31 Dec 2003 20:56:00
Larry de Silva
Murali Bashing

Murali Bashing

http://www.dailynews.lk/2003/12/31/spo04.html

The media in England and Australia have once again started off on a campaign
to vilify Muralitharan. The reason is that he has now developed a lethal
leg-spinner not distinguishable from his off-spinner that is going to cause
mayhem among batsmen. We saw it for the first time in the series against the
English Team but he must have bowled it in his short stint of county cricket
this summer in England.

Sensing the potential danger to his team, Gough called it the 'doosra' and
said that it was thrown. Murali not anyone else had so named it, but Gough's
intent was to create a sinister aura about a new delivery. Hussain and
Atherton fellow county players with Murali quickly took over the campaign
against him.

Atherton's outburst is particularly disgusting as he and Murali were county
colleagues at Lancashire, when a few years ago Murali took 66 wickets in six
matches. Atherton standing in the slips took many catches off Murali
cheering him all the way saying "well bowled". Why did he not say "well
thrown" because now he says Murali throws every ball?

It's a case of the weasel squealing. Atherton tries to debunk the scientific
tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted by the
ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot straighten and hence does
not throw. Let us not forget that Atherton as England's captain admitted to
having dirt (sandy earth) in his pocket, the ideal stuff to scuff up a ball.

The tolerance level for straightening the elbow has been set at five degrees
and if Murali is now to be tested for this, so must every bowler. The
results would show that many bowlers exceed this limit. There are other
reports in the Australian media now taking up the cry against Murali in view
of the impending visit of their team to Sri Lanka in february 2004.

We can expect this Murali bashing to intensify in the next few weeks before
and during the Aussie visit and reach a frenzy when Sri Lanka tour Australia
later in the year. Murali's rivalry with Warne and their race to beat
Walsh's record will be one of the highlights of 2004.

The deformity of Murali not being able to straighten his elbow has been
compensated for by his wrist being extraordinarily flexible enabling him to
rotate it much more than normal. His prodigious spinning ability is derived
from this rotation of wrist which he also snaps to get that extra bite. All
this extra wrist action on the ball which is actually like throwing with the
writs, is perfectly legal. Paul Adams of South Africa does this in a
different way. Every bowler whether striving for spin or swing does this to
some degree.

It is to Murali's credit that he has worked so hard to develop this new
delivery that spins away from the right hander. He is now twice the bowler
that he was, causing confusion and indecision in the batsman's mind as to
which way the ball would spin. Previously, there was Ramadhin who on the
first post war West Indies tour to England in 1950 bowled off-breaks and a
'mystery' leg break to create havoc among the Englishmen. Jack Iverson of
Australia too bowled both spinners, reportedly with one finger bent beneath
the ball to impart spin either way. Both had short careers but Murali will
stay long to torment the best.

In recent years left handers Thorpe, Lara and Fleming had great success
against Murali and an opinion was created that he did not have much success
against the southpaws. But this has all changed and he got Thorpe five times
out of six in the last series. Indeed all the batsmen were just bent on
trying to read him and were stroke-less.

First they opted to play him on the front foot using a lot of pad, then they
changed to back-foot play with even less success. His conceding of just 40
runs off 40 overs in the first innings of the Third Test show how deadly he
was and how he mesmerized the batsmen into impotence.

As our former coach Dave Whatmore said, let the world celebrate and marvel
at this spinning sensation Muttaih Muralitharan.

D.L. Seneviratne,





31 Dec 2003 02:02:20
Shripathi Kamath
Re: Murali Bashing


"Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:B1xIb.273$EM4.5469@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...

<snip >

> The tolerance level for straightening the elbow has been set at five
degrees

and is far less than the margin of error of +/- 15 degrees in Dr. G's tests
according to Ananda.


--
Shripathi Kamath




31 Dec 2003 11:14:09
Paul Robson
Re: Murali Bashing

Larry de Silva wrote:
> Murali Bashing
>
> http://www.dailynews.lk/2003/12/31/spo04.html
> It's a case of the weasel squealing. Atherton tries to debunk the scientific
> tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted by the
> ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot straighten and hence does
> not throw.

i.i. this guy is a twat.




31 Dec 2003 06:15:37
Whazzup
Re: Murali Bashing

"Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message >
> tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted by the
> ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot straighten and hence does
> not throw.

Well, for a batsman the balls are throws. That's all that should count
IMO.

The ICC accept Murali's action as fair, so nobody has a right to call
Murali a cheat. Others, however, have the right to push ICC to change
its rules/interpretation.


