Originally posted by invigorateYou're right, it was Doctrove. http://wwwc5.cricinfo.com/engvpak/engine/match/225258.html
The other umpire was not Steve Blind Man Bucknor it was a litlle man with no balls to make a decision eitherway. (his name escapes me, but I remeber reading he is not at the ICC tournament either.
But it was a joint decision which it has to be.
Originally posted by buffalobillThe only trouble is for Hair. If the charges were unfounded, why is Hair not sacked publicly? Both Hair and Doctrove were not chosen to umpire in this tourney? Might as well have the balls to fire him if the ICC is going to run with this policy of appeasement with the sub-continent cricket authorities.
You're right, it was Doctrove. http://wwwc5.cricinfo.com/engvpak/engine/match/225258.html
But it was a joint decision which it has to be.
Originally posted by lordhighgusFor the same reason that umpires are not sacked for getting an lbw or caught off an edge decision wrong.
The only trouble is for Hair. If the charges were unfounded, why is Hair not sacked publicly? Both Hair and Doctrove were not chosen to umpire in this tourney? Might as well have the balls to fire him if the ICC is going to run with this policy of appeasement with the sub-continent cricket authorities.
Umpires are paid to make judgement calls, which are occassionally wrong.
I don't see how the tampering incident was much different.
Originally posted by ElleEffSeeeI say the guy chucks. Dont give me all that rubbish about a deformed elbow, he chucks, plain and simple.
Murali's a genius. A few off-breaks getting Oram to shuffle across and leave his leg-stump exposed to the doosera! Quality.
Law 24.3 states:
"A ball is fairly delivered in respect to the arm if, once the bowler's arm has reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing, the elbow joint is not straightened partially or completely from that point until the ball has left the hand.
"This definition shall not debar a bowler from flexing or rotating the wrist in the delivery swing."
Before Murali was controversially no-balled for chucking, a bowler was allowed to bend and then straighten his arm by 10-degrees if a fast bowler, and by 5-degrees if a spin bowler. Any more, and the bowler was judged to be chucking.
Murali was found, after rigorous testing, to bend his arm by 14-degrees, 9 more than allowed by the rulebook, when bowling his doosra the "special" delivery that he was no-balled for. Even when he spent time in the bio-mechanical testing arena he was unable to get his elbow-extension below the 10 degree mark. Still 5+ degrees in excess of the rules.
Instead of holding Murali to the rulebook the ICC decided to change the rules to allow bending of the arm to 15 degrees. One can only assume this drastic increase was created to cover all of Murali's deliveries because he has such a huge fan base on the sub continent and ruling him out of the game would just about kill cricket over there.
The ICC commissioned 7 of former international cricketers (from a number of teams) to develop a set of new regulations (which were brought into practice on 1 March 2005) amongst them the new elbow flex angle of 15 degrees - to demonstrate that it was a universal decision of change.
Sunil Gavaskar (Former Indian batsman), Michael Holding ( Former West Indian fast bowler), Tim May (Former Australian off spinner), Aravinda de Silva (Former Sri Lankan batsman),
Tony Lewis (Former England captain), Angus Fraser (Former England fast bowler - did they have any? hehehe), David Richardson (Former South African wicket-keeper) were amongst those who created the new regulations which mean that Murali can no longer be called for a no-ball.
Ridiculous situation. The only umpire man enough to call him was Daryl Hair.
Well interesting the only people who seemed opposed to murali seems to be the Australians for some reason. Right from their prime minister who has no business to comment on this issue to the above 2 posters above me all australians seem to be after murali's blood..Come on the ICC cleared him.
Originally posted by lordhighgusYou forgot to mention that an independant report submitted to the ICC at around the same time showed that a substantial number of pace bowlers were also exceding the 10 degree limit.
I say the guy chucks. Dont give me all that rubbish about a deformed elbow, he chucks, plain and simple.
Law 24.3 states:
"A ball is fairly delivered in respect to the arm if, once the bowler's arm has reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing, the elbow joint is not straightened partially or completely from that point until the ball ha ...[text shortened]... a no-ball.
Ridiculous situation. The only umpire man enough to call him was Daryl Hair.
Originally posted by lordhighgusI don't know man. I've seen alot of him and his action seems fine to me.
I say the guy chucks. Dont give me all that rubbish about a deformed elbow, he chucks, plain and simple.
The only umpire man enough to call him was Daryl Hair.
BTW, what are your thoughts on this? http://www.cricketviewer.com/ricky-ponting-using-an-illegal-bat.html
Originally posted by CrowleyIt was judged contrary to the games intent or some such rubbish on February 20th, 2006 and he stopped using it. Just like Lillie with the aluminium bat and Lance Cairns with the shoulderless bat.
I don't know man. I've seen alot of him and his action seems fine to me.
BTW, what are your thoughts on this? http://www.cricketviewer.com/ricky-ponting-using-an-illegal-bat.html
I think Murali chucks, so do Brett Lee and Aktar on certain faster deliveries.
If we keep this up, we may as well play baseball.
The rules were changed for one man. This is not the spirit of cricket.
Originally posted by druidraviNo they didn't if you just read the above post ,they changed the rules ,there is a difference in clearing him and rule changing to cater for him.The prime minister is a cricket fan like thousands of others so yes he can have a comment on it .
Well interesting the only people who seemed opposed to murali seems to be the Australians for some reason. Right from their prime minister who has no business to comment on this issue to the above 2 posters above me all australians seem to be after murali's blood..Come on the ICC cleared him.
You will also find that it is not just Australians who think he chucks .
Anyway the ICC is gutless when it comes to making decisions on sub continent players ,look no further than the Pakistani cricketers who were guilty of taking drugs ,the ICC could of banned them but let the Pakistan cricket council deal with the issue ,knowing full well that they would not receive any ban ,to me they are no different than Shane Warne who served his suspension.
Originally posted by boarmanThe MCC should have control of cricket, not this toothless, gutless ICC.
No they didn't if you just read the above post ,they changed the rules ,there is a difference in clearing him and rule changing to cater for him.The prime minister is a cricket fan like thousands of others so yes he can have a comment on it .
You will also find that it is not just Australians who think he chucks .
Anyway the ICC is gutless when it comes to ...[text shortened]... ld not receive any ban ,to me they are no different than Shane Warne who served his suspension.