Aussie spinners agree to flick 'doosra'

[RazabQ]

Ian mate, I think you are being highly convenient here. Think back to what brought about this 15 degree tolerance in the first place. If you recall, the ICC installed super slo-mo cameras at some tournaments and found that _every_one_ chucks to some degree. Even the great Glenn McGrath. What they found was that as far as visual evidence goes and average deviation, anything withing 15 degrees should be fine. It is therefore highly revisionist to think that this law was rewritten for Murali. Also, there was a Sky documentary where Murali had his entire arm in a brace which prevented him from any form of elbow straightening and he was still able to turn his offie and doosra at good pace and with great deviation.

I understand that this is one of those issues where many with an Aussie upbringing (note I don't say this is racism - cricket_king who holds the same views is of Bangladeshi ancestry) somehow gets all hot and bothered. It could very well be because Australia has never had a reputation for cricketing innovation. Of domination, excellence, professionalism and competitiveness - yes, but not of newness: The didn't invent leg-spin, just had some of the best practitioners. They didn't invent the leg glance or hook or pull - just that their batters are so good at it. They didn't invent the reverse sweep or switch hit. They didn't invent reverse swing but now happen to have the best coach for teaching it. Arguably the only thing "new" that they've taught the world is "mental disintegration" aka calling someone dirty names while on the field and then acting like nothing's happened because you are buying that "mate" a beer afterwords. Hence, "new" stuff in Australia is treated with suspicion perhaps?

Anyway, I never recall the Aussies griping about Saqlain's action and he invented the doosra. Could it be because they were able to figure him out easily but not Murali? To assert, in a blanket fashion, that all doosras must involve chucking is ignorant at best and a sad case of sour-grapes at worst.

I look forward to the day when an Australian player, sayes F-you to coaching and comes up with some new form of bowling or batting, sends the establishment into a tizzy and burying this mistrust of all things new once and for all from the southern shores.

[OZGOD]

Innovation is not just about creating new deliveries, new shots or the like. Innovation is about thinking of new ways to do things, new models to follow. I thought scoring at 4rpo in a Test match and finishing it in 3 or 4 days was pretty innovative myself. Nobody had done it before. And I thought World Series Cricket, which was set up by Kerry Packer, was a bit of an innovation, but maybe others don't see it that way. Same goes for the six-ball over, which was also an Australian innovation way back in the late 1800s. The concept of centrally contracted players - another innovation.

And John Buchanan was talking about switch hitting well before Kevinder started doing it. Buchanan also brought in a US baseball throwing coach to teach the OZ how to throw low, flat trajectories which saved time and improved accuracy. Buck was actually a pretty innovative coach. 90% of his ideas were rubbish, but the 10% made a difference.

[RazabQ]

OZGod, fair enough. You explain then this hot-n-bothered reaction to bowling innovations then.

[OZGOD]

Originally Posted by RazabQ
OZGod, fair enough. You explain then this hot-n-bothered reaction to bowling innovations then.

I think it's more of a principle thing for them to be honest. Like Ian said, they just fundamentally think that a doosra cannot be bowled legally as it involves straightening the elbow. Clearly it is now a legal delivery, but chucking has a big stigma in OZ.

That said, if Cullen or Horroritz ever managed to figure out how to bowl one, I don't think anyone will be complaining.

[Surfer]

Originally Posted by OZGOD
Innovation is not just about creating new deliveries, new shots or the like. Innovation is about thinking of new ways to do things, new models to follow. I thought scoring at 4rpo in a Test match and finishing it in 3 or 4 days was pretty innovative myself. Nobody had done it before. And I thought World Series Cricket, which was set up by Kerry Packer, was a bit of an innovation, but maybe others don't see it that way. Same goes for the six-ball over, which was also an Australian innovation way back in the late 1800s. The concept of centrally contracted players - another innovation.

And John Buchanan was talking about switch hitting well before Kevinder started doing it. Buchanan also brought in a US baseball throwing coach to teach the OZ how to throw low, flat trajectories which saved time and improved accuracy. Buck was actually a pretty innovative coach. 90% of his ideas were rubbish, but the 10% made a difference.

