24 Apr 2004 10:08:47
Colin Kynoch
What is a cheat?

Here is a dictionary definition

"To violate rules deliberately"

As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.

Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
deliberately.

It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
other than Murali is a cheat.

Colin Kynoch


24 Apr 2004 20:17:22
Sultan
Re: What is a cheat?

"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Here is a dictionary definition
>
> "To violate rules deliberately"
>
> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>
> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> deliberately.
>
> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> other than Murali is a cheat.

QED.

Sultan




24 Apr 2004 20:32:53
Larry de Silva
Re: What is a cheat?


"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Here is a dictionary definition
>
> "To violate rules deliberately"
>
> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>
> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> deliberately.
>
> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> other than Murali is a cheat.
>
> Colin Kynoch


Fair enough Colin, you are entitled to your views dude.

If I was a bowler, I would immediately volunteer to have my action cleared
of the appropriate tolerance levels. In my view, ALL the bowlers who DON'T
subject themselves to this testing but then continue playing are cheats.

It in no longer possible to believe that bowlers are not aware of the
reports that MOST of them go over the tolerance levels, so there is no other
conclusion to be reached other than they are all cheats.

Laz




24 Apr 2004 10:41:47
Colin Kynoch
Re: What is a cheat?

On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 20:32:53 +1000, "Larry de Silva"
<[email protected] > parted their butt cheeks and let rip
with this:

>
>"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>> Here is a dictionary definition
>>
>> "To violate rules deliberately"
>>
>> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>>
>> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
>> deliberately.
>>
>> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> other than Murali is a cheat.
>>
>> Colin Kynoch
>
>
>Fair enough Colin, you are entitled to your views dude.

Can you come up with another explanation of Murali's actions?

>
>If I was a bowler, I would immediately volunteer to have my action cleared
>of the appropriate tolerance levels. In my view, ALL the bowlers who DON'T
>subject themselves to this testing but then continue playing are cheats.

How do you come to this conclusion?

>It in no longer possible to believe that bowlers are not aware of the
>reports that MOST of them go over the tolerance levels, so there is no other
>conclusion to be reached other than they are all cheats.

Larry even on the very tenuous results of the study the majority of
the bowlers would not be cheats even if they were aware of the results
for their particular delivery or two.

Colin Kynoch


24 Apr 2004 12:47:15
Paul Robson
Re: What is a cheat?

Colin Kynoch wrote:

> Here is a dictionary definition
>
> "To violate rules deliberately"
>
> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>
> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> deliberately.
>
> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> other than Murali is a cheat.
>
> Colin Kynoch

My views exactly. I never thought Murali knew he was throwing. He must
be aware that it is illegal under the rules he is playing.

The one however is that we do not know if the doosra was actually bowled.


24 Apr 2004 06:49:30
Madhusudan Singh
Re: What is a cheat?

On Saturday 24 April 2004 06:08, Colin Kynoch ([email protected])
held forth in rec.sport.cricket
(<[email protected] >):

> Here is a dictionary definition
>
> "To violate rules deliberately"
>
> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>
> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> deliberately.
>
> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> other than Murali is a cheat.
>
> Colin Kynoch

Well put.


24 Apr 2004 12:49:28
Paul Robson
Re: What is a cheat?

Larry de Silva wrote:

>
> "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> Here is a dictionary definition
>>
>> "To violate rules deliberately"
>>
>> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>>
>> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
>> deliberately.
>>
>> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> other than Murali is a cheat.
>>
>> Colin Kynoch
>
>
> Fair enough Colin, you are entitled to your views dude.
>
> If I was a bowler, I would immediately volunteer to have my action cleared
> of the appropriate tolerance levels. In my view, ALL the bowlers who DON'T
> subject themselves to this testing but then continue playing are cheats.
>
> It in no longer possible to believe that bowlers are not aware of the
> reports that MOST of them go over the tolerance levels, so there is no
> other conclusion to be reached other than they are all cheats.
>

I still can't find this report, which suggests your argument fails.


24 Apr 2004 21:44:50
Will Sutton
Re: What is a cheat?


"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Here is a dictionary definition
>
> "To violate rules deliberately"
>
> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>
> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> deliberately.
>
> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> other than Murali is a cheat.
>
> Colin Kynoch

Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
press
release ?




24 Apr 2004 22:16:41
Larry de Silva
Re: What is a cheat?


"Will Sutton" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > Here is a dictionary definition
> >
> > "To violate rules deliberately"
> >
> > As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> >
> > Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> > deliberately.
> >
> > It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> > doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> > other than Murali is a cheat.
> >
> > Colin Kynoch
>
> Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
> press
> release ?


Official report hasnt been releaased as yet Will.

Only comments by Elliot and press reports.

Laz
>
>




24 Apr 2004 12:18:40
Somefella
Re: What is a cheat?


"Will Sutton" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > Here is a dictionary definition
> >
> > "To violate rules deliberately"
> >
> > As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> >
> > Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> > deliberately.
> >
> > It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> > doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> > other than Murali is a cheat.
> >
> > Colin Kynoch
>
> Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
> press
> release ?

Yeah, I'd like to know aswell....
I'm pretty confident he does chuck... but I'm not confident that he can
actually bowl without chucking... i'd like to see him give that a go.




24 Apr 2004 22:29:00
The Wog
Re: What is a cheat?

"Larry de Silva" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > Here is a dictionary definition
> >
> > "To violate rules deliberately"
> >
> > As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> >
> > Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> > deliberately.
> >
> > It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> > doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> > other than Murali is a cheat.
> >
> > Colin Kynoch
>
>
> Fair enough Colin, you are entitled to your views dude.
>
> If I was a bowler, I would immediately volunteer to have my action cleared
> of the appropriate tolerance levels. In my view, ALL the bowlers who DON'T
> subject themselves to this testing but then continue playing are cheats.

So these people are cheats because they know that SOME of them are throwing,
and they don't know for a fact that they're the ones that aren't?

