28 Apr 2004 20:24:57
Cricketislife!
Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

+++++++++++
The tests were conducted with the most up-to-date technology at the
Biomechanics Laboratory of the School of Human Movement and Exercise
Science at the University of Western Australia by a team led by
Professor Bruce Elliott. The nine-page confidential document
comprising the "Bowling Report — Mr. Muttiah Muralitharan" by
Professor Elliot and Jacque Alderson and the "Remediation Report — Mr.
Muttiah Muralitharan" by Mr. Foster is with The Hindu .
+++++++++++

READ IT AT

http://www.hindu.com/2004/04/29/stories/2004042905562200.htm


plus what could be sort of useful addon to that
Paul Adam's bowling action.... acc to the researcher he straightens it
by 19 degrees
The full ' ANALYSIS OF CRICKET BOWLING ACTION OF PAUL ADAMS' at
http://www.sportsci.com/SPORTSCI/JANUARY/biomechanics_of_cricket_bowling.htm

but the main thing is the murali report in the link at the top..

CiL
off to read the report


29 Apr 2004 04:11:25
Colin Lord
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"Cricketislife!" <cricketislife@rediffmail.com > wrote in message
news:754dc28b.0404281924.61e1b7c7@posting.google.com...
> +++++++++++
> The tests were conducted with the most up-to-date technology at the
> Biomechanics Laboratory of the School of Human Movement and Exercise
> Science at the University of Western Australia by a team led by
> Professor Bruce Elliott. The nine-page confidential document
> comprising the "Bowling Report - Mr. Muttiah Muralitharan" by
> Professor Elliot and Jacque Alderson and the "Remediation Report - Mr.
> Muttiah Muralitharan" by Mr. Foster is with The Hindu .
> +++++++++++

Wow, it started out at 14 degrees under lab conditions. In my mind that puts
it at 20+ in a degraded for in test leading up to the testing.




29 Apr 2004 14:47:01
Stephen Hobbs
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

Murali should have a greater tolerance because his action is similar to
another suspect fast bowlers action?
"Colin Lord" <clord@metz.une.edu.au > wrote in message
news:Nf%jc.3202$TT.856@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Cricketislife!" <cricketislife@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
> news:754dc28b.0404281924.61e1b7c7@posting.google.com...
> > +++++++++++
> > The tests were conducted with the most up-to-date technology at the
> > Biomechanics Laboratory of the School of Human Movement and Exercise
> > Science at the University of Western Australia by a team led by
> > Professor Bruce Elliott. The nine-page confidential document
> > comprising the "Bowling Report - Mr. Muttiah Muralitharan" by
> > Professor Elliot and Jacque Alderson and the "Remediation Report - Mr.
> > Muttiah Muralitharan" by Mr. Foster is with The Hindu .
> > +++++++++++
>
> Wow, it started out at 14 degrees under lab conditions. In my mind that
puts
> it at 20+ in a degraded for in test leading up to the testing.
>
>




29 Apr 2004 06:54:56
Paul Robson
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

Cricketislife! wrote:

> +++++++++++
> The tests were conducted with the most up-to-date technology at the
> Biomechanics Laboratory of the School of Human Movement and Exercise
> Science at the University of Western Australia by a team led by
> Professor Bruce Elliott. The nine-page confidential document
> comprising the "Bowling Report — Mr. Muttiah Muralitharan" by
> Professor Elliot and Jacque Alderson and the "Remediation Report — Mr.
> Muttiah Muralitharan" by Mr. Foster is with The Hindu .
> +++++++++++
>
> READ IT AT
>
> http://www.hindu.com/2004/04/29/stories/2004042905562200.htm
>
>
> plus what could be sort of useful addon to that
> Paul Adam's bowling action.... acc to the researcher he straightens it
> by 19 degrees
> The full  ' ANALYSIS OF CRICKET BOWLING ACTION OF PAUL ADAMS' at
>
http://www.sportsci.com/SPORTSCI/JANUARY/biomechanics_of_cricket_bowling.htm
>
> but the main thing is the murali report in the link at the top..

CiL, do I take this to mean the report is on line.... it isn't linked
on either page you refer to here.

Quite interesting. Could of course be fantasy but certainly totally
credible.



29 Apr 2004 16:33:59
Mango
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"Colin Lord" <clord@metz.une.edu.au > wrote in message
news:Nf%jc.3202$TT.856@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Cricketislife!" <cricketislife@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
> news:754dc28b.0404281924.61e1b7c7@posting.google.com...
> > +++++++++++
> > The tests were conducted with the most up-to-date technology at the
> > Biomechanics Laboratory of the School of Human Movement and Exercise
> > Science at the University of Western Australia by a team led by
> > Professor Bruce Elliott. The nine-page confidential document
> > comprising the "Bowling Report - Mr. Muttiah Muralitharan" by
> > Professor Elliot and Jacque Alderson and the "Remediation Report - Mr.
> > Muttiah Muralitharan" by Mr. Foster is with The Hindu .
> > +++++++++++
>
> Wow, it started out at 14 degrees under lab conditions. In my mind that
puts
> it at 20+ in a degraded for in test leading up to the testing.
>

It's obviously an optical illusion. It looked more like 45 degrees to me.

>




29 Apr 2004 17:08:02
Ian Galbraith
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 04:11:25 GMT, "Colin Lord" <clord@metz.une.edu.au >
wrote:

>
>"Cricketislife!" <cricketislife@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
>news:754dc28b.0404281924.61e1b7c7@posting.google.com...
>> +++++++++++
>> The tests were conducted with the most up-to-date technology at the
>> Biomechanics Laboratory of the School of Human Movement and Exercise
>> Science at the University of Western Australia by a team led by
>> Professor Bruce Elliott. The nine-page confidential document
>> comprising the "Bowling Report - Mr. Muttiah Muralitharan" by
>> Professor Elliot and Jacque Alderson and the "Remediation Report - Mr.
>> Muttiah Muralitharan" by Mr. Foster is with The Hindu .
>> +++++++++++
>
>Wow, it started out at 14 degrees under lab conditions. In my mind that puts
>it at 20+ in a degraded for in test leading up to the testing.

14 degrees at the first test, 10.2 degrees after remedial action. I
guess that settles the debate as to whether he can bowl his doosra
legally, and whether he is in fact cheating by now bowling it in
matches. Assuming this report is accurate of course.




29 Apr 2004 19:52:15
Rats
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

"Cricketislife!" <cricketislife@rediffmail.com > wrote in message
news:754dc28b.0404281924.61e1b7c7@posting.google.com...
> +++++++++++
> The tests were conducted with the most up-to-date technology at the
> Biomechanics Laboratory of the School of Human Movement and Exercise
> Science at the University of Western Australia by a team led by
> Professor Bruce Elliott. The nine-page confidential document
> comprising the "Bowling Report - Mr. Muttiah Muralitharan" by
> Professor Elliot and Jacque Alderson and the "Remediation Report - Mr.
> Muttiah Muralitharan" by Mr. Foster is with The Hindu .
> +++++++++++

ROFLMAO! Murali started out at 14 degrees under lab conditions?! They then
tried "remedial" action and this brought it down to 10.2! OMG! What sort of
lunacy is this? Man, under game conditions Murali must be wrenching his
elbow out. ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTING!