01 Jan 2004 03:55:17
Larry de Silva
Re: Murali Bashing


"Whazzup" <whazzup@yours.com > wrote in message
news:4c4148be.0312310615.7ec7ee6b@posting.google.com...
> "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message >
> > tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted by the
> > ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot straighten and hence
does
> > not throw.
>
> Well, for a batsman the balls are throws. That's all that should count
> IMO.


For WHOM dude? Except for a couple of whingers in Hussein & Gilly, WHICH
batsman are you talking about? WHO in the Indian, Pakistani, Bagladesh, West
Indian, New Zealand, South African teams? Please enlighten me because
without evidence, all this stuff is crap.


> The ICC accept Murali's action as fair, so nobody has a right to call
> Murali a cheat. Others, however, have the right to push ICC to change
> its rules/interpretation.


WHY? Is this the "Walter Lindrum" rule in cricket where you lobby to change
the rules because they cant face a bowler who is so good? Which OTHER
rules/interpretations need to be challenged? Why?
I find this very odd that because a bowler is so successful, they want the
interpretations & rules changed! So as Hayden is so good at hitting sixes,
do we lobby to change a current six to a four and a current four to a two?

That is such a silly thing to do.

Laz




31 Dec 2003 17:16:56
Re: Murali Bashing

"Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> "Whazzup" <whazzup@yours.com> wrote in message
> news:4c4148be.0312310615.7ec7ee6b@posting.google.com...
> > "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message >
> > > tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted by
> > > the ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot straighten and
> > > hence
> does
> > > not throw.
> >
> > Well, for a batsman the balls are throws. That's all that should count
> > IMO.
>
> For WHOM dude? Except for a couple of whingers in Hussein & Gilly, WHICH
> batsman are you talking about? WHO in the Indian, Pakistani, Bagladesh,
> West Indian, New Zealand, South African teams? Please enlighten me
> because without evidence, all this stuff is crap.
>
> > The ICC accept Murali's action as fair, so nobody has a right to call
> > Murali a cheat. Others, however, have the right to push ICC to change
> > its rules/interpretation.
>
> WHY? Is this the "Walter Lindrum" rule in cricket where you lobby to
> change the rules because they cant face a bowler who is so good? Which
> OTHER rules/interpretations need to be challenged? Why?
> I find this very odd that because a bowler is so successful, they want
> the interpretations & rules changed! So as Hayden is so good at hitting
> sixes, do we lobby to change a current six to a four and a current four
> to a two?
>
> That is such a silly thing to do.
>
> Laz

Larry:

I have a straight elbow and, as a youngster, had completely normal bowling
action. If I were to chuck it would be obvious. I would be called and there
would be no other explanation to it.

Enter a guy with a "bent" elbow. Claims his delivery looks suspicious
because of the crooked elbow,otherwise it is fair. Fair enough. Now if he
does in fact chuck once in every while, on what basis would you call him?
The "bent" elbow suddenly becomes a disguise for actual chucking.

I am not claiming that Murali chucks. But the possibility that anyone with
crooked elbow could (and probably does) chuck once in a while cannot be
ruled out.

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/--------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service New Rate! $9.95/Month 50GB


01 Jan 2004 04:28:53
Larry de Silva
Re: Murali Bashing


<vminai@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:20031231121656.519$hD@newsreader.com...
> "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > "Whazzup" <whazzup@yours.com> wrote in message
> > news:4c4148be.0312310615.7ec7ee6b@posting.google.com...
> > > "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message >
> > > > tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted by
> > > > the ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot straighten and
> > > > hence
> > does
> > > > not throw.
> > >
> > > Well, for a batsman the balls are throws. That's all that should count
> > > IMO.
> >
> > For WHOM dude? Except for a couple of whingers in Hussein & Gilly, WHICH
> > batsman are you talking about? WHO in the Indian, Pakistani, Bagladesh,
> > West Indian, New Zealand, South African teams? Please enlighten me
> > because without evidence, all this stuff is crap.
> >
> > > The ICC accept Murali's action as fair, so nobody has a right to call
> > > Murali a cheat. Others, however, have the right to push ICC to change
> > > its rules/interpretation.
> >
> > WHY? Is this the "Walter Lindrum" rule in cricket where you lobby to
> > change the rules because they cant face a bowler who is so good? Which
> > OTHER rules/interpretations need to be challenged? Why?
> > I find this very odd that because a bowler is so successful, they want
> > the interpretations & rules changed! So as Hayden is so good at hitting
> > sixes, do we lobby to change a current six to a four and a current four
> > to a two?
> >
> > That is such a silly thing to do.
> >
> > Laz
>
> Larry:
>
> I have a straight elbow and, as a youngster, had completely normal bowling
> action. If I were to chuck it would be obvious. I would be called and
there
> would be no other explanation to it.
>
> Enter a guy with a "bent" elbow. Claims his delivery looks suspicious
> because of the crooked elbow,otherwise it is fair. Fair enough. Now if he
> does in fact chuck once in every while, on what basis would you call him?