Yup. What you do is innovation. What others do (and you can not) is illegal. For example, a squash ball in the gloves is innovation. The doosra is illegal.

[OZGOD]

Originally Posted by Surfer
Yup. What you do is innovation. What others do (and you can not) is illegal. For example, a squash ball in the gloves is innovation. The doosra is illegal.

Show me where in the Laws of Cricket it says that having a squash ball in the gloves is illegal and I will agree with you. Does having a squash ball in the gloves involve straightening the elbow?

What about being deliberately late for the toss? Surely that can't be an innovation and neither can it be illegal, as a million captains from a million teams in a million sports have done the same to wind their opposing captain up. It's all good when you get away with it eh.

Mind you, my personal opinion is that if the ICC have legalised straightening the elbow by 15 degrees, then it's all good. But other Ozzies will have their own opinions, and fair enough.

[RazabQ]

I'd like to again reiterate, that elbow straightening was done by many an OZ bowler as well under the ICC analysis. This matter of principle still seems a tad convenient if you ask me.

[Tintin]

Originally Posted by RazabQ
I'd like to again reiterate, that elbow straightening was done by many an OZ bowler as well under the ICC analysis. This matter of principle still seems a tad convenient if you ask me.

The ICC analysis was done in the 2004 Champions Trophy where Murali did not play. I would be glad to be proved wrong but I don't think Murali has ever been tested in match conditions, though ICC claims to have the figures for many others. Those for Murali are all taken during "tests". One would have thought that ICC would want to measure Murali before anyone else.

[RazabQ]

And I'm yet to hear the rebuttal of Murali brace issue:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDxRhcpBZio

Again, given that he was a trump to Warny's wicket total, I find this "principle" business unconvincing.

[RazabQ]

Note I'm not talking about match conditions per se but the blanket statement that a doosra cannot be bowled without chucking. That to me is total crock! The match condition argument will never end unless you record every delivery every bowler has ever bowled.

[OZGOD]

It's perception though RazabQ. Most offies cannot bowl a doosra AND control the ball without noticeably straightening their elbow. E.g. Shoaib Malik, Johan Botha, etc. It's an incredibly difficult delivery to bowl. There are a select few who obviously can keep it below 15 degrees, like Saqi, Saint Harby and Murali. Their anatomy or level of control is such that it allows them to do it. Now I'm not Ashley Mallett and I can neither speak for him, nor do I necessarily share his opinion, but I would guess that they think that it's pretty much impossible for someone to bowl a doosra without bending and straightening the arm.

Like I said, I'm sure tunes will change once someone actually manages to bowl a doosra in OZ.

[Surfer]

Originally Posted by OZGOD
Show me where in the Laws of Cricket it says that having a squash ball in the gloves is illegal and I will agree with you. Does having a squash ball in the gloves involve straightening the elbow?

What about being deliberately late for the toss? Surely that can't be an innovation and neither can it be illegal, as a million captains from a million teams in a million sports have done the same to wind their opposing captain up. It's all good when you get away with it eh.

Mind you, my personal opinion is that if the ICC have legalised straightening the elbow by 15 degrees, then it's all good. But other Ozzies will have their own opinions, and fair enough.

That's the point. Both are new, both are within the law. One the Australians can do, the other they can not. What they can not do, they declare illegal. That's hypocritical. The doosra has been around for more than a decade and the ICC has allowed it to stay. But the Australians, who have no idea how to bowl it suddenly conclude that its illegal. That is hypocrisy at its best.

[Surfer]

Originally Posted by OZGOD
It's perception though RazabQ. Most offies cannot bowl a doosra AND control the ball without noticeably straightening their elbow. E.g. Shoaib Malik, Johan Botha, etc. It's an incredibly difficult delivery to bowl. There are a select few who obviously can keep it below 15 degrees, like Saqi, Saint Harby and Murali. Their anatomy or level of control is such that it allows them to do it. Now I'm not Ashley Mallett and I can neither speak for him, nor do I necessarily share his opinion, but I would guess that they think that it's pretty much impossible for someone to bowl a doosra without bending and straightening the arm.