29 Apr 2004 09:01:38
Cicero
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"Rats" <rubix@chump.com > wrote in message
news:c6qc6d$16ph$1@news.f.de.plusline.net...
> "Cricketislife!" <cricketislife@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
> news:754dc28b.0404281924.61e1b7c7@posting.google.com...
> > +++++++++++
> > The tests were conducted with the most up-to-date technology at the
> > Biomechanics Laboratory of the School of Human Movement and Exercise
> > Science at the University of Western Australia by a team led by
> > Professor Bruce Elliott. The nine-page confidential document
> > comprising the "Bowling Report - Mr. Muttiah Muralitharan" by
> > Professor Elliot and Jacque Alderson and the "Remediation Report - Mr.
> > Muttiah Muralitharan" by Mr. Foster is with The Hindu .
> > +++++++++++
>
> ROFLMAO! Murali started out at 14 degrees under lab conditions?! They then
> tried "remedial" action and this brought it down to 10.2! OMG! What sort
of
> lunacy is this? Man, under game conditions Murali must be wrenching his
> elbow out. ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTING!
>
>

This is a better scoop.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4146756343




29 Apr 2004 20:34:01
alvey
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


1. I was unaware Daryl Foster was ever a WA coach. Perhaps a
Westralian could provide some local knowledge?

2. There seems to be an excessive amount of Foster's recommendations
and input into these reports. You'd think that the purpose of the
exercise would be to determine whether the bowler exceeds this
accursed "tolerance" level. Simplistically, it should be just a Yes/No
answer NOT all sorts of escape clauses, mitigations and limited
comparisons.

3. The process outlined from this report leans heavily towards farce.
I was particularly sceptical about the bit where it appears Merrily
bowled a few deliveries which analysis then showed to be 14 degrees.
So in steps Super Daz, a former employee of SLC let this cynic remind,
and with a few words of wisdom instantly reduces it to 10 degrees.
Meanwhile, independent observer B Yardley continues to read the
newspaper and catch up on phome messages from Colombo. One could opine
that Merrily didn't try really, really hard after Daz'z words while
"Dying Day" Yardley looked out the window.

4. I also VERY SERIOUSLY INDEED disagree with Foster's diagnosis and
explanation of MM's problems; in that; "... Murali's technical
problems. "Murali began his run up at too much of an angle to the
bowling crease. This resulted in Murali bowling wide on the crease
which caused his bowling action to be quite open by Merrily.""
In my opinion, this is complete and utter bullshit. Firstly, it's 100%
incorrect to state that if the bowler begins his run-up at a biggish
angle then there is absolutely no reason at all why he still can't
bowl from close to the stumps. DF may not have meant what it reads,
but what it reads is either a snow job or a blow job.
Secondly, technically and logically (not always the same thing), if a
bowler runs in from a wide angle then he *must* bowl more side-on than
if he runs straight in. The opposite of what DF is avering here.
Recall the change that the WI fast bowlers (and plague proportion back
injuries) bought in by running straight in rather than the traditional
Asif Masood/mid off angle. Sorry Daryl, I don't know, or care, why
you're doing it, but you're fudging, and fudging very, very badly here.

Lost interest after this.

The only good that *may* come from this report is to highlight the
irrational, illogical and wasteful nature of this existing process.
It's shite.



alvey


alvey



29 Apr 2004 21:39:44
alvey
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

alvey wrote bad in his last post:

>
snip
>
> 2. There seems to be an excessive amount of Foster's recommendations and
> input into these reports. You'd think that the purpose of the exercise
> would be to determine whether the bowler exceeds this accursed
> "tolerance" level. Simplistically, it should be just a Yes/No answer NOT
> all sorts of escape clauses, mitigations and limited comparisons.

I forgot that Stage 1 is also supposed to rectify, hence the
over-supply of Foster. An Official Oops.



29 Apr 2004 20:41:16
Jason Derby
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

"alvey" <alvey_digit_sidecast@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:c6qlms$emjtb$1@ID-155113.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> 1. I was unaware Daryl Foster was ever a WA coach. Perhaps a
> Westralian could provide some local knowledge?
>

Yes he was. Some time in the 90's. Can't recall when or for how long though.
I think it was after the Alderman debacle and before Clarke.

Regards,
Jason




29 Apr 2004 16:53:58
max.it
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

"Rats" <rubix@chump.com >

>"Cricketislife!" <cricketislife@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
>news:754dc28b.0404281924.61e1b7c7@posting.google.com...
>> +++++++++++
>> The tests were conducted with the most up-to-date technology at the
>> Biomechanics Laboratory of the School of Human Movement and Exercise
>> Science at the University of Western Australia by a team led by
>> Professor Bruce Elliott. The nine-page confidential document
>> comprising the "Bowling Report - Mr. Muttiah Muralitharan" by
>> Professor Elliot and Jacque Alderson and the "Remediation Report - Mr.
>> Muttiah Muralitharan" by Mr. Foster is with The Hindu .
>> +++++++++++
>
>ROFLMAO! Murali started out at 14 degrees under lab conditions?! They then
>tried "remedial" action and this brought it down to 10.2! OMG! What sort of
>lunacy is this? Man, under game conditions Murali must be wrenching his
>elbow out. ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTING!
>
>


Perhaps Elliot and Alderson should be standing in white coats.
The most up to date technology on a cricket pitch is the man who calls the no ball.

max.it


30 Apr 2004 13:31:56
Andrew Dunford
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


<snip >

The long extract quoted directly from the report (shame it's not the report
in total) confirms that the UWA's position wrt Murali does indeed rely
heavily on the research of Marc Portus.

Portus' research was the now-infamous (at least on this newsgroup) study of
34 deliveries bowled by 21 fast bowlers, 14 of which exceeded the current
tolerance limit of 10%. From those figures (i.e. perhaps one or two
deliveries from each bowler in the study), Daryl Foster is able to conclude
that "there are fast bowlers who are regularly operating outside legal
limits" and "fast bowlers...have regularly extended their elbow more than
the accepted limit".

It might be time to try to track down a copy of the Portus paper.