Many camera angles recording a significant change in the bent elbow during
the delivery action?


> The "bent" elbow suddenly becomes a disguise for actual chucking.
>
> I am not claiming that Murali chucks. But the possibility that anyone with
> crooked elbow could (and probably does) chuck once in a while cannot be
> ruled out.


Look, fair point but what is the solution dude? Do we start banning players
with bent elbows from playing the game at the highest level? If a person was
born with six fingers in his bowling hand, do we ban him from playing
because hypothetically, he could impart more spin on the ball? Do we ban
players like Fred Titmus who had (& I stand corrected on this as my memory
may be off) only four toes or something like that? Colin Milbourne/Pataudi
with one eye?

WHERE do we draw the line dude?

Laz


>
> --
> -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/--------------------
> Usenet Newsgroup Service New Rate! $9.95/Month 50GB




31 Dec 2003 17:36:42
Re: Murali Bashing

"Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> <vminai@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:20031231121656.519$hD@newsreader.com...
> > "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > > "Whazzup" <whazzup@yours.com> wrote in message
> > > news:4c4148be.0312310615.7ec7ee6b@posting.google.com...
> > > > "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message >
> > > > > tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted
> > > > > by the ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot
> > > > > straighten and hence
> > > does
> > > > > not throw.
> > > >
> > > > Well, for a batsman the balls are throws. That's all that should
> > > > count IMO.
> > >
> > > For WHOM dude? Except for a couple of whingers in Hussein & Gilly,
> > > WHICH batsman are you talking about? WHO in the Indian, Pakistani,
> > > Bagladesh, West Indian, New Zealand, South African teams? Please
> > > enlighten me because without evidence, all this stuff is crap.
> > >
> > > > The ICC accept Murali's action as fair, so nobody has a right to
> > > > call Murali a cheat. Others, however, have the right to push ICC to
> > > > change its rules/interpretation.
> > >
> > > WHY? Is this the "Walter Lindrum" rule in cricket where you lobby to
> > > change the rules because they cant face a bowler who is so good?
> > > Which OTHER rules/interpretations need to be challenged? Why?
> > > I find this very odd that because a bowler is so successful, they
> > > want the interpretations & rules changed! So as Hayden is so good at
> > > hitting sixes, do we lobby to change a current six to a four and a
> > > current four to a two?
> > >
> > > That is such a silly thing to do.
> > >
> > > Laz
> >
> > Larry:
> >
> > I have a straight elbow and, as a youngster, had completely normal
> > bowling action. If I were to chuck it would be obvious. I would be
> > called and
> there
> > would be no other explanation to it.
> >
> > Enter a guy with a "bent" elbow. Claims his delivery looks suspicious
> > because of the crooked elbow,otherwise it is fair. Fair enough. Now if
> > he does in fact chuck once in every while, on what basis would you call
> > him?
>
> Many camera angles recording a significant change in the bent elbow
> during the delivery action?
>
> > The "bent" elbow suddenly becomes a disguise for actual chucking.
> >
> > I am not claiming that Murali chucks. But the possibility that anyone
> > with crooked elbow could (and probably does) chuck once in a while
> > cannot be ruled out.
>
> Look, fair point but what is the solution dude? Do we start banning
> players with bent elbows from playing the game at the highest level? If a
> person was born with six fingers in his bowling hand, do we ban him from
> playing because hypothetically, he could impart more spin on the ball? Do
> we ban players like Fred Titmus who had (& I stand corrected on this as
> my memory may be off) only four toes or something like that? Colin
> Milbourne/Pataudi with one eye?
>
> WHERE do we draw the line dude?

Calm down, "dude". I am not clamoring to draw a line. Of course we
shouldn't ban (cant't speak for Aussies and Brits) cricketers with bent
elbows and six fingers.

I just offered a viewpint. That's all. We have to stop harping on this
"chucking" business and get on with Cricket.