Like I said, I'm sure tunes will change once someone actually manages to bowl a doosra in OZ.

There, you said it. There are some things in each sport that only the experts can do. A lot of spinners can not spin the ball as much as Warne could. Should the rest of the world declare Warne's deliveries as illegal? As long as the deliveries are bowled within the rules prescribed by the ICC, they are legal. And the expert Aussie coaches, who could not produce a half decent spinner since Warne, should try and develop their own skills than point fingers at others.

[chol_bd123]

the aussies are a little too narrow minded. just because they cant do it doesnt mean other's can't

By that what exactly is a doosra. Can anyone provide me a youtube video.
ANd is there a doosra for a legspinner.

[Purbasha T]

Originally Posted by chol_bd123
these aussies are just losers!! and wimps

Don't generalise.

[uss01]

No it's not. Just some ideas being exchanged at some conference. I think you'e being racist by saying these Aussies are racist. WTF, so white people can't have opinions on anything without being racist? I understand if you disagree with these people but why bring racism to it without having substantial evidence. They didnt' say anything like like since the doosra was invented by a player from Pakistan we should ban it.

Originally Posted by ZeeshanM
For those who cant read english, translation:

?

B-l-a-t-a-n-t R-a-c-i-s-m!

[MysoreHuli]

With no sucessor for Shane Warne, this is a lam eexcuse by the Aussies.

[OZGOD]

Originally Posted by Surfer
There, you said it. There are some things in each sport that only the experts can do. A lot of spinners can not spin the ball as much as Warne could. Should the rest of the world declare Warne's deliveries as illegal? As long as the deliveries are bowled within the rules prescribed by the ICC, they are legal. And the expert Aussie coaches, who could not produce a half decent spinner since Warne, should try and develop their own skills than point fingers at others.

Amazing how a decision by Ozzie coaches to make a determination as to what type of deliveries to teach to their players has somehow been construed as a "pointing the finger at others". I'm pretty sure we're entitled to deciding what to or not to teach our bowlers. Also, you seem to be treating me as Ashley Mallett when I had already mentioned that I don't care if people chuck the ball, scratch it with a can opener or whatever as long as the ICC reckons its all good. I think there's a bit of Aussie hate clouding your judgment mate.

[Eshen]

Jason Krejza produces one that goes the other way. And gets away scot-free

http://www.cricinfo.com/page2/content/story/437267.html

Veteran Australian radio commentator Jim Maxwell said it hit a crack, Ed Cowan, who was playing in the game, said it hit the footmarks; and the news quickly spread: an Australian bowled an unplayable doosra. Nathan Hauritz then said he had one, but people ignored him.

Tim Coyle, Krejza's coach at Tasmania, stood up and made everyone feel better: "It is not a doosra, it is as simple as that".

Problem solved.

Coyle went on to say, "Jason Krejza has a special delivery that can't be compared with a bent-elbow doosra. People need to go and have a look at what he bowls. He bowls this ball that goes the other way exactly the same way as his offbreak, so to me it is not a doosra."

Thank you, Tim Coyle. Of course it isn't a doosra. How silly. It is an as-yet-unnamed mystery ball. Australian fans all let out a sigh of relief.

[Eshen]

And here is video evidence - Krejza bowling doosra!

Jason Krejza bowls Khawaja with a doosra

[Neel Here]

Originally Posted by Eshen
It's not only Aussies who think Doosra is illegal though,

Spin great Bedi blasts ICC over doosra row

bishen bedi has or had an aussie wife and he thinks of himself as an australian.

he can be generally trusted to give the oz viewpoint only.

[Eshen]

Now Pointing wants Hauritz to bowl doosra! No respect for Terry Jenner and Co!

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1225805135796

[Tigers_eye]

After pontings comment Ashley Mallet heads to the pub with his buddies. For some reason Bedi was not sited there. I wonder ....