Andrew




29 Apr 2004 22:58:13
Bob Dubery
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

"Andrew Dunford" <adunford@artifax.net > wrote in message news:<s0ikc.424$s3.45988@news02.tsnz.net>...
> <snip>
>
> The long extract quoted directly from the report (shame it's not the report
> in total) confirms that the UWA's position wrt Murali does indeed rely
> heavily on the research of Marc Portus.
>
> Portus' research was the now-infamous (at least on this newsgroup) study of
> 34 deliveries bowled by 21 fast bowlers, 14 of which exceeded the current
> tolerance limit of 10%. From those figures (i.e. perhaps one or two
> deliveries from each bowler in the study), Daryl Foster is able to conclude
> that "there are fast bowlers who are regularly operating outside legal
> limits" and "fast bowlers...have regularly extended their elbow more than
> the accepted limit".
>
> It might be time to try to track down a copy of the Portus paper.

I've been looking for it.

All I've found so far is references to it.

Portus is an ICC accredited human movement specialist (so that makes
at least 3 of them). He helped Brett Lee sort out his acton and was on
the panel that reviewed and assisted Sanwar Hossein.


30 Apr 2004 16:34:55
Ken Higgs
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !



Bob Dubery wrote:

> "Andrew Dunford" <adunford@artifax.net> wrote in message news:<s0ikc.424$s3.45988@news02.tsnz.net>...
> > <snip>
> >
> > The long extract quoted directly from the report (shame it's not the report
> > in total) confirms that the UWA's position wrt Murali does indeed rely
> > heavily on the research of Marc Portus.
> >
> > Portus' research was the now-infamous (at least on this newsgroup) study of
> > 34 deliveries bowled by 21 fast bowlers, 14 of which exceeded the current
> > tolerance limit of 10%. From those figures (i.e. perhaps one or two
> > deliveries from each bowler in the study), Daryl Foster is able to conclude
> > that "there are fast bowlers who are regularly operating outside legal
> > limits" and "fast bowlers...have regularly extended their elbow more than
> > the accepted limit".
> >
> > It might be time to try to track down a copy of the Portus paper.
>
> I've been looking for it.
>
> All I've found so far is references to it.
>
> Portus is an ICC accredited human movement specialist (so that makes
> at least 3 of them). He helped Brett Lee sort out his acton and was on
> the panel that reviewed and assisted Sanwar Hossein.

I'm wondering if it ever got published.
Or maybe hasn't been yet.
Or is too sensitive.
I searched a couple of reliable databases, with some interesting results (posted below), and I've got
another reference to Portus from the 19 Int. S. Biom. Sports 2001 that I haven't located yet. I'm
assuming this to be the 19th International Symposium on Biome(chanical?) Sports.
But 2001 still seems too early if the testing was done at the WC.

Anyway:

EMBASE © 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All Rights Reserved

Cricket fast bowling performance and technique
and the influence of selected physical factors during
an 8-over spell

Portus M.R.; Sinclair P.J.; Burke S.T.; Moore D.J.A.; Farhart P.J.

M.R. Portus, Department of Biomechanics, Australian Institute of Sport, PO Box 176,
Belconnen, ACT 2616, Australia; e-mail marc.portus@ausport.gov.au

Abstract

The aims of this study were to determine the influence of an 8-over spell on cricket fast bowling
technique and performance (speed and accuracy), and to establish the relationship of selected
physical capacities with technique and performance during an 8-over spell. Fourteen first-grade fast
bowlers with a mean age of 23 years participated in the study. Physical capacities assessed were
abdominal strength, trunk stability, selected girth and skinfold measures. During the delivery
stride,
bowlers were filmed from an overhead and lateral perspective (50 Hz) to obtain two-dimensional
data for transverse plane shoulder alignment and sagittal plane knee joint angle respectively. Ball
speed was measured by a radar gun and accuracy by the impact point of each delivery on a zoned
scoring target at the batter's stumps. Shoulder counter-rotation did not change significantly between

overs 2 and 8 for all bowlers, but was significantly related to a more front-on shoulder orientation
at
back foot impact. When the front-on fast bowlers (n=5) were isolated for analysis, shoulder
counter-rotation increased significantly between overs 2 and 8. Ball speed remained constant while
accuracy showed some non-significant variation during the spell. Shoulder counter-rotation was
significantly related to accuracy scores during the second half of the 8-over spell. Chest girth and
composition and body composition were significantly related to ball release speed at various times
during the spell. [Journal Conference Paper; 33 Refs; In English; Summary in English]

Medical Index Terms: physical performance; human; normal human; adult; athlete; accuracy;
physical capacity; muscle fatigue; body movement; sport; conference paper

EMBASE Classifications: 002 - Physiology; 035 - Occupational Health and Industrial Medicine

Journal of Sports Sciences
Volume 18, Issue 12, 2000, Pages 999-1011
ISSN: 0264-0414, Coden: JSSCE

British Journal of Sports Medicine
Volume 36, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 222-223
ISSN: 0306-3674, Coden: BJSMD

and

EMBASE © 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All Rights Reserved

Exact moment of a gastrocnemius muscle strain
captured on video

Orchard J.W.; Alcott E.; James T.; Farhart P.; Portus M.; Waugh S.R.

Dr. J.W. Orchard, South Sydney Sports Medicine, III Anzac Parade, Kensington,
NSW 2033, Australia; e-mail johnorchard@msn.com.au

Abstract

A left gastrocnemius strain was sustained by an elite cricket batsman while he was taking off to run.

The exact moment of injury, captured by a camera in the middle stump, appears to correspond to
the sudden appearance of a deficit in the gastrocnemius muscle, seen through the player's trousers.
The strain occurred when the entire body weight was on the left foot with the centre of mass well in
front of the leg. The injury probably occurred close to the time when the gastrocnemius complex
was moving from an eccentric to an isometric phase. [Journal Article; 10 Refs; In English; Summary
in English]

Medical Index Terms: muscle injury; sport injury; gastrocnemius muscle; videorecording; camera;
mass; weight bearing; muscle isometric contraction; Australia and New Zealand; stress strain
relationship; human; male; case report; adult; article

EMBASE Classifications: 027 - Biophysics, Bioengineering and Medical Instrumentation; 033 -
Orthopaedic Surgery

British Journal of Sports Medicine
Volume 36, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 222-2

So, Waugh has now moved into Biophysical research....

H




30 Apr 2004 19:44:40
Andrew Dunford
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"Bob Dubery" <megapode@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:e8f67309.0404292158.1c1970f@posting.google.com...
> "Andrew Dunford" <adunford@artifax.net> wrote in message
news:<s0ikc.424$s3.45988@news02.tsnz.net >...
> > <snip>
> >
> > The long extract quoted directly from the report (shame it's not the
report
> > in total) confirms that the UWA's position wrt Murali does indeed rely
> > heavily on the research of Marc Portus.
> >
> > Portus' research was the now-infamous (at least on this newsgroup) study
of
> > 34 deliveries bowled by 21 fast bowlers, 14 of which exceeded the
current
> > tolerance limit of 10%. From those figures (i.e. perhaps one or two
> > deliveries from each bowler in the study), Daryl Foster is able to
conclude
> > that "there are fast bowlers who are regularly operating outside legal
> > limits" and "fast bowlers...have regularly extended their elbow more
than
> > the accepted limit".
> >
> > It might be time to try to track down a copy of the Portus paper.
>
> I've been looking for it.
>
> All I've found so far is references to it.
>
> Portus is an ICC accredited human movement specialist (so that makes
> at least 3 of them). He helped Brett Lee sort out his acton and was on
> the panel that reviewed and assisted Sanwar Hossein.