Was Murali a cheat after the date that whoever claimed that some fast
bowlers were straightening their arms more than 10 degrees, but before UWA
showed that Murali was? Or have you changed your definition of "cheat" since
after Murali's tests?
>
Wog




24 Apr 2004 22:30:19
The Wog
Re: What is a cheat?

"Will Sutton" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > Here is a dictionary definition
> >
> > "To violate rules deliberately"
> >
> > As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> >
> > Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> > deliberately.
> >
> > It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> > doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> > other than Murali is a cheat.
> >
> > Colin Kynoch
>
> Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
> press release ?

I think we've all seen enough material from UWA, SLC and the RIICC to
consider the test results confirmed. Or do you seriously consider the
conclusion still in doubt?




24 Apr 2004 12:47:46
Colin Kynoch
Re: What is a cheat?

On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:44:50 +1000, "Will Sutton"
<[email protected] > parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
this:

>
>"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>> Here is a dictionary definition
>>
>> "To violate rules deliberately"
>>
>> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>>
>> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
>> deliberately.
>>
>> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> other than Murali is a cheat.
>>
>> Colin Kynoch
>
>Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
>press
>release ?

Dr Elliott has been quoted as saying it is about 10 degrees more than
once.

I assume he knows the results of his own tests.

The President of SLC has been quoted as saying that they have advised
Murali not to bowl the doosra.

I assume that he has seen the results and unless the doosra is over
the tolerance level why would he suggest to Murali not to bowl it?

Colin Kynoch
>



24 Apr 2004 23:01:51
Mango
Re: What is a cheat?


"Larry de Silva" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > Here is a dictionary definition
> >
> > "To violate rules deliberately"
> >
> > As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> >
> > Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> > deliberately.
> >
> > It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> > doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> > other than Murali is a cheat.
> >
> > Colin Kynoch
>
>
> Fair enough Colin, you are entitled to your views dude.
>
> If I was a bowler, I would immediately volunteer to have my action cleared
> of the appropriate tolerance levels. In my view, ALL the bowlers who DON'T
> subject themselves to this testing but then continue playing are cheats.
>

An interesting view. Also a view that seems recently adopted.

> It in no longer possible to believe that bowlers are not aware of the
> reports that MOST of them go over the tolerance levels, so there is no
other
> conclusion to be reached other than they are all cheats.
>

I have heard of no such reports. However if Murali is aware that his doosra
violates the current laws of the game and if he continues to use it, then he
would be cheating. It is quite possible that his board have told him that
it is ok for him to use it. In that case it would be his board that is
cheating.

> Laz
>
>




24 Apr 2004 14:07:45
Paul Robson
Re: What is a cheat?

Will Sutton wrote:

>
> "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> Here is a dictionary definition
>>
>> "To violate rules deliberately"
>>
>> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>>
>> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
>> deliberately.
>>
>> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> other than Murali is a cheat.
>>
>> Colin Kynoch
>
> Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
> press
> release ?

It is a conclusion. Elliot has stated that the doosra comes out at 10
degrees, twice the legal limit. Under the current rules that is a chuck.

Seems that Elliot has been desperately trying to come to any conclusion
other than this in his report ; hence all the crap about Murali being a
fast bowler really and the limits are wrong really.



24 Apr 2004 13:09:38
Colin Kynoch
Re: What is a cheat?

On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 23:01:51 +1000, "Mango" <[email protected] >
parted their butt cheeks and let rip with this:

>
>"Larry de Silva" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>>
>> "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>> > Here is a dictionary definition
>> >
>> > "To violate rules deliberately"
>> >
>> > As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>> >
>> > Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
>> > deliberately.
>> >
>> > It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> > doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> > other than Murali is a cheat.
>> >
>> > Colin Kynoch
>>
>>
>> Fair enough Colin, you are entitled to your views dude.
>>
>> If I was a bowler, I would immediately volunteer to have my action cleared
>> of the appropriate tolerance levels. In my view, ALL the bowlers who DON'T
>> subject themselves to this testing but then continue playing are cheats.
>>
>
>An interesting view. Also a view that seems recently adopted.
>
>> It in no longer possible to believe that bowlers are not aware of the
>> reports that MOST of them go over the tolerance levels, so there is no
>other
>> conclusion to be reached other than they are all cheats.
>>
>
>I have heard of no such reports. However if Murali is aware that his doosra
>violates the current laws of the game and if he continues to use it, then he
>would be cheating. It is quite possible that his board have told him that
>it is ok for him to use it. In that case it would be his board that is
>cheating.

Except the President of SLC has been quoted as saying that he has
advised Murali not to bowl it.

Colin Kynoch
>
>> Laz
>>
>>
>



25 Apr 2004 00:05:30
Will Sutton
Re: What is a cheat?


"The Wog" <[my org name]@optusnet.com.au > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> "Will Sutton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> >
> > "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> > > Here is a dictionary definition
> > >
> > > "To violate rules deliberately"
> > >
> > > As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> > >
> > > Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> > > deliberately.
> > >
> > > It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> > > doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> > > other than Murali is a cheat.
> > >
> > > Colin Kynoch
> >
> > Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
> > press release ?
>
> I think we've all seen enough material from UWA, SLC and the RIICC to
> consider the test results confirmed. Or do you seriously consider the
> conclusion still in doubt?
>

Where ? I would like to see something official and until then I will keep
my mouth shut which I think others should consider




25 Apr 2004 00:07:46
Will Sutton
Re: What is a cheat?


"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:44:50 +1000, "Will Sutton"
> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
> this:
>
> >
> >"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]
> >> Here is a dictionary definition
> >>
> >> "To violate rules deliberately"
> >>
> >> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> >>
> >> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> >> deliberately.
> >>
> >> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> >> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> >> other than Murali is a cheat.
> >>
> >> Colin Kynoch
> >
> >Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
> >press
> >release ?
>
> Dr Elliott has been quoted as saying it is about 10 degrees more than
> once.
>
> I assume he knows the results of his own tests.
>
> The President of SLC has been quoted as saying that they have advised
> Murali not to bowl the doosra.
>
> I assume that he has seen the results and unless the doosra is over
> the tolerance level why would he suggest to Murali not to bowl it?
>
> Colin Kynoch