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/--------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service New Rate! $9.95/Month 50GB


01 Jan 2004 04:43:37
Larry de Silva
Re: Murali Bashing


<vminai@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:20031231123642.139$e2@newsreader.com...
> "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > <vminai@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:20031231121656.519$hD@newsreader.com...
> > > "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > > > "Whazzup" <whazzup@yours.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:4c4148be.0312310615.7ec7ee6b@posting.google.com...
> > > > > "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message >
> > > > > > tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and
accepted
> > > > > > by the ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot
> > > > > > straighten and hence
> > > > does
> > > > > > not throw.
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, for a batsman the balls are throws. That's all that should
> > > > > count IMO.
> > > >
> > > > For WHOM dude? Except for a couple of whingers in Hussein & Gilly,
> > > > WHICH batsman are you talking about? WHO in the Indian, Pakistani,
> > > > Bagladesh, West Indian, New Zealand, South African teams? Please
> > > > enlighten me because without evidence, all this stuff is crap.
> > > >
> > > > > The ICC accept Murali's action as fair, so nobody has a right to
> > > > > call Murali a cheat. Others, however, have the right to push ICC
to
> > > > > change its rules/interpretation.
> > > >
> > > > WHY? Is this the "Walter Lindrum" rule in cricket where you lobby to
> > > > change the rules because they cant face a bowler who is so good?
> > > > Which OTHER rules/interpretations need to be challenged? Why?
> > > > I find this very odd that because a bowler is so successful, they
> > > > want the interpretations & rules changed! So as Hayden is so good at
> > > > hitting sixes, do we lobby to change a current six to a four and a
> > > > current four to a two?
> > > >
> > > > That is such a silly thing to do.
> > > >
> > > > Laz
> > >
> > > Larry:
> > >
> > > I have a straight elbow and, as a youngster, had completely normal
> > > bowling action. If I were to chuck it would be obvious. I would be
> > > called and
> > there
> > > would be no other explanation to it.
> > >
> > > Enter a guy with a "bent" elbow. Claims his delivery looks suspicious
> > > because of the crooked elbow,otherwise it is fair. Fair enough. Now if
> > > he does in fact chuck once in every while, on what basis would you
call
> > > him?
> >
> > Many camera angles recording a significant change in the bent elbow
> > during the delivery action?
> >
> > > The "bent" elbow suddenly becomes a disguise for actual chucking.
> > >
> > > I am not claiming that Murali chucks. But the possibility that anyone
> > > with crooked elbow could (and probably does) chuck once in a while
> > > cannot be ruled out.
> >
> > Look, fair point but what is the solution dude? Do we start banning
> > players with bent elbows from playing the game at the highest level? If
a
> > person was born with six fingers in his bowling hand, do we ban him from
> > playing because hypothetically, he could impart more spin on the ball?
Do
> > we ban players like Fred Titmus who had (& I stand corrected on this as
> > my memory may be off) only four toes or something like that? Colin
> > Milbourne/Pataudi with one eye?
> >
> > WHERE do we draw the line dude?
>
> Calm down, "dude".


Very calm actually.


>I am not clamoring to draw a line. Of course we
> shouldn't ban (cant't speak for Aussies and Brits) cricketers with bent
> elbows and six fingers.
>
> I just offered a viewpint.


And I offered a serious response.


> That's all.
> We have to stop harping on this
> "chucking" business and get on with Cricket.


Amen to that dude.

HNY

Laz


>
> --
> -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/--------------------
> Usenet Newsgroup Service New Rate! $9.95/Month 50GB




31 Dec 2003 18:05:36
Mike Holmans
Re: Murali Bashing

"Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au > decided to say:

>
>"Whazzup" <whazzup@yours.com> wrote in message
>news:4c4148be.0312310615.7ec7ee6b@posting.google.com...
>> "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message >
>> > tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted by the
>> > ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot straighten and hence
>does
>> > not throw.
>>
>> Well, for a batsman the balls are throws. That's all that should count
>> IMO.
>
>
>For WHOM dude? Except for a couple of whingers in Hussein & Gilly, WHICH
>batsman are you talking about? WHO in the Indian, Pakistani, Bagladesh, West
>Indian, New Zealand, South African teams? Please enlighten me because
>without evidence, all this stuff is crap.

You know that this is a pretty unreasonable request, don't you? Active
players dare not state publicly that they think he throws, because
they get shit put on them by the authorities if they do. And if that
happens, you're right there clapping along with the authorities, so
you clearly approve of the authorities' silencing of controversial
opinions. So the above is the equivalent of locking up all the bottles
and asking someone to pour you a drink, and then taking it out on them
for being inhospitable. The silence of those who are contractually
bound not to say things publicly should not be taken as evidence of
what they think.

But how's about a challenge for you: give a list of all the non-Sri
Lankan players who have publicly stated that they do not believe that
Murali throws, with specific references to confirmatory evidence (ie
we won't take "I'm sure I heard it on an interview on the Cricket Show
a couple of years ago as anything but unsubstantiated flannel). I'll
bet you can't find more than a handful of actual public statements.

Using your line of argument above, I could then try and tell you that
this means that everybody else thinks he throws.