[Neel Here]

http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/con...ry/435363.html

Three cheers for the crackdown on chucking

India seem to have made a start to combat illegal actions by allowing umpires to call bowlers on the field

Harsha Bhogle

November 20, 2009
Comments: 56 | Text size: A | A
Rajesh Pawar bowls, West Zone v East Zone, Duleep Trophy semi-final, Mumbai, 1st day, January 30, 2009
Rajesh Pawar is one of a bunch of players to have been no-balled for suspect actions this season © Cricinfo Ltd
Related Links
News : Call suspect actions immediately - BCCI
News : Kulamani Parida's action under scrutiny
News : After Veragi, Pawar called for suspect action

So umpires in India have started calling bowlers for chucking, and it is nice to see a forgotten law being implemented. Some bowlers, especially those who have played first-class cricket for eight or 10 years, might choose to disagree with the current practice. They are entitled to be a bit confused, but really, in our part of the world we have no alternative. In law, in spirit and in fairness, bowling has to be a straight-arm exercise, and that definition has been mutilated over the years. I suspect the reason umpires have started calling bowlers is not because, during an off-season revision, they discovered a law that seemed abandoned, or because they feel very strongly about it, but simply because there is now a list of offenders and umpires have been given the freedom to call them. It is a welcome change.

Bowlers might complain that they were fine all this time and that it is a bit unfair to call them now. But the law hasn't changed, merely the tools for its implementation. With fixed cameras at every first-class game, there is no place to hide anymore, and in any case the argument against unfairness suffers when confronted with the number of wickets that have been obtained with illegal actions over the years. In truth it had become an epidemic and had reached a stage where if we saw a finger spinner, rather than look at how good he was, we were overjoyed that he actually bowled with a straight arm. That is exactly the feeling I had when I first saw Shakib Al Hasan, the talented Bangladeshi cricketer. That he was a good bowler was almost secondary; that he didn't bend his arm was a surprise.

The idea of calling a bowler on the field is sound for at least a couple of reasons. The current procedure at the ICC is cumbersome and has an in-built failure mechanism. Umpires can only report bowlers, and if they report them frequently enough (and they can keep bowling till then), the bowlers have to, after undergoing remedial action, demonstrate the legality of their action before cameras, in an artificial situation. That is easily done. Now umpires are looking at what a bowler does in tense, sometimes desperate, situations, and that is the best indicator of how clean his action is at that moment. A bowler might bowl five clean deliveries and let one slip through. Only the on-field umpires can catch the moment.



Now umpires are looking at what a bowler does in tense, sometimes desperate, situations, and that is the best indicator of how clean his action is at that moment. A bowler might bowl five clean deliveries and let one slip through. Only the on-field umpires can catch the moment



India has actually done a commendable job by shortlisting bowlers with suspect actions, based on video footage, inviting them to the National Cricket Academy for remedial action and warning them that future transgressions will invite a no-ball call from an umpire. Bowlers therefore are aware that they are under the scanner, and that, in effect, takes much of the sting out of their argument. Now if everybody took care of this at domestic level, we would have few problems at the international level, where currently bowlers seem to enjoy greater latitude.

What this tells me is that intent is often the starting point, and therefore the stumbling block, for change. Intent has led to this action against one of the two epidemics in our cricket. Now we must look at the second - the problem with cricketers' ages. When I see the age against a player's name on some of the graphics, I cringe. It is embarrassing. In all fairness, once players are playing international cricket it shouldn't matter what number goes against their name in the age column, since it is one player's ability versus another. And irrespective of what a certificate says, the body knows its real age and so it knows when to send out the right signals. The problem is at the Under-19 level and lower, where you see players of every vintage on the field.

So either we crack down on players very early - difficult because local administrators and doctors are pretty strong and willing accomplices, or we reduce the importance given to Under-19 cricket. Today, because of the attention, and the resulting monetary benefit, there is a temptation to stay 19 for just a little while longer! It is unfair on genuine 17-year-olds because a two- or three-year age gap can be very large at that level.

I'm waiting to see a news report that says an Under-19 cricketer was banned for three years for being found over-age.

[_Rafi_]

I am not against doosra but i dont support the way it is bowled by Murali, Ajmal, Harbhajan and Botha. They all hv suspected action. Proper off-spin action should be like Hauritz, Riad's action.

Posted via BC Mobile Edition