So they have been quoted ? I assume you mean by journalist and they
are just so trustworthy and reliable and they never quote out on context etc





24 Apr 2004 16:40:29
Paul Robson
Re: What is a cheat?

Will Sutton wrote:

>
> "The Wog" <[my org name]@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> "Will Sutton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>> >
>> > "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > news:[email protected]
>> > > Here is a dictionary definition
>> > >
>> > > "To violate rules deliberately"
>> > >
>> > > As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>> > >
>> > > Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do
>> > > so deliberately.
>> > >
>> > > It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> > > doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> > > other than Murali is a cheat.
>> > >
>> > > Colin Kynoch
>> >
>> > Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
>> > press release ?
>>
>> I think we've all seen enough material from UWA, SLC and the RIICC to
>> consider the test results confirmed. Or do you seriously consider the
>> conclusion still in doubt?
>>
>
> Where ? I would like to see something official and until then I will keep
> my mouth shut which I think others should consider

I think Elliott saying "his doosra is about ten degrees which is twice the
legal limit" will do won't it ?


24 Apr 2004 14:42:26
Colin Kynoch
Re: What is a cheat?

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 00:07:46 +1000, "Will Sutton"
<[email protected] > parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
this:

>
>"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>> On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:44:50 +1000, "Will Sutton"
>> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
>> this:
>>
>> >
>> >"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected]
>> >> Here is a dictionary definition
>> >>
>> >> "To violate rules deliberately"
>> >>
>> >> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>> >>
>> >> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
>> >> deliberately.
>> >>
>> >> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> >> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> >> other than Murali is a cheat.
>> >>
>> >> Colin Kynoch
>> >
>> >Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
>> >press
>> >release ?
>>
>> Dr Elliott has been quoted as saying it is about 10 degrees more than
>> once.
>>
>> I assume he knows the results of his own tests.
>>
>> The President of SLC has been quoted as saying that they have advised
>> Murali not to bowl the doosra.
>>
>> I assume that he has seen the results and unless the doosra is over
>> the tolerance level why would he suggest to Murali not to bowl it?
>>
>> Colin Kynoch
>
>
>So they have been quoted ?

Yep.

> I assume you mean by journalist and they
>are just so trustworthy and reliable and they never quote out on context etc

The quotes were quite clear Will.

Can you please tell me how the following could have been taken out of
context?

"It would not be appropriate for Murali to continue to bowl his doosra
at the moment," de Silva said.

"I am positive that the ICC will eventually take appropriate steps to
reflect current studies into bowling actions. Murali has been given
advice about his doosra but he is a very strong character and I am
sure he will continue to bowl well while this matter is finalised."

http://www.thewest.com.au/20040421/sport/tw-sport-home-sto123585.html


Colin Kynoch


>
>



25 Apr 2004 01:01:40
Will Sutton
Re: What is a cheat?


"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 00:07:46 +1000, "Will Sutton"
> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
> this:
>
> >
> >"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]
> >> On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:44:50 +1000, "Will Sutton"
> >> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
> >> this:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[email protected]
> >> >> Here is a dictionary definition
> >> >>
> >> >> "To violate rules deliberately"
> >> >>
> >> >> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> >> >>
> >> >> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do
so
> >> >> deliberately.
> >> >>
> >> >> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> >> >> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> >> >> other than Murali is a cheat.
> >> >>
> >> >> Colin Kynoch
> >> >
> >> >Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is
the
> >> >press
> >> >release ?
> >>
> >> Dr Elliott has been quoted as saying it is about 10 degrees more than
> >> once.
> >>
> >> I assume he knows the results of his own tests.
> >>
> >> The President of SLC has been quoted as saying that they have advised
> >> Murali not to bowl the doosra.
> >>
> >> I assume that he has seen the results and unless the doosra is over
> >> the tolerance level why would he suggest to Murali not to bowl it?
> >>
> >> Colin Kynoch
> >
> >
> >So they have been quoted ?
>
> Yep.
>
> > I assume you mean by journalist and they
> >are just so trustworthy and reliable and they never quote out on context
etc
>
> The quotes were quite clear Will.
>
> Can you please tell me how the following could have been taken out of
> context?
>
> "It would not be appropriate for Murali to continue to bowl his doosra
> at the moment," de Silva said.
>
> "I am positive that the ICC will eventually take appropriate steps to
> reflect current studies into bowling actions. Murali has been given
> advice about his doosra but he is a very strong character and I am
> sure he will continue to bowl well while this matter is finalised."
>
> http://www.thewest.com.au/20040421/sport/tw-sport-home-sto123585.html
>
>
> Colin Kynoc

I will wait for something official rather then rely on reports in an
Australian paper on this




25 Apr 2004 10:12:16
bigbadja
Re: What is a cheat?

So Larry is addmitting that Murili is a cheat, and has been scientifically
proved to be a cheat......end of the line Larry.




25 Apr 2004 01:57:55
Colin Kynoch
Re: What is a cheat?

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 01:01:40 +1000, "Will Sutton"
<[email protected] > parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
this:

>
>"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>> On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 00:07:46 +1000, "Will Sutton"
>> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
>> this:
>>
>> >
>> >"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected]
>> >> On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:44:50 +1000, "Will Sutton"
>> >> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
>> >> this:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> >news:[email protected]
>> >> >> Here is a dictionary definition
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "To violate rules deliberately"
>> >> >>
>> >> >> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do
>so
>> >> >> deliberately.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> >> >> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> >> >> other than Murali is a cheat.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Colin Kynoch
>> >> >
>> >> >Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is
>the
>> >> >press
>> >> >release ?
>> >>
>> >> Dr Elliott has been quoted as saying it is about 10 degrees more than
>> >> once.
>> >>
>> >> I assume he knows the results of his own tests.
>> >>
>> >> The President of SLC has been quoted as saying that they have advised
>> >> Murali not to bowl the doosra.
>> >>
>> >> I assume that he has seen the results and unless the doosra is over
>> >> the tolerance level why would he suggest to Murali not to bowl it?
>> >>
>> >> Colin Kynoch
>> >
>> >
>> >So they have been quoted ?
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>> > I assume you mean by journalist and they
>> >are just so trustworthy and reliable and they never quote out on context
>etc
>>
>> The quotes were quite clear Will.
>>
>> Can you please tell me how the following could have been taken out of
>> context?
>>
>> "It would not be appropriate for Murali to continue to bowl his doosra
>> at the moment," de Silva said.
>>
>> "I am positive that the ICC will eventually take appropriate steps to
>> reflect current studies into bowling actions. Murali has been given
>> advice about his doosra but he is a very strong character and I am
>> sure he will continue to bowl well while this matter is finalised."
>>
>> http://www.thewest.com.au/20040421/sport/tw-sport-home-sto123585.html
>>
>>
>> Colin Kynoc
>
>I will wait for something official rather then rely on reports in an
>Australian paper on this

So the President of SLC isn't official enough for you?