It has certainly been published. The paper is:

Portus MR, Mason BR, Rath DA and Rosemond CD. A kinematic analysis of fast
bowling arm actions in men's cricket matches. In Conference Proceedings of
the 2nd World Congress of Science and Medicine in Cricket. Cape Town, South
Africa, February 6-8 2003

Portus works in the Cricket Australia Sports Science Program, which is run
using facilities at the AIS in Canberra with posts funded by CA. The paper
can supposedly be obtained from the AIS via the National Sport Information
Centre's Document Delivery Service, after one signs the usual copyright
forms, hands over some money and waits for a few weeks.

The search page for AIS research is at:
http://www.ais.org.au/research/rpphome.asp#start

Mr Portus himself is apparently on leave from the CA Sports Science Program
until January 2005.

Andrew




30 Apr 2004 19:06:00
Adam Harvey
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 16:34:55 +1000, Ken Higgs wrote:
> I'm wondering if it ever got published.
> Or maybe hasn't been yet.
> Or is too sensitive.
> I searched a couple of reliable databases, with some interesting results (posted below), and I've got
> another reference to Portus from the 19 Int. S. Biom. Sports 2001 that I haven't located yet. I'm
> assuming this to be the 19th International Symposium on Biome(chanical?) Sports.
> But 2001 still seems too early if the testing was done at the WC.

It doesn't appear to have been published anywhere that I can find. The
first article listed, "Cricket fast bowling performance and technique and
the influence of selected physical factors during an 8-over spell", is
focused on a number of fast bowling factors, including accuracy, knee
angle at delivery and shoulder rotation, but doesn't deal with throwing at
all. The only mention of elbows in the entire paper is a brief snippet on
measuring abdominal strength.

Interesting stuff, but unrelated to the topic at hand, sadly.
Incidentally, the testing in the report was conducted using Sydney
first-grade bowlers in July 1998.

Adam


30 Apr 2004 09:01:14
Bob Dubery
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

Ken Higgs <kenhiggs8@hotmail.com > wrote in message news:<4091F38F.35478EA0@hotmail.com>...

> I'm wondering if it ever got published.
> Or maybe hasn't been yet.
> Or is too sensitive.
It hasn't been published online - that doesn't mean it hasn't been
published. The paper has certainly been presented.


01 May 2004 15:48:09
Mad Hamish
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

On 30 Apr 2004 09:01:14 -0700, megapode@hotmail.com (Bob Dubery)
wrote:

>Ken Higgs <kenhiggs8@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<4091F38F.35478EA0@hotmail.com>...
>
>> I'm wondering if it ever got published.
>> Or maybe hasn't been yet.
>> Or is too sensitive.
>It hasn't been published online - that doesn't mean it hasn't been
>published. The paper has certainly been presented.

Don't most conferences make their proceedings available at some stage?
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001

Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
newslaws@iinet.net.au


01 May 2004 13:50:28
Phil. Felton
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

Mad Hamish wrote:

> On 30 Apr 2004 09:01:14 -0700, megapode@hotmail.com (Bob Dubery)
> wrote:
>
> >Ken Higgs <kenhiggs8@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<4091F38F.35478EA0@hotmail.com>...
> >
> >> I'm wondering if it ever got published.
> >> Or maybe hasn't been yet.
> >> Or is too sensitive.
> >It hasn't been published online - that doesn't mean it hasn't been
> >published. The paper has certainly been presented.
>
> Don't most conferences make their proceedings available at some stage?

It depends, sometimes they're only available to participants, in those cases you can sometimes
buy a copy fom the sponsoring organisation if they have any extras.

Phil.



01 May 2004 22:05:12
Bob Dubery
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

"Phil. Felton" <felton@princeton.edu > wrote in message news:<4093E365.C8077091@princeton.edu>...

> It depends, sometimes they're only available to participants, in those cases you can sometimes
> buy a copy fom the sponsoring organisation if they have any extras.

Which is the case with this paper. Copies are available via the post
and at a price.

I would also guess that it depends on who funded the research and the
laws in the country where the study was done. In some countries IF the
research was effectively funded by the taxpayer and IF the subject or
the results are not deemed to be of strategic importance THEN the
information comes into the public domain.


03 May 2004 14:29:14
dechucka
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"Andrew Dunford" <adunford@artifax.net > wrote in message
news:s0ikc.424$s3.45988@news02.tsnz.net...
>
> <snip>
>
> The long extract quoted directly from the report (shame it's not the
report
> in total) confirms that the UWA's position wrt Murali does indeed rely
> heavily on the research of Marc Portus.
>
> Portus' research was the now-infamous (at least on this newsgroup) study
of
> 34 deliveries bowled by 21 fast bowlers, 14 of which exceeded the current
> tolerance limit of 10%. From those figures (i.e. perhaps one or two
> deliveries from each bowler in the study), Daryl Foster is able to
conclude
> that "there are fast bowlers who are regularly operating outside legal
> limits" and "fast bowlers...have regularly extended their elbow more than
> the accepted limit".
>
> It might be time to try to track down a copy of the Portus paper.
>
> Andrew

This is the paper

Portus MR, Mason BR, Rath DA and Rosemond CD. Fast bowling arm actions and
the illegal delivery law in men's high performance cricket matches. In
Conference Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress of Science and Medicine in
Cricket. Cape Town, South Africa, February 6-8, 2003.




03 May 2004 15:15:30
witt
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

Didn't read all of it but if thats all correct and they changed the law
he still couldn't bowl it as he would still breach it by 0.2%...


03 May 2004 17:44:32
Aditya Basrur
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk > wrote in message
news:CUjlc.71$lS.2265@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...

> >
> > It might be time to try to track down a copy of the Portus paper.
> >
> > Andrew
>
> This is the paper
>
> Portus MR, Mason BR, Rath DA and Rosemond CD. Fast bowling arm actions
and
> the illegal delivery law in men's high performance cricket matches. In
> Conference Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress of Science and Medicine
in
> Cricket. Cape Town, South Africa, February 6-8, 2003.
>

Have you translated it into French for us yet?