Whether you like it or not, and whether you agree with it or not,
there *is* a lot of suspicion about Murali's action, especially his
new deliveries which he didn't even try to bowl when the famous
"tests" were done. Constantly repeating your mantra that you do't
believe he throws isn't going to change anybody's mind, and it takes
up a lot of useless badnwidth.

What will change people's minds is what comes out of the ICC's
investigation into spinners and how many of them chuck and to what
extent. And that will represent the ICC's official position, about
which as yet we have only got surmise rather than actual evidence.

>
>> The ICC accept Murali's action as fair, so nobody has a right to call
>> Murali a cheat. Others, however, have the right to push ICC to change
>> its rules/interpretation.
>
>
>WHY? Is this the "Walter Lindrum" rule in cricket where you lobby to change
>the rules because they cant face a bowler who is so good? Which OTHER
>rules/interpretations need to be challenged? Why?
>I find this very odd that because a bowler is so successful, they want the
>interpretations & rules changed! So as Hayden is so good at hitting sixes,
>do we lobby to change a current six to a four and a current four to a two?
>
>That is such a silly thing to do.

But this happens all the time, Larry. When the English bowlers started
firing in leg stump bouncers and beating Australia, the Laws were
changed to stop it. When the medium pacers bowling leg theory in the
50s were able to prevent any run-scoring whatsoever, they changed the
Laws. When May and Cowdrey spoilt everyone's fun by playing football
rather than cricket against WI, they changed the Laws. When WI made a
mockery of things by bowling vast numbers of bouncers at 11
overs/hour, they changed the playing regulations to put a stop to it.
There were people who lobbied to have the googly banned because they
considered it dishonest and unfair.

And anyway, such change as there has been in the Laws since the
controversy over Murali first raised its head has so far been to make
it *easier* for Murali, not harder, since it has changed the emphasis
from "no-ball unless you're *sure* it's legal" to "don't no-ball
unless you're *sure* it's a throw". Since Murali's action is one which
is difficult to decipher, umpires are now supposed to give the benefit
of the doubt to him, whereas before they were supposed to deny him
that benefit.

Cheers,

Mike



01 Jan 2004 10:46:14
bigbadja
Re: Murali Bashing

The truth is slowly coming out Larry, I hope you will be big enough to take
it when it really hits the fan.


"Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:B1xIb.273$EM4.5469@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> Murali Bashing
>
> http://www.dailynews.lk/2003/12/31/spo04.html
>
> The media in England and Australia have once again started off on a
campaign
> to vilify Muralitharan. The reason is that he has now developed a lethal
>
>




01 Jan 2004 00:38:30
Colin Kynoch
Re: Murali Bashing



Larry de Silva wrote:

> Murali Bashing
>
> http://www.dailynews.lk/2003/12/31/spo04.html
>
<snip >



> The deformity of Murali not being able to straighten his elbow



And here the writer shows he is talking out his arse.

<snip rest of crap >

Colin Kynoch



01 Jan 2004 01:39:00
Mango
Re: Murali Bashing


"Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message

Face it Larry. Your hero is a chucker who throws consistantly but is still
playing today through political intervention.




01 Jan 2004 13:35:16
The Wog
Re: Murali Bashing

"Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:B1xIb.273$EM4.5469@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> It's a case of the weasel squealing. Atherton tries to debunk the
scientific
> tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted by the
> ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot straighten and hence
does
> not throw.

Larry, two questions on a point that is not all that central to this
article:

1) You yourself don't believe the line "He cannot straighten [his arm] and
hence does not throw", right?
2) Assuming the answer to 1) is "no" does it concern you that someone
writing in a respectable paper for the SLGP is SO deluded about SUCH a
fundamental point? I mean, the "Murali throws" debate has been around since
1995; surely it's not asking too much for the mainstream media to have SOME
idea about a topic of such importance to the country? Doesn't this kind of
rubbish really harm the credibility of the SLGP?

> The tolerance level for straightening the elbow has been set at five
degrees
> and if Murali is now to be tested for this, so must every bowler. The
> results would show that many bowlers exceed this limit.

Really?? I'm wondering how this bloke knows conclusively that
a) Murali can't possibly throw, but
b) Other bowlers with bent or hyperextended arms, who have been
scientifically assessed by the same organisations who looked at Murali's
action, do and by how much.

> We can expect this Murali bashing to intensify in the next few weeks
before
> and during the Aussie visit and reach a frenzy when Sri Lanka tour
Australia
> later in the year.

You mean like last time? One Crapdock article, one thing in the BrisbaneGP
quoting Egar, and then a flood of "Lee chucks" articles?