Colin Kynoch
>



25 Apr 2004 12:08:58
Will Sutton
Re: What is a cheat?


"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 01:01:40 +1000, "Will Sutton"
> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
> this:
>
> >
> >"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]
> >> On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 00:07:46 +1000, "Will Sutton"
> >> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
> >> this:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[email protected]
> >> >> On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:44:50 +1000, "Will Sutton"
> >> >> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
> >> >> this:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >> >news:[email protected]
> >> >> >> Here is a dictionary definition
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "To violate rules deliberately"
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a
cheat.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not
do
> >so
> >> >> >> deliberately.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> >> >> >> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be
reached
> >> >> >> other than Murali is a cheat.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Colin Kynoch
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is
> >the
> >> >> >press
> >> >> >release ?
> >> >>
> >> >> Dr Elliott has been quoted as saying it is about 10 degrees more
than
> >> >> once.
> >> >>
> >> >> I assume he knows the results of his own tests.
> >> >>
> >> >> The President of SLC has been quoted as saying that they have
advised
> >> >> Murali not to bowl the doosra.
> >> >>
> >> >> I assume that he has seen the results and unless the doosra is over
> >> >> the tolerance level why would he suggest to Murali not to bowl it?
> >> >>
> >> >> Colin Kynoch
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >So they have been quoted ?
> >>
> >> Yep.
> >>
> >> > I assume you mean by journalist and they
> >> >are just so trustworthy and reliable and they never quote out on
context
> >etc
> >>
> >> The quotes were quite clear Will.
> >>
> >> Can you please tell me how the following could have been taken out of
> >> context?
> >>
> >> "It would not be appropriate for Murali to continue to bowl his doosra
> >> at the moment," de Silva said.
> >>
> >> "I am positive that the ICC will eventually take appropriate steps to
> >> reflect current studies into bowling actions. Murali has been given
> >> advice about his doosra but he is a very strong character and I am
> >> sure he will continue to bowl well while this matter is finalised."
> >>
> >> http://www.thewest.com.au/20040421/sport/tw-sport-home-sto123585.html
> >>
> >>
> >> Colin Kynoc
> >
> >I will wait for something official rather then rely on reports in an
> >Australian paper on this
>
> So the President of SLC isn't official enough for you?
>
> Colin Kynoch


You may believe everything you see in a paper but I don't :-)




25 Apr 2004 02:45:32
Colin Kynoch
Re: What is a cheat?

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 12:08:58 +1000, "Will Sutton"
<[email protected] > parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
this:

>
>"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>> On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 01:01:40 +1000, "Will Sutton"
>> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
>> this:
>>
>> >
>> >"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected]
>> >> On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 00:07:46 +1000, "Will Sutton"
>> >> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
>> >> this:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> >news:[email protected]
>> >> >> On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:44:50 +1000, "Will Sutton"
>> >> >> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with
>> >> >> this:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> >> >news:[email protected]
>> >> >> >> Here is a dictionary definition
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "To violate rules deliberately"
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a
>cheat.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not
>do
>> >so
>> >> >> >> deliberately.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> >> >> >> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be
>reached
>> >> >> >> other than Murali is a cheat.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Colin Kynoch
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is
>> >the
>> >> >> >press
>> >> >> >release ?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Dr Elliott has been quoted as saying it is about 10 degrees more
>than
>> >> >> once.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I assume he knows the results of his own tests.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The President of SLC has been quoted as saying that they have
>advised
>> >> >> Murali not to bowl the doosra.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I assume that he has seen the results and unless the doosra is over
>> >> >> the tolerance level why would he suggest to Murali not to bowl it?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Colin Kynoch
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >So they have been quoted ?
>> >>
>> >> Yep.
>> >>
>> >> > I assume you mean by journalist and they
>> >> >are just so trustworthy and reliable and they never quote out on
>context
>> >etc
>> >>
>> >> The quotes were quite clear Will.
>> >>
>> >> Can you please tell me how the following could have been taken out of
>> >> context?
>> >>
>> >> "It would not be appropriate for Murali to continue to bowl his doosra
>> >> at the moment," de Silva said.
>> >>
>> >> "I am positive that the ICC will eventually take appropriate steps to
>> >> reflect current studies into bowling actions. Murali has been given
>> >> advice about his doosra but he is a very strong character and I am
>> >> sure he will continue to bowl well while this matter is finalised."
>> >>
>> >> http://www.thewest.com.au/20040421/sport/tw-sport-home-sto123585.html
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Colin Kynoc
>> >
>> >I will wait for something official rather then rely on reports in an
>> >Australian paper on this
>>
>> So the President of SLC isn't official enough for you?
>>
>> Colin Kynoch
>
>
>You may believe everything you see in a paper but I don't :-)

It has been widely quoted Will.

And I haven't seen the good Pres denying the quotes anywhere.

Even the mouthpiece of Sri Lankan cricket Charlie Austin refers to
Murali being told not to bowl the doosra.

http://aus.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2004/APR/130095_SL_21APR2004.html

"Muralitharan had been advised by Sri Lanka cricket officials prior to
the Zimbabwe tour to stop using the doosra until they had sought the
advice of the ICC Technical Committee and officially recommended
further research."