Aditya




03 May 2004 15:46:59
dechucka
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"Aditya Basrur" <sandaas_rocks@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:c74m4k$ki1$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
> "dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk> wrote in message
> news:CUjlc.71$lS.2265@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
>
> > >
> > > It might be time to try to track down a copy of the Portus paper.
> > >
> > > Andrew
> >
> > This is the paper
> >
> > Portus MR, Mason BR, Rath DA and Rosemond CD. Fast bowling arm actions
> and
> > the illegal delivery law in men's high performance cricket matches. In
> > Conference Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress of Science and Medicine
> in
> > Cricket. Cape Town, South Africa, February 6-8, 2003.
> >
>
> Have you translated it into French for us yet?

translate it I can't find an actual copy of the report
>
> Aditya
>
>




03 May 2004 02:19:47
David Male
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

On Mon, 3 May 2004 14:29:14 +1000, "dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk >
wrote:
>This is the paper
>
>Portus MR, Mason BR, Rath DA and Rosemond CD. Fast bowling arm actions and
>the illegal delivery law in men's high performance cricket matches. In
>Conference Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress of Science and Medicine in
>Cricket. Cape Town, South Africa, February 6-8, 2003.

I cant find the above paper but here is an earlier one....

copyright acknowledged etc etc.........

Journal of Sports Sciences, Dec 2000 v18 i12 p999
Cricket fast bowling performance and technique and the influence of
selected physical factors during an 8-over spell (3). MARC R. PORTUS;
PETER J. SINCLAIR; STEPHEN T. BURKE; DAVID J.A. MOORE; PATRICK J.
FARHART.
Full Text: COPYRIGHT 2000 E & F N Spon
Trunk stability is also assessed in cricket fast bowlers because of the
notion that a strong and stable mid-torso region is fundamental for
efficient technique, force production and injury prevention (Faccioni,
1994; Saunders, 1995). It could also be argued that a stronger
midsection enables a front-on orientation to be maintained more easily
through the delivery stride and, therefore, reduces shoulder
counter-rotation. The trunk stability test conducted in this study
proved to have no relationship with the shoulder counter-rotation
displayed by these fast bowlers during any stage of the spell. The use
of the biofeedback pressure pad to evaluate the strength of the
lumbo-pelvic stabilizing muscles may be flawed, as it has been noted
that participants sometimes recruit other musculature in the torso to
substitute for poor stabilizing muscle recruitment patterns (Richardson
and Jull, 1995).
The significant inverse correlation between trunk stability and the mean
knee angle at front-foot impact is interesting. Bowlers who recorded low
trunk stability scores had a straighter front knee at front-foot impact.
Even though this correlation is only moderate in strength ([r.sup.2] =
0.41; i.e. 41% of the variance is explained), it suggests that trunk
stability could play a role in the technique of fast bowlers. It is hard
to explain this relationship, as a straighter front leg at front-foot
impact is believed to result in less force being absorbed by the lower
limb and more by the trunk. It is logical that bowlers landing on a
straighter front limb should have better developed muscular support of
the lumbo-pelvic region to help absorb the higher ground reaction forces
thought to be experienced by the lower back when this technique is used.
The results of this study suggest otherwise. It is possible that the
bowlers with a bent knee at front-foot impact might have adapted by
using their core trunk musculature to facilitate their trunk being used
as a rigid lever instead of their front lower limb.
Physical capacities and fast bowling performance
At all ball speeds, chest composition correlated more highly than chest
girth. Furthermore, chest composition correlated significantly with
maximum ball speed, whereas chest girth did not. The average coefficient
of determination for all these correlations ([r.sup.2]) suggests that
chest composition explains 45% of variance in ball speed. The average
[r.sup.2] for the straight chest girth measurements and ball speed
readings was 36%. These results imply that those bowlers with a larger
and leaner upper torso bowl consistently faster than their smaller, less
lean counterparts. It should be noted, however, that other factors, such
as limb length, strength and approach speed, were not analysed in this
study. It could be that the bowlers with a larger torso also approached
the bowling crease faster or had longer limbs, giving them a speed
leverage advantage.
As a larger overall fat-free size was also related to higher ball
speeds, it would appear that general body physical factors, as opposed
to the upper body alone, play a role in ball speed. However, the
strength of the correlations suggests that the composition of the chest
and upper back regions appears to be related more to ball speed than
overall body composition. The path of the bowling arm leading up to and
after ball release is the anatomical movement of humerus circumduction,
which combines the movements of flexion, extension, abduction and
adduction. The predominant muscles in the chest girth measurement, the
pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi, play a major role in most of
these actions (Thompson and Floyd, 1994). A long-held notion has been
that a proportional relationship exists between a muscle's maximal
contractile force and its cross-sectional area (Wilmore, 1974; Castro et
al., 1995). The bowlers with larger and leaner dimensions in the upper
torso bowled faster in this study; this may have been due to higher
strength or force-producing capacities in the pectoralis major and
latissimus dorsi muscles. These muscles have been reported to be highly
active during the acceleration and follow-through phases of the humerus
during the tennis serve (Ryu et al., 1988) and the baseball pitch (lobe
et al., 1984). Although other muscles, such as the deltoid, play a role
in the angular velocity of the humerus, the pectoralis major and
latissimus dorsi are likely to be integral in the rapid circumduction of
the humerus during the fast bowling delivery stride as well.
Foster and John (1987) reported a relationship between upper body
strength and ball release speed; however, they also stated that too much
reliance on upper body strength may increase the torsional loading
experienced by the lower back. However, as strength was not measured in
this study, we can only speculate on the link between strength and
bowling speed. Further investigations are required to substantiate these
speculations and determine the optimal strengths of the different body
regions for both performance enhancement and injury prevention. If this
can be achieved, physical preparation for fast bowling will become more
purposeful and effective.
Relationships between fast bowling technique and accuracy
There is no reference in the research literature to the role that
technique plays in the accuracy of fast bowling. Evidence was
forthcoming to suggest that increased shoulder counter-rotation may be
one of many factors affecting bowling accuracy, particularly in the
later stages of a bowling spell. The [r.sup.2] value of the correlation
suggests that increased shoulder counter-rotation could explain up to
29% of poorer bowling accuracy. A possible explanation for this may be
that counter-rotation of the shoulders affects the stability of the head
and upper body, resulting in difficulties in keeping the eyes on the
target, in the development of efficient upper body technique and,
ultimately, in achieving better accuracy. The importance of keeping the
eyes fixed on the desired target throughout the delivery stride and
follow-through for improved accuracy has been reported in the cricket
literature (Lillee, 1977; Australian Cricket Board, 1998). Further work
is required to validate this accuracy protocol or identify another
laboratory-based protocol for measuring accuracy that simulates match
demands.
Relationships between fast bowling technique and ball release speed
When the mean knee angle at ball release was calculated from the three
filmed deliveries, the correlation between knee angle at ball release
and mean ball speed was not significant. The correlation between mean
knee angle at ball release and the maximum ball speed was close to
significance (P = 0.055), again suggesting that knee angle may play a
role in higher ball release speeds. The notion that a knee angle of 150
[degrees] or more at ball release provides increased ball speed benefits
(Elliott et al., 1986) received little support from this study. The
bowlers who exhibited a mean knee angle equal to or greater than 148
[degrees] did not bowl significantly faster during the spell.
Conclusions
Although this study has some limitations, several conclusions can be
drawn. First, fast bowlers using a front-on technique increase shoulder
counter-rotation during the course of an 8-over spell. This may increase
their predisposition to lower back injury during the course oft he
spell.
Secondly, increased shoulder counter-rotation is linked to a more `open'
shoulder alignment at back-foot impact. Coaches should be aware that
fast bowlers find it difficult to maintain a more `open' technique
throughout the delivery stride; this is often difficult to detect with
the human eye. Preference should be given to the semi-open front-on
technique rather than the more open front-on technique wherever
possible.
Thirdly, bowlers with a larger and leaner upper torso bowled faster than
those with a smaller and less lean upper torso. An overall larger and
leaner body composition was also related to ball release speed, although
not as strongly as the upper torso. Further research into the optimal
strengths required by fast bowlers in the different regions of the body
is recommended to enhance performance and minimize injury.
Finally, greater shoulder counter-rotation appears to be related to
poorer bowling accuracy during the later stages of an 8-over spell;
however, this result can only be substantiated by validation of the
accuracy protocol used in the present study.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the bowlers for their participation in
this study, the New South Wales Cricket Association for their support
and Dr Kevin Ness of James Cook University who assisted in the
compilation of this report.