> The deformity of Murali not being able to straighten his elbow has been
> compensated for by his wrist being extraordinarily flexible enabling him
to
> rotate it much more than normal. His prodigious spinning ability is
derived
> from this rotation of wrist which he also snaps to get that extra bite.
All
> this extra wrist action on the ball which is actually like throwing with
the
> writs, is perfectly legal. Paul Adams of South Africa does this in a
> different way.

Really? Ananda thinks a study of Paul Adams tells us that he is using his
elbow.

Wog




01 Jan 2004 13:49:31
The Wog
Re: Murali Bashing

"Mike Holmans" <mike@jackalope.demon.co.uk > wrote in message
news:rj26vvkh1dpk80h7jsad3gdcecurcdgits@4ax.com...
> "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> decided to say:
> >> Well, for a batsman the balls are throws. That's all that should count
> >> IMO.
> >
> >
> >For WHOM dude? Except for a couple of whingers in Hussein & Gilly, WHICH
> >batsman are you talking about? WHO in the Indian, Pakistani, Bagladesh,
West
> >Indian, New Zealand, South African teams? Please enlighten me because
> >without evidence, all this stuff is crap.
>
> You know that this is a pretty unreasonable request, don't you? Active
> players dare not state publicly that they think he throws, because
> they get shit put on them by the authorities if they do.

Rutherford was the last player to make his feelings clear while still
playing. Parore and Smith said immediately on retirement that he throws.
Parore said that was the unianimous view in the team at the time. Also from
NZ, we've got the comments by Steve Dumme on retirement, although any
mention of them have since been removed from the web by some mysterious
forces.

> But how's about a challenge for you: give a list of all the non-Sri
> Lankan players who have publicly stated that they do not believe that
> Murali throws, with specific references to confirmatory evidence (ie
> we won't take "I'm sure I heard it on an interview on the Cricket Show
> a couple of years ago as anything but unsubstantiated flannel). I'll
> bet you can't find more than a handful of actual public statements.

SRW at a press conference after he was called (don't know which time),
Richie Richardson come to mind.
>
> Using your line of argument above, I could then try and tell you that
> this means that everybody else thinks he throws.

He he!
>
> What will change people's minds is what comes out of the ICC's
> investigation into spinners and how many of them chuck and to what
> extent. And that will represent the ICC's official position, about
> which as yet we have only got surmise rather than actual evidence.
>
Here's a radical idea: The ICC's wide reaching investigations will reveal
zero chuckers. Since all the well known methods require people to attend a
specific testing venue; there's nothing that can measure the amount of a
chuck simply from TV footage. And while attending said venue, no-one will
chuck.
> >
> >WHY? Is this the "Walter Lindrum" rule in cricket where you lobby to
change
> >the rules because they cant face a bowler who is so good? Which OTHER
> >rules/interpretations need to be challenged? Why?
> >I find this very odd that because a bowler is so successful, they want
the
> >interpretations & rules changed! So as Hayden is so good at hitting
sixes,
> >do we lobby to change a current six to a four and a current four to a
two?
> >
> >That is such a silly thing to do.
>
> But this happens all the time, Larry. When the English bowlers started
> firing in leg stump bouncers and beating Australia, the Laws were
> changed to stop it. When the medium pacers bowling leg theory in the
> 50s were able to prevent any run-scoring whatsoever, they changed the
> Laws. When May and Cowdrey spoilt everyone's fun by playing football
> rather than cricket against WI, they changed the Laws. When WI made a
> mockery of things by bowling vast numbers of bouncers at 11
> overs/hour, they changed the playing regulations to put a stop to it.
> There were people who lobbied to have the googly banned because they
> considered it dishonest and unfair.

I don't think anyone is seriously proposing to change the Laws to deal with
Murali. Those that think he throws want the existing (weakened) one
enforced.
>
Wog




01 Jan 2004 19:09:59
Larry de Silva
Re: Murali Bashing


"The Wog" <a s v c[remove spaces]@optusnet.com.au > wrote in message
news:3ff387f3$0$18691$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:B1xIb.273$EM4.5469@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> > It's a case of the weasel squealing. Atherton tries to debunk the
> scientific
> > tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted by the
> > ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot straighten and hence
> does
> > not throw.
>
> Larry, two questions on a point that is not all that central to this
> article:
>
> 1) You yourself don't believe the line "He cannot straighten [his arm] and
> hence does not throw", right?

Correct

> 2) Assuming the answer to 1) is "no" does it concern you that someone
> writing in a respectable paper for the SLGP is SO deluded about SUCH a
> fundamental point? I mean, the "Murali throws" debate has been around
since
> 1995; surely it's not asking too much for the mainstream media to have
SOME
> idea about a topic of such importance to the country? Doesn't this kind of
> rubbish really harm the credibility of the SLGP?