Colin Kynoch


25 Apr 2004 22:47:00
witt
Re: What is a cheat?

In article <[email protected] >, Larry de Silva
<[email protected] > wrote:

> "Will Sutton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> >
> > "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> > > Here is a dictionary definition
> > >
> > > "To violate rules deliberately"
> > >
> > > As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> > >
> > > Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> > > deliberately.
> > >
> > > It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> > > doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> > > other than Murali is a cheat.
> > >
> > > Colin Kynoch
> >
> > Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
> > press
> > release ?
>
>
> Official report hasnt been releaased as yet Will.
>
> Only comments by Elliot and press reports.
>
> Laz
> >
Thats because SL wont pass on the report to the ICC!!


25 Apr 2004 22:51:16
witt
Re: What is a cheat?

In article <[email protected] >, Will Sutton
<[email protected] > wrote:

> "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > Here is a dictionary definition
> >
> > "To violate rules deliberately"
> >
> > As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> >
> > Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> > deliberately.
> >
> > It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> > doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> > other than Murali is a cheat.
> >
> > Colin Kynoch
>
> Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
> press
> release ?
>
When SL eventually pass on Elliot's report to the ICC then you will see
it...SL are looking at a change in the law and are speculating on a
plot because they saw Broad having a drink with the Australians....


25 Apr 2004 22:55:07
witt
Re: What is a cheat?

> > Can you please tell me how the following could have been taken out of
> > context?
> >
> > "It would not be appropriate for Murali to continue to bowl his doosra
> > at the moment," de Silva said.
> >
> > "I am positive that the ICC will eventually take appropriate steps to
> > reflect current studies into bowling actions. Murali has been given
> > advice about his doosra but he is a very strong character and I am
> > sure he will continue to bowl well while this matter is finalised."
> >
> > http://www.thewest.com.au/20040421/sport/tw-sport-home-sto123585.html
> >
> >
> > Colin Kynoc
>
> I will wait for something official rather then rely on reports in an
> Australian paper on this
>
It will only become official when SL finally pass on the report to the
ICC...they have it in their hot little hands and wont let go...


25 Apr 2004 23:23:19
Larry de Silva
Re: What is a cheat?


"witt" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:250420042247005156%[email protected]
> In article <[email protected]>, Larry de Silva
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "Will Sutton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> > >
> > > "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]
> > > > Here is a dictionary definition
> > > >
> > > > "To violate rules deliberately"
> > > >
> > > > As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> > > >
> > > > Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do
so
> > > > deliberately.
> > > >
> > > > It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> > > > doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> > > > other than Murali is a cheat.
> > > >
> > > > Colin Kynoch
> > >
> > > Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is
the
> > > press
> > > release ?
> >
> >
> > Official report hasnt been releaased as yet Will.
> >
> > Only comments by Elliot and press reports.
> >
> > Laz
> > >
> Thats because SL wont pass on the report to the ICC!!



ICC receives Murali report

Sri Lanka's cricket board has forwarded the official report on Muttiah
Muralitharan's doosra delivery to the International Cricket Council, board
president Mohan de Silva confirmed on Saturday.

"The report from the University of Western Australia was sent with the
observations of the bowling review group to the ICC on Friday," de Silva
told Reuters.

"The details of the report will now be circulated by the ICC to their
officials."

Muralitharan's doosra, a delivery that turns in the opposite direction to
his stock off break, was reported at the end of the recent Sri
Lanka-Australia series by ICC match referee Chris Broad.

The contents of the report have not officially been made public, but sources
privy to his assessment said biomechanics experts believed Muralitharan
should be allowed to bowl his doosra even though his arm straightens by
about 10 degrees.

However, the ICC stressed on Tuesday: "The existing regulations governing
the degree to which a spin bowler can straighten his arm or 'level of
tolerance' (five degrees) remain in place and will be enforced.

"...Should any bowler be reported for a second time within 12 months of the
first report, the ICC will convene a hearing of its own Bowling Review Group
which has the power to impose a ban of up to 12 months should it determine
the bowler's action is illegal."

Muralitharan has continued to bowl the doosra during the one-day series
against Zimbabwe, against the advice of Sri Lankan cricket officials.

Muralitharan, who has taken 513 Test wickets, is on the verge of overtaking
West Indies' Courtney Walsh (519) to become the game's leading wicket-taker.

After being reported Muralitharan was sent to Perth for tests where he
bowled in front of 12 cameras with his body strapped in reflective markers
so a computer could track his action.

Muralitharan's arm straightened by approximately 10 degrees when bowling the
delivery.

ICC regulations state that pace bowlers are allowed 10 degrees of flex,
medium pacers seven-and-a-half degrees, and spinners five.

Professor Bruce Elliott, an ICC-approved biomechanist who oversaw the
assessments, has suggested that further research needs to be undertaken to
ascertain whether the levels are practical.

--Reuters




25 Apr 2004 23:23:50
Larry de Silva
Re: What is a cheat?


"witt" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:250420042255074365%[email protected]
> > > Can you please tell me how the following could have been taken out of
> > > context?
> > >
> > > "It would not be appropriate for Murali to continue to bowl his doosra
> > > at the moment," de Silva said.
> > >
> > > "I am positive that the ICC will eventually take appropriate steps to
> > > reflect current studies into bowling actions. Murali has been given
> > > advice about his doosra but he is a very strong character and I am
> > > sure he will continue to bowl well while this matter is finalised."
> > >
> > > http://www.thewest.com.au/20040421/sport/tw-sport-home-sto123585.html
> > >
> > >
> > > Colin Kynoc
> >
> > I will wait for something official rather then rely on reports in an
> > Australian paper on this
> >
> It will only become official when SL finally pass on the report to the
> ICC...they have it in their hot little hands and wont let go...



ICC receives Murali report

Sri Lanka's cricket board has forwarded the official report on Muttiah
Muralitharan's doosra delivery to the International Cricket Council, board
president Mohan de Silva confirmed on Saturday.

"The report from the University of Western Australia was sent with the
observations of the bowling review group to the ICC on Friday," de Silva
told Reuters.

"The details of the report will now be circulated by the ICC to their
officials."

