHERE is the doosra ? The balls which he did bowl from around the wicket ( to Butcher , Ramprakash etc) were pure off-spinners. Only the Gough dismissal of Gough gives some doubts. Even that is not clear.

Dude, they were doosras. On 7:31 you can see a perfect doosra. He bowled it several times in that match. You can compare them with other videos of that delivery --> http://youtube.com/watch?v=_TxkaGeVtek

[Ram]

Dude' date=' they were doosras. On 7:31 you can see a perfect doosra. He bowled it several times in that match. You can compare them with other videos of that delivery --> [url']http://youtube.com/watch?v=_TxkaGeVtek

7.31 ? the delivery bowled to Mark Ramprakash which he hits past point ? That delivery pitched outside off-stump and spun in , even it was flat and quick. How can a doosra spin INTO the batsman ? I dunno what you are talking bout here. Lets leave this. This discussion aint goin nowhere..