This was a letter to the editor from a reader dude. NOT from a sports journo
in SL or anywhere else. Just another opinion on Murali. But after taking
advice from Mike last night, I will not be posting all opinions on Murali
here anymore. Posters know where I stand on the issue so no more daily or
weekly stuff on Murali from me, except for the very rare post defending him
as I see fit, if I can be bothered with the flames, abuse & crap (like
Mango's post above) in return. So this is my LAST post on Murali for a very
long time.

Have fun villifying him without me dudes. At the end of the day, I wil be
standing up applauding his mighty world record and amazing achievements
while you lot STILL crap on about diminishing his efforts like little
children eating sour grapes.

Laz




> > The tolerance level for straightening the elbow has been set at five
> degrees
> > and if Murali is now to be tested for this, so must every bowler. The
> > results would show that many bowlers exceed this limit.
>
> Really?? I'm wondering how this bloke knows conclusively that
> a) Murali can't possibly throw, but
> b) Other bowlers with bent or hyperextended arms, who have been
> scientifically assessed by the same organisations who looked at Murali's
> action, do and by how much.
>
> > We can expect this Murali bashing to intensify in the next few weeks
> before
> > and during the Aussie visit and reach a frenzy when Sri Lanka tour
> Australia
> > later in the year.
>
> You mean like last time? One Crapdock article, one thing in the BrisbaneGP
> quoting Egar, and then a flood of "Lee chucks" articles?
>
> > The deformity of Murali not being able to straighten his elbow has been
> > compensated for by his wrist being extraordinarily flexible enabling him
> to
> > rotate it much more than normal. His prodigious spinning ability is
> derived
> > from this rotation of wrist which he also snaps to get that extra bite.
> All
> > this extra wrist action on the ball which is actually like throwing with
> the
> > writs, is perfectly legal. Paul Adams of South Africa does this in a
> > different way.
>
> Really? Ananda thinks a study of Paul Adams tells us that he is using his
> elbow.
>
> Wog
>
>




01 Jan 2004 21:09:15
The Wog
Re: Murali Bashing

"Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:dAQIb.207$VJ5.5538@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
>
> "The Wog" <a s v c[remove spaces]@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:3ff387f3$0$18691$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> > "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:B1xIb.273$EM4.5469@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> > > It's a case of the weasel squealing. Atherton tries to debunk the
> > scientific
> > > tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted by
the
> > > ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot straighten and hence
> > does
> > > not throw.
> >
> > Larry, two questions on a point that is not all that central to this
> > article:
> >
> > 1) You yourself don't believe the line "He cannot straighten [his arm]
and
> > hence does not throw", right?
>
> Correct
>
> > 2) Assuming the answer to 1) is "no" does it concern you that someone
> > writing in a respectable paper for the SLGP is SO deluded about SUCH a
> > fundamental point? I mean, the "Murali throws" debate has been around
> since
> > 1995; surely it's not asking too much for the mainstream media to have
> SOME
> > idea about a topic of such importance to the country? Doesn't this kind
of
> > rubbish really harm the credibility of the SLGP?
>
>
> This was a letter to the editor from a reader dude. NOT from a sports
journo
> in SL or anywhere else.

Got it - thanks. Not totally clear which of this stuff is GP staff and which
is letters to the Ed. (Especially since the heading was "Sports" rather than
"Letters." Any tips for differentiating the two when reading the SLGP?

Wog




01 Jan 2004 22:30:05
Larry de Silva
Re: Murali Bashing


"The Wog" <a s v c[remove spaces]@optusnet.com.au > wrote in message
news:3ff3f25c$0$18387$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:dAQIb.207$VJ5.5538@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> >
> > "The Wog" <a s v c[remove spaces]@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:3ff387f3$0$18691$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> > > "Larry de Silva" <larrydesilva@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> > > news:B1xIb.273$EM4.5469@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> > > > It's a case of the weasel squealing. Atherton tries to debunk the
> > > scientific
> > > > tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted by
> the
> > > > ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot straighten and
hence
> > > does
> > > > not throw.
> > >
> > > Larry, two questions on a point that is not all that central to this
> > > article:
> > >
> > > 1) You yourself don't believe the line "He cannot straighten [his arm]
> and
> > > hence does not throw", right?
> >
> > Correct
> >
> > > 2) Assuming the answer to 1) is "no" does it concern you that someone
> > > writing in a respectable paper for the SLGP is SO deluded about SUCH a
> > > fundamental point? I mean, the "Murali throws" debate has been around
> > since
> > > 1995; surely it's not asking too much for the mainstream media to have
> > SOME
> > > idea about a topic of such importance to the country? Doesn't this
kind
> of
> > > rubbish really harm the credibility of the SLGP?
> >
> >
> > This was a letter to the editor from a reader dude. NOT from a sports
> journo
> > in SL or anywhere else.
>
> Got it - thanks. Not totally clear which of this stuff is GP staff and
which
> is letters to the Ed. (Especially since the heading was "Sports" rather
than
> "Letters." Any tips for differentiating the two when reading the SLGP?
>
> Wog