Muralitharan's doosra, a delivery that turns in the opposite direction to
his stock off break, was reported at the end of the recent Sri
Lanka-Australia series by ICC match referee Chris Broad.

The contents of the report have not officially been made public, but sources
privy to his assessment said biomechanics experts believed Muralitharan
should be allowed to bowl his doosra even though his arm straightens by
about 10 degrees.

However, the ICC stressed on Tuesday: "The existing regulations governing
the degree to which a spin bowler can straighten his arm or 'level of
tolerance' (five degrees) remain in place and will be enforced.

"...Should any bowler be reported for a second time within 12 months of the
first report, the ICC will convene a hearing of its own Bowling Review Group
which has the power to impose a ban of up to 12 months should it determine
the bowler's action is illegal."

Muralitharan has continued to bowl the doosra during the one-day series
against Zimbabwe, against the advice of Sri Lankan cricket officials.

Muralitharan, who has taken 513 Test wickets, is on the verge of overtaking
West Indies' Courtney Walsh (519) to become the game's leading wicket-taker.

After being reported Muralitharan was sent to Perth for tests where he
bowled in front of 12 cameras with his body strapped in reflective markers
so a computer could track his action.

Muralitharan's arm straightened by approximately 10 degrees when bowling the
delivery.

ICC regulations state that pace bowlers are allowed 10 degrees of flex,
medium pacers seven-and-a-half degrees, and spinners five.

Professor Bruce Elliott, an ICC-approved biomechanist who oversaw the
assessments, has suggested that further research needs to be undertaken to
ascertain whether the levels are practical.

--Reuters




25 Apr 2004 23:24:23
Larry de Silva
Re: What is a cheat?


"witt" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:250420042251160498%[email protected]
> In article <[email protected]>, Will Sutton
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> > > Here is a dictionary definition
> > >
> > > "To violate rules deliberately"
> > >
> > > As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> > >
> > > Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> > > deliberately.
> > >
> > > It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> > > doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> > > other than Murali is a cheat.
> > >
> > > Colin Kynoch
> >
> > Questions : Is it official that the doorsa is a "chuck" ? Where is the
> > press
> > release ?
> >
> When SL eventually pass on Elliot's report to the ICC then you will see
> it...SL are looking at a change in the law and are speculating on a
> plot because they saw Broad having a drink with the Australians....


ICC receives Murali report

Sri Lanka's cricket board has forwarded the official report on Muttiah
Muralitharan's doosra delivery to the International Cricket Council, board
president Mohan de Silva confirmed on Saturday.

"The report from the University of Western Australia was sent with the
observations of the bowling review group to the ICC on Friday," de Silva
told Reuters.

"The details of the report will now be circulated by the ICC to their
officials."

Muralitharan's doosra, a delivery that turns in the opposite direction to
his stock off break, was reported at the end of the recent Sri
Lanka-Australia series by ICC match referee Chris Broad.

The contents of the report have not officially been made public, but sources
privy to his assessment said biomechanics experts believed Muralitharan
should be allowed to bowl his doosra even though his arm straightens by
about 10 degrees.

However, the ICC stressed on Tuesday: "The existing regulations governing
the degree to which a spin bowler can straighten his arm or 'level of
tolerance' (five degrees) remain in place and will be enforced.

"...Should any bowler be reported for a second time within 12 months of the
first report, the ICC will convene a hearing of its own Bowling Review Group
which has the power to impose a ban of up to 12 months should it determine
the bowler's action is illegal."

Muralitharan has continued to bowl the doosra during the one-day series
against Zimbabwe, against the advice of Sri Lankan cricket officials.

Muralitharan, who has taken 513 Test wickets, is on the verge of overtaking
West Indies' Courtney Walsh (519) to become the game's leading wicket-taker.

After being reported Muralitharan was sent to Perth for tests where he
bowled in front of 12 cameras with his body strapped in reflective markers
so a computer could track his action.

Muralitharan's arm straightened by approximately 10 degrees when bowling the
delivery.

ICC regulations state that pace bowlers are allowed 10 degrees of flex,
medium pacers seven-and-a-half degrees, and spinners five.

Professor Bruce Elliott, an ICC-approved biomechanist who oversaw the
assessments, has suggested that further research needs to be undertaken to
ascertain whether the levels are practical.

--Reuters




26 Apr 2004 14:10:44
Andrew Dunford
Re: What is a cheat?


"Colin Kynoch" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Here is a dictionary definition
>
> "To violate rules deliberately"
>
> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>
> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> deliberately.
>
> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> other than Murali is a cheat.

You do that. As you've reached your conclusions on the basis of (a) media
leaks concerning the test findings (in which case one should always be wary
of selective details being leaked), and (b) media reports that Murali is
bowling a particular type of delivery in matches in Zimbabwe, I shall
conclude that you're comfortable with throwing around strong accusations
without anything substantial to back them up, and henceforth not worth
taking any notice of.

How do you know that the report says Murali exceeds the tolerance limit
every time he bowls the doosra? How do you know Murali hasn't modified his
bowling action for delivering the doosra?

Andrew




26 Apr 2004 02:51:33
Spaceman Spiff
Re: What is a cheat?

Andrew Dunford <[email protected] > scratched his armpit and grunted:
> "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> Here is a dictionary definition
>>
>> "To violate rules deliberately"
>>
>> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>>
>> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do
>> so deliberately.
>>
>> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> other than Murali is a cheat.
>
> You do that. As you've reached your conclusions on the basis of (a)
> media leaks concerning the test findings (in which case one should
> always be wary of selective details being leaked), and (b) media
> reports that Murali is bowling a particular type of delivery in
> matches in Zimbabwe, I shall conclude that you're comfortable with
> throwing around strong accusations without anything substantial to
> back them up, and henceforth not worth taking any notice of.
>
> How do you know that the report says Murali exceeds the tolerance
> limit every time he bowls the doosra? How do you know Murali hasn't
> modified his bowling action for delivering the doosra?
>
indeed, in the absence of video evidence, it is entirely possible that murali
has reverted to the earlier version of the doosra, which didn't turn quite as
much.