03 May 2004 22:48:57
Larry de Silva
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"witt" <me@home.on.the.net > wrote in message
news:030520041515305359%me@home.on.the.net...
> Didn't read all of it but if thats all correct and they changed the law
> he still couldn't bowl it as he would still breach it by 0.2%...


That's nothing dude, negligible, like getting $20.02 of petrol but only
paying $20.00 cash. No one cares.

Get over it.

Laz




03 May 2004 21:32:47
Colin Kynoch
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

On Mon, 3 May 2004 22:48:57 +1000, "Larry de Silva"
<larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au > parted their butt cheeks and let rip
with this:

>
>"witt" <me@home.on.the.net> wrote in message
>news:030520041515305359%me@home.on.the.net...
>> Didn't read all of it but if thats all correct and they changed the law
>> he still couldn't bowl it as he would still breach it by 0.2%...
>
>
>That's nothing dude, negligible, like getting $20.02 of petrol but only
>paying $20.00 cash. No one cares.

Actually it would be like getting $20.40 of petrol and only paying for
$20 so that would be in fact theft.

Colin Kynoch


04 May 2004 10:54:42
witt
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

In article <mdrlc.165$lS.6422@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au >, Larry de Silva
<larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au > wrote:

> "witt" <me@home.on.the.net> wrote in message
> news:030520041515305359%me@home.on.the.net...
> > Didn't read all of it but if thats all correct and they changed the law
> > he still couldn't bowl it as he would still breach it by 0.2%...
>
>
> That's nothing dude, negligible, like getting $20.02 of petrol but only
> paying $20.00 cash. No one cares.
>
> Get over it.
>
> Laz
>
Another way to look at it is that he could easily revert to the 14
degrees at any particular time for a few deliveries depending on the
circumstances of the match...


04 May 2004 10:59:24
dechucka
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"witt" <me@home.on.the.net > wrote in message
news:040520041054422351%me@home.on.the.net...
> In article <mdrlc.165$lS.6422@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>, Larry de Silva
> <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> > "witt" <me@home.on.the.net> wrote in message
> > news:030520041515305359%me@home.on.the.net...
> > > Didn't read all of it but if thats all correct and they changed the
law
> > > he still couldn't bowl it as he would still breach it by 0.2%...
> >
> >
> > That's nothing dude, negligible, like getting $20.02 of petrol but only
> > paying $20.00 cash. No one cares.
> >
> > Get over it.
> >
> > Laz
> >
> Another way to look at it is that he could easily revert to the 14
> degrees at any particular time for a few deliveries depending on the
> circumstances of the match...

which is the problem that a lot of people have with testing and "clearing?"
people in the lab. All that lab testing proves is that a person is capable
of bowling within the laws or, as in Muralis case, that even in perfect
conditions they cannot legally bowl within the laws. The relevance of these
results to match conditions is minimal to say the least IMHO.




04 May 2004 04:54:35
Bob Dubery
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

"dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk > wrote in message news:<UVBlc.41$7P1.991@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>...

> which is the problem that a lot of people have with testing and "clearing?"
> people in the lab.
There is no clearing. No bowler gets a certificate saying that his
action is clean now and for always.

The ICC protocols place no prohibition on a bowler being called and/or
repeated over and over.

That said, it does get difficult for an umpire. If a test and
especially a stage 2 test showed no problem then it gets very hard for
an umpire to fly in the face of precedent. Unless, of course, the
bowler makes a distinct change to his technique or develops a
distinctly new variant ball.

The latest protocol under which Murali has been reported makes it a
little easier for the umpire in that the stage 1 test is a friendly
test and can be taken as putting the bowler on notice. So the bowler
gets a chance to sort things out of his own free will and the umpires
and referees still have a second nibble at the cherry if they think
there is something dodgy going on.


05 May 2004 08:47:20
dechucka
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"Bob Dubery" <megapode@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:e8f67309.0405040354.303d708a@posting.google.com...
> "dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk> wrote in message
news:<UVBlc.41$7P1.991@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au >...
>
> > which is the problem that a lot of people have with testing and
"clearing?"
> > people in the lab.
> There is no clearing. No bowler gets a certificate saying that his
> action is clean now and for always.
>
> The ICC protocols place no prohibition on a bowler being called and/or
> repeated over and over.
>
> That said, it does get difficult for an umpire. If a test and
> especially a stage 2 test showed no problem then it gets very hard for
> an umpire to fly in the face of precedent. Unless, of course, the
> bowler makes a distinct change to his technique or develops a
> distinctly new variant ball.
>
> The latest protocol under which Murali has been reported makes it a
> little easier for the umpire in that the stage 1 test is a friendly
> test and can be taken as putting the bowler on notice. So the bowler
> gets a chance to sort things out of his own free will and the umpires
> and referees still have a second nibble at the cherry if they think
> there is something dodgy going on.

agree with you which is why I put the question mark around the CLEARING, it
is a popular misconception or deliberate mistruth put forward that being
tested and passed show the bowler can never chuck again




04 May 2004 21:25:42
kenhiggs8
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

Colin Kynoch <kynochfamily@bigpond.com > wrote in message news:<jied90tddsjl4rsjlq2929bs8t8a8rqap4@4ax.com>...
> On Mon, 3 May 2004 22:48:57 +1000, "Larry de Silva"
> <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> parted their butt cheeks and let rip
> with this:
>
> >
> >"witt" <me@home.on.the.net> wrote in message
> >news:030520041515305359%me@home.on.the.net...
> >> Didn't read all of it but if thats all correct and they changed the law
> >> he still couldn't bowl it as he would still breach it by 0.2%...
> >
> >
> >That's nothing dude, negligible, like getting $20.02 of petrol but only
> >paying $20.00 cash. No one cares.
>
> Actually it would be like getting $20.40 of petrol and only paying for
> $20 so that would be in fact theft.
>
> Colin Kynoch


So when will you starting up a new thread 'Murali is a thief'?