Usually the staff names are at the top of the article (like a byline), under
the heading. The letters to the Editor have the name of the writer at the
bottom, at the end of the article. Ofcourse in the actual newspaper edition,
it is very clear but on the Internet edition, it can be confusing at times.

Laz




>
>




02 Jan 2004 11:21:38
John Stewart
Re: Murali Bashing

If Murali is not a CHUCKER then Agarkar is a Marshall.

Larry de Silva wrote:

> Murali Bashing
>
> http://www.dailynews.lk/2003/12/31/spo04.html
>
> The media in England and Australia have once again started off on a campaign
> to vilify Muralitharan. The reason is that he has now developed a lethal
> leg-spinner not distinguishable from his off-spinner that is going to cause
> mayhem among batsmen. We saw it for the first time in the series against the
> English Team but he must have bowled it in his short stint of county cricket
> this summer in England.
>
> Sensing the potential danger to his team, Gough called it the 'doosra' and
> said that it was thrown. Murali not anyone else had so named it, but Gough's
> intent was to create a sinister aura about a new delivery. Hussain and
> Atherton fellow county players with Murali quickly took over the campaign
> against him.
>
> Atherton's outburst is particularly disgusting as he and Murali were county
> colleagues at Lancashire, when a few years ago Murali took 66 wickets in six
> matches. Atherton standing in the slips took many catches off Murali
> cheering him all the way saying "well bowled". Why did he not say "well
> thrown" because now he says Murali throws every ball?
>
> It's a case of the weasel squealing. Atherton tries to debunk the scientific
> tests carried out in Western Australia and Hong Kong and accepted by the
> ICC, that Murali has a bent elbow which he cannot straighten and hence does
> not throw. Let us not forget that Atherton as England's captain admitted to
> having dirt (sandy earth) in his pocket, the ideal stuff to scuff up a ball.
>
> The tolerance level for straightening the elbow has been set at five degrees
> and if Murali is now to be tested for this, so must every bowler. The
> results would show that many bowlers exceed this limit. There are other
> reports in the Australian media now taking up the cry against Murali in view
> of the impending visit of their team to Sri Lanka in february 2004.
>
> We can expect this Murali bashing to intensify in the next few weeks before
> and during the Aussie visit and reach a frenzy when Sri Lanka tour Australia
> later in the year. Murali's rivalry with Warne and their race to beat
> Walsh's record will be one of the highlights of 2004.
>
> The deformity of Murali not being able to straighten his elbow has been
> compensated for by his wrist being extraordinarily flexible enabling him to
> rotate it much more than normal. His prodigious spinning ability is derived
> from this rotation of wrist which he also snaps to get that extra bite. All
> this extra wrist action on the ball which is actually like throwing with the
> writs, is perfectly legal. Paul Adams of South Africa does this in a
> different way. Every bowler whether striving for spin or swing does this to
> some degree.
>
> It is to Murali's credit that he has worked so hard to develop this new
> delivery that spins away from the right hander. He is now twice the bowler
> that he was, causing confusion and indecision in the batsman's mind as to
> which way the ball would spin. Previously, there was Ramadhin who on the
> first post war West Indies tour to England in 1950 bowled off-breaks and a
> 'mystery' leg break to create havoc among the Englishmen. Jack Iverson of
> Australia too bowled both spinners, reportedly with one finger bent beneath
> the ball to impart spin either way. Both had short careers but Murali will
> stay long to torment the best.
>
> In recent years left handers Thorpe, Lara and Fleming had great success
> against Murali and an opinion was created that he did not have much success
> against the southpaws. But this has all changed and he got Thorpe five times
> out of six in the last series. Indeed all the batsmen were just bent on
> trying to read him and were stroke-less.
>
> First they opted to play him on the front foot using a lot of pad, then they
> changed to back-foot play with even less success. His conceding of just 40
> runs off 40 overs in the first innings of the Third Test show how deadly he
> was and how he mesmerized the batsmen into impotence.
>
> As our former coach Dave Whatmore said, let the world celebrate and marvel
> at this spinning sensation Muttaih Muralitharan.
>
> D.L. Seneviratne,