--
stay cool,
Spaceman Spiff

No more cryin' and memories find their way back
Tomorrow's waiting let's journey there together
Yesterday is gone but tomorrow is forever




26 Apr 2004 14:04:13
witt
Re: What is a cheat?

>
> Muralitharan has continued to bowl the doosra during the one-day series
> against Zimbabwe, against the advice of Sri Lankan cricket officials.
>

I read that they got it yesterday...


26 Apr 2004 14:05:37
witt
Re: What is a cheat?

Topic...What is a cheat?

> Muralitharan has continued to bowl the doosra during the one-day series
> against Zimbabwe, against the advice of Sri Lankan cricket officials.
>


26 Apr 2004 14:06:17
witt
Re: What is a cheat?

Topic...What is a cheat?

> Muralitharan has continued to bowl the doosra during the one-day series
> against Zimbabwe, against the advice of Sri Lankan cricket officials.
>


26 Apr 2004 16:21:05
Larry de Silva
Re: What is a cheat?


"Spaceman Spiff" <[email protected]_spam_mail.com > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Andrew Dunford <[email protected]> scratched his armpit and grunted:
> > "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> >> Here is a dictionary definition
> >>
> >> "To violate rules deliberately"
> >>
> >> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> >>
> >> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do
> >> so deliberately.
> >>
> >> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> >> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> >> other than Murali is a cheat.
> >
> > You do that. As you've reached your conclusions on the basis of (a)
> > media leaks concerning the test findings (in which case one should
> > always be wary of selective details being leaked), and (b) media
> > reports that Murali is bowling a particular type of delivery in
> > matches in Zimbabwe, I shall conclude that you're comfortable with
> > throwing around strong accusations without anything substantial to
> > back them up, and henceforth not worth taking any notice of.
> >
> > How do you know that the report says Murali exceeds the tolerance
> > limit every time he bowls the doosra? How do you know Murali hasn't
> > modified his bowling action for delivering the doosra?
> >
> indeed, in the absence of video evidence, it is entirely possible that
murali
> has reverted to the earlier version of the doosra, which didn't turn quite
as
> much.



Will the Murali bashers REALLY read great logic like this??

Will they care?

I don't think so. Their sole purpose here is to bash Murali and SL at ANY
chance. Like I have said for years and I'm being proven right as usual.

Laz




>
> --
> stay cool,
> Spaceman Spiff
>
> No more cryin' and memories find their way back
> Tomorrow's waiting let's journey there together
> Yesterday is gone but tomorrow is forever
>
>




26 Apr 2004 08:48:17
Paul Robson
Re: What is a cheat?

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

>> How do you know that the report says Murali exceeds the tolerance
>> limit every time he bowls the doosra? How do you know Murali hasn't
>> modified his bowling action for delivering the doosra?
>>
> indeed, in the absence of video evidence, it is entirely possible that
> murali has reverted to the earlier version of the doosra, which didn't
> turn quite as much.

We don't know if he did at all. I suspect we will find out in A/SL



26 Apr 2004 21:22:23
alvey
Re: What is a cheat?

Andrew Dunford wrote:

snip preaching

>
> How do you know that the report says Murali exceeds the tolerance limit
> every time he bowls the doosra? How do you know Murali hasn't modified his
> bowling action for delivering the doosra?

On that last point I'd opine that it's impossible for him to do so.
Without the whiplash momentum provided by the elbow straightening he
couldn't get the ball to turn from leg.



alvey




26 Apr 2004 21:28:24
alvey
Re: What is a cheat?

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

snip
>
> indeed, in the absence of video evidence, it is entirely possible that murali
> has reverted to the earlier version of the doosra, which didn't turn quite as
> much.
>

And in the absence of testing it's entirely possible that Murali's
Doosra V.1 was an illegal delivery as well.



alvey




26 Apr 2004 23:15:29
The Wog
Re: What is a cheat?

"alvey" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Andrew Dunford wrote:
>
> snip preaching
>
> >
> > How do you know that the report says Murali exceeds the tolerance limit
> > every time he bowls the doosra? How do you know Murali hasn't modified
his
> > bowling action for delivering the doosra?
>
> On that last point I'd opine that it's impossible for him to do so.
> Without the whiplash momentum provided by the elbow straightening he
> couldn't get the ball to turn from leg.
>
or the off!




26 Apr 2004 14:24:03
kenhiggs8
Re: What is a cheat?

Colin Kynoch <[email protected] > wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Here is a dictionary definition
>
> "To violate rules deliberately"
>
> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>
> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> deliberately.
>
> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> other than Murali is a cheat.
>
> Colin Kynoch

Is this one of the reasons why you continually defend Warne on the
grounds that he did nothing wrong when he took money from bookies or
borrowed drugs from his mum?

He did none of those things knowingly, so therefore isn't a cheat?

H


27 Apr 2004 01:32:37
Colin Kynoch
Re: What is a cheat?

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:21:05 +1000, "Larry de Silva"
<[email protected] > parted their butt cheeks and let rip
with this:

>
>"Spaceman Spiff" <[email protected]_spam_mail.com> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>> Andrew Dunford <[email protected]> scratched his armpit and grunted:
>> > "Colin Kynoch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > news:[email protected]
>> >> Here is a dictionary definition
>> >>
>> >> "To violate rules deliberately"
>> >>
>> >> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>> >>
>> >> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do
>> >> so deliberately.
>> >>
>> >> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> >> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> >> other than Murali is a cheat.
>> >
>> > You do that. As you've reached your conclusions on the basis of (a)
>> > media leaks concerning the test findings (in which case one should
>> > always be wary of selective details being leaked), and (b) media
>> > reports that Murali is bowling a particular type of delivery in
>> > matches in Zimbabwe, I shall conclude that you're comfortable with
>> > throwing around strong accusations without anything substantial to
>> > back them up, and henceforth not worth taking any notice of.
>> >
>> > How do you know that the report says Murali exceeds the tolerance
>> > limit every time he bowls the doosra? How do you know Murali hasn't
>> > modified his bowling action for delivering the doosra?
>> >
>> indeed, in the absence of video evidence, it is entirely possible that
>murali
>> has reverted to the earlier version of the doosra, which didn't turn quite
>as
>> much.