H


05 May 2004 15:05:07
dechucka
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"kenhiggs8" <kenhiggs8@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:6af2bb1.0405042025.6ceff33d@posting.google.com...
> Colin Kynoch <kynochfamily@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:<jied90tddsjl4rsjlq2929bs8t8a8rqap4@4ax.com >...
> > On Mon, 3 May 2004 22:48:57 +1000, "Larry de Silva"
> > <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> parted their butt cheeks and let rip
> > with this:
> >
> > >
> > >"witt" <me@home.on.the.net> wrote in message
> > >news:030520041515305359%me@home.on.the.net...
> > >> Didn't read all of it but if thats all correct and they changed the
law
> > >> he still couldn't bowl it as he would still breach it by 0.2%...
> > >
> > >
> > >That's nothing dude, negligible, like getting $20.02 of petrol but only
> > >paying $20.00 cash. No one cares.
> >
> > Actually it would be like getting $20.40 of petrol and only paying for
> > $20 so that would be in fact theft.
> >
> > Colin Kynoch
>
>
> So when will you starting up a new thread 'Murali is a thief'?

of wickets with his illegal action he probably is. What is sad is that his
action deminishes legitimate bowlers records ( a legitimat bowler defined as
someone who bowls within the iic tolerances ) held by other bowler who
bowled under the laws of thier time..

Sorry Huggies the bloke is now a twice convicted chucker.
>
> H




05 May 2004 16:27:05
kenhiggs8
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

"dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk > wrote in message news:<iC_lc.113$UL2.2533@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>...
> "kenhiggs8" <kenhiggs8@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:6af2bb1.0405042025.6ceff33d@posting.google.com...
> > Colin Kynoch <kynochfamily@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> news:<jied90tddsjl4rsjlq2929bs8t8a8rqap4@4ax.com>...
> > > On Mon, 3 May 2004 22:48:57 +1000, "Larry de Silva"
> > > <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> parted their butt cheeks and let rip
> > > with this:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >"witt" <me@home.on.the.net> wrote in message
> > > >news:030520041515305359%me@home.on.the.net...
> > > >> Didn't read all of it but if thats all correct and they changed the
> law
> > > >> he still couldn't bowl it as he would still breach it by 0.2%...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >That's nothing dude, negligible, like getting $20.02 of petrol but only
> > > >paying $20.00 cash. No one cares.
> > >
> > > Actually it would be like getting $20.40 of petrol and only paying for
> > > $20 so that would be in fact theft.
> > >
> > > Colin Kynoch
> >
> >
> > So when will you starting up a new thread 'Murali is a thief'?
>
> of wickets with his illegal action he probably is. What is sad is that his
> action deminishes legitimate bowlers records ( a legitimat bowler defined as
> someone who bowls within the iic tolerances ) held by other bowler who
> bowled under the laws of thier time..
>
> Sorry Huggies the bloke is now a twice convicted chucker.

I ate your Web page.
Forgive me; it was tasty
And tart on my tongue

H(aiku)


06 May 2004 10:06:08
dechucka
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"kenhiggs8" <kenhiggs8@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:6af2bb1.0405051527.6e77da9c@posting.google.com...
> "dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk> wrote in message
news:<iC_lc.113$UL2.2533@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au >...
> > "kenhiggs8" <kenhiggs8@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:6af2bb1.0405042025.6ceff33d@posting.google.com...
> > > Colin Kynoch <kynochfamily@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> > news:<jied90tddsjl4rsjlq2929bs8t8a8rqap4@4ax.com>...
> > > > On Mon, 3 May 2004 22:48:57 +1000, "Larry de Silva"
> > > > <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> parted their butt cheeks and let rip
> > > > with this:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >"witt" <me@home.on.the.net> wrote in message
> > > > >news:030520041515305359%me@home.on.the.net...
> > > > >> Didn't read all of it but if thats all correct and they changed
the
> > law
> > > > >> he still couldn't bowl it as he would still breach it by 0.2%...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >That's nothing dude, negligible, like getting $20.02 of petrol but
only
> > > > >paying $20.00 cash. No one cares.
> > > >
> > > > Actually it would be like getting $20.40 of petrol and only paying
for
> > > > $20 so that would be in fact theft.
> > > >
> > > > Colin Kynoch
> > >
> > >
> > > So when will you starting up a new thread 'Murali is a thief'?
> >
> > of wickets with his illegal action he probably is. What is sad is that
his
> > action deminishes legitimate bowlers records ( a legitimat bowler
defined as
> > someone who bowls within the iic tolerances ) held by other bowler who
> > bowled under the laws of thier time..
> >
> > Sorry Huggies the bloke is now a twice convicted chucker.
>
> I ate your Web page.
> Forgive me; it was tasty
> And tart on my tongue

probably the most interesting thing you have ever posted but like normal
irrelevant
>
> H(aiku)




06 May 2004 13:11:01
Aditya Basrur
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk > wrote in message
news:_jfmc.11$jG3.801@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
>
> "kenhiggs8" <kenhiggs8@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:6af2bb1.0405051527.6e77da9c@posting.google.com...
> > "dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk> wrote in message
> news:<iC_lc.113$UL2.2533@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>...
> > > "kenhiggs8" <kenhiggs8@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:6af2bb1.0405042025.6ceff33d@posting.google.com...
> > > > Colin Kynoch <kynochfamily@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> > > news:<jied90tddsjl4rsjlq2929bs8t8a8rqap4@4ax.com>...
> > > > > On Mon, 3 May 2004 22:48:57 +1000, "Larry de Silva"
> > > > > <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> parted their butt cheeks and let rip
> > > > > with this:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >"witt" <me@home.on.the.net> wrote in message
> > > > > >news:030520041515305359%me@home.on.the.net...
> > > > > >> Didn't read all of it but if thats all correct and they changed
> the
> > > law
> > > > > >> he still couldn't bowl it as he would still breach it by 0.2%...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >That's nothing dude, negligible, like getting $20.02 of petrol but
> only
> > > > > >paying $20.00 cash. No one cares.
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually it would be like getting $20.40 of petrol and only paying
> for
> > > > > $20 so that would be in fact theft.
> > > > >
> > > > > Colin Kynoch
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > So when will you starting up a new thread 'Murali is a thief'?
> > >
> > > of wickets with his illegal action he probably is. What is sad is that
> his
> > > action deminishes legitimate bowlers records ( a legitimat bowler
> defined as
> > > someone who bowls within the iic tolerances ) held by other bowler who
> > > bowled under the laws of thier time..
> > >
> > > Sorry Huggies the bloke is now a twice convicted chucker.
> >
> > I ate your Web page.
> > Forgive me; it was tasty
> > And tart on my tongue
>
> probably the most interesting thing you have ever posted but like normal
> irrelevant
> >
> > H(aiku)
>
>




06 May 2004 11:26:43
dechucka
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"Aditya Basrur" <sandaas_rocks@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:c7c385$26i$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
> "dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk> wrote in message
> news:_jfmc.11$jG3.801@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> >
> > "kenhiggs8" <kenhiggs8@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:6af2bb1.0405051527.6e77da9c@posting.google.com...
> > > "dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk> wrote in message
> > news:<iC_lc.113$UL2.2533@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>...
> > > > "kenhiggs8" <kenhiggs8@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:6af2bb1.0405042025.6ceff33d@posting.google.com...
> > > > > Colin Kynoch <kynochfamily@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:<jied90tddsjl4rsjlq2929bs8t8a8rqap4@4ax.com>...
> > > > > > On Mon, 3 May 2004 22:48:57 +1000, "Larry de Silva"
> > > > > > <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> parted their butt cheeks and let
rip
> > > > > > with this:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >"witt" <me@home.on.the.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > >news:030520041515305359%me@home.on.the.net...
> > > > > > >> Didn't read all of it but if thats all correct and they
changed
> > the
> > > > law
> > > > > > >> he still couldn't bowl it as he would still breach it by
0.2%...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >That's nothing dude, negligible, like getting $20.02 of petrol
but
> > only
> > > > > > >paying $20.00 cash. No one cares.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Actually it would be like getting $20.40 of petrol and only
paying
> > for
> > > > > > $20 so that would be in fact theft.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Colin Kynoch
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > So when will you starting up a new thread 'Murali is a thief'?
> > > >
> > > > of wickets with his illegal action he probably is. What is sad is
that
> > his
> > > > action deminishes legitimate bowlers records ( a legitimat bowler
> > defined as
> > > > someone who bowls within the iic tolerances ) held by other bowler
who
> > > > bowled under the laws of thier time..
> > > >
> > > > Sorry Huggies the bloke is now a twice convicted chucker.
> > >
> > > I ate your Web page.
> > > Forgive me; it was tasty
> > > And tart on my tongue
> >
> > probably the most interesting thing you have ever posted but like normal
> > irrelevant
> > >
> > > H(aiku)
> >
> >
>
>

keep trying Ab not a bad blank post but lacked the levels of sophistication
I put into mine




05 May 2004 22:29:11
Bob Dubery
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

"dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk > wrote in message news:<74Vlc.212$7P1.8577@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>...

> agree with you which is why I put the question mark around the CLEARING, it
> is a popular misconception or deliberate mistruth put forward that being
> tested and passed show the bowler can never chuck again

People overstate their case, or just plain get things wrong, like they
do when they say things like "the bloke is now a twice convicted
chucker".


06 May 2004 15:58:27
dechucka
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !


"Bob Dubery" <megapode@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:e8f67309.0405052129.77a61874@posting.google.com...
> "dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk> wrote in message
news:<74Vlc.212$7P1.8577@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au >...
>
> > agree with you which is why I put the question mark around the CLEARING,
it
> > is a popular misconception or deliberate mistruth put forward that being
> > tested and passed show the bowler can never chuck again
>
> People overstate their case, or just plain get things wrong, like they
> do when they say things like "the bloke is now a twice convicted
> chucker".

but in my case I will defend the statement. Murali was called for throwing
by Hair et al thus under the laws at the time he was a chucker, he has now
been shown to throw his doosra thus under the laws now he is a chucker.

that equal twice a chucker




06 May 2004 04:08:06
Bob Dubery
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

"dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk > wrote in message news:<iukmc.118$jG3.2685@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>...

> but in my case I will defend the statement. Murali was called for throwing
> by Hair et al thus under the laws at the time he was a chucker, he has now
> been shown to throw his doosra thus under the laws now he is a chucker.
>
> that equal twice a chucker

IMLO just as he can't be cleared forever he shouldn't be condemned
forever either - although he might have to amend his technique or
eschew a particular delivery.


06 May 2004 21:08:29
Mad Hamish
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

On 5 May 2004 22:29:11 -0700, megapode@hotmail.com (Bob Dubery) wrote:

>"dechucka" <dechucka1@spew.com.uk> wrote in message news:<74Vlc.212$7P1.8577@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>...
>
>> agree with you which is why I put the question mark around the CLEARING, it
>> is a popular misconception or deliberate mistruth put forward that being
>> tested and passed show the bowler can never chuck again
>
>People overstate their case, or just plain get things wrong, like they
>do when they say things like "the bloke is now a twice convicted
>chucker".

Well he was called in 3 matches off the top of my head...
and now he's been investigated and one of his deliveries has been
found to be illegal...
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001

Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
newslaws@iinet.net.au


06 May 2004 15:48:20
Andrew Mc
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

In article <e8f67309.0405060308.39eac5a8@posting.google.com >, Bob Dubery says...
>
>IMLO just as he can't be cleared forever he shouldn't be condemned
>forever either - although he might have to amend his technique or
>eschew a particular delivery.

What's this "might" stuff? If he's allowed to continue bowling the dsoora in its
current form then we should all give up on cricket now.



07 May 2004 11:04:50
Bob Dubery
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

Mad Hamish <newslawsunspammie@iinet.net.au > wrote in message news:<k27k90ptf2fa6ubo6va8lka64q7r22uo1o@4ax.com>...

> Well he was called in 3 matches off the top of my head...
> and now he's been investigated and one of his deliveries has been
> found to be illegal...

Well there could come a point at which things would get very difficult
for him. For me, having seen him bowl very recently, that time is not
now, though it's quite possible that Procter (the RIMR) is going to
make a charlie out of me.


07 May 2004 11:06:04
Bob Dubery
Re: Scoop! The MURALI REPORT !

Andrew Mc <andrew@nospamplease.com > wrote in message news:<c7efbk0f8i@drn.newsguy.com>...
> In article <e8f67309.0405060308.39eac5a8@posting.google.com>, Bob Dubery says...
> >
> >IMLO just as he can't be cleared forever he shouldn't be condemned
> >forever either - although he might have to amend his technique or
> >eschew a particular delivery.
>
> What's this "might" stuff? If he's allowed to continue bowling the dsoora in its
> current form then we should all give up on cricket now.

Yes. Bad choice of words. He is going to have to change or give something up.