From what has been reported about the UWA tests I suspect that is what
he bowled during those tests.

10 degrees certainly wouldn't explain the darts he threw in the recent
A v SL series.

>Will the Murali bashers REALLY read great logic like this??
>
>Will they care?
>
>I don't think so. Their sole purpose here is to bash Murali and SL at ANY
>chance. Like I have said for years and I'm being proven right as usual.

Larry it would seem fairly obvious that he 'reverted' to his earlier
version of the doosra in the UWA tests.

Colin Kynoch


28 Apr 2004 10:00:50
Andrew Dunford
Re: What is a cheat?


"alvey" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Andrew Dunford wrote:
>
> snip preaching
>
> >
> > How do you know that the report says Murali exceeds the tolerance limit
> > every time he bowls the doosra? How do you know Murali hasn't modified
his
> > bowling action for delivering the doosra?
>
> On that last point I'd opine that it's impossible for him to do so.
> Without the whiplash momentum provided by the elbow straightening he
> couldn't get the ball to turn from leg.

Quite possibly, but we're back in the land of "it is my opinion that he
bowls with an illegal action". Which is fine: it's the claim that one can
"deduce" Murali is a cheat based on the combination of unreleased test
results and some CricInfo ball-by-ball commentary that I object to.

Reverend Dunford




28 Apr 2004 01:50:52
Moby
Re: What is a cheat?

It's a European grass widely denounced as a weed.

HTH

Moby


28 Apr 2004 09:00:49
Cicero
Re: What is a cheat?


"Moby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> It's a European grass widely denounced as a weed.
>
> HTH
>
> Moby

It's a thing on a boat that ropes go around.




28 Apr 2004 19:23:58
David Male
Re: What is a cheat?

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 09:00:49 GMT, "Cicero"
<moofie53HJU&^*(@bigpond.net.au > wrote:

>
>"Moby" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>> It's a European grass widely denounced as a weed.
>>
>> HTH
>>
>> Moby
>
>It's a thing on a boat that ropes go around.

Actually it is "taech" which is a Scottish word which means "Och, its
chilly round the scroat tonight Nellie"





28 Apr 2004 11:58:33
Afzal A. Khan
Re: What is a cheat?



Colin Kynoch wrote:
>
> Here is a dictionary definition
>
> "To violate rules deliberately"
>
> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>
> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> deliberately.
>
> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> other than Murali is a cheat.
>
> Colin Kynoch



Some 45 years back, there was an Australian bowler,
Meckiff, who used to "bowl" from a very short run-up
but still generated frightening pace. He was soon out
of the game, though. Now, there are two possibilities.
Either that he thought it was quite possible to bowl
legitimately at that pace with such a short run-up.
Or that he was a .......



A. A. Khan


28 Apr 2004 21:45:51
Colin Kynoch
Re: What is a cheat?

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 11:58:33 -0500, "Afzal A. Khan"
<[email protected] > parted their butt cheeks and let rip with this:

>
>
>Colin Kynoch wrote:
>>
>> Here is a dictionary definition
>>
>> "To violate rules deliberately"
>>
>> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>>
>> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
>> deliberately.
>>
>> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> other than Murali is a cheat.
>>
>> Colin Kynoch
>
>
>
> Some 45 years back, there was an Australian bowler,
> Meckiff, who used to "bowl" from a very short run-up
> but still generated frightening pace. He was soon out
> of the game, though. Now, there are two possibilities.
> Either that he thought it was quite possible to bowl
> legitimately at that pace with such a short run-up.
> Or that he was a .......

Meckiff maintains to this day that he didn't chuck.

BTW he also was unable to straighten his arm fully a la Murali

Colin Kynoch
>
>
>
> A. A. Khan



28 Apr 2004 18:53:53
Afzal A. Khan
Re: What is a cheat?



Colin Kynoch wrote:
>
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 11:58:33 -0500, "Afzal A. Khan"
> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with this:
>
> >
> >
> >Colin Kynoch wrote:
> >>
> >> Here is a dictionary definition
> >>
> >> "To violate rules deliberately"
> >>
> >> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> >>
> >> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> >> deliberately.
> >>
> >> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> >> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> >> other than Murali is a cheat.
> >>
> >> Colin Kynoch
> >
> >
> >
> > Some 45 years back, there was an Australian bowler,
> > Meckiff, who used to "bowl" from a very short run-up
> > but still generated frightening pace. He was soon out
> > of the game, though. Now, there are two possibilities.
> > Either that he thought it was quite possible to bowl
> > legitimately at that pace with such a short run-up.
> > Or that he was a .......
>
> Meckiff maintains to this day that he didn't chuck.
>
> BTW he also was unable to straighten his arm fully a la Murali




Does Murali go about claiming that he chucks .... ?


A. A. Khan



>
> Colin Kynoch
> >
> >
> >
> > A. A. Khan


29 Apr 2004 02:04:40
Colin Kynoch
Re: What is a cheat?

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 18:53:53 -0500, "Afzal A. Khan"
<[email protected] > parted their butt cheeks and let rip with this:

>
>
>Colin Kynoch wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 11:58:33 -0500, "Afzal A. Khan"
>> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with this:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >Colin Kynoch wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Here is a dictionary definition
>> >>
>> >> "To violate rules deliberately"
>> >>
>> >> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>> >>
>> >> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
>> >> deliberately.
>> >>
>> >> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> >> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> >> other than Murali is a cheat.
>> >>
>> >> Colin Kynoch
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Some 45 years back, there was an Australian bowler,
>> > Meckiff, who used to "bowl" from a very short run-up
>> > but still generated frightening pace. He was soon out
>> > of the game, though. Now, there are two possibilities.
>> > Either that he thought it was quite possible to bowl
>> > legitimately at that pace with such a short run-up.
>> > Or that he was a .......
>>
>> Meckiff maintains to this day that he didn't chuck.
>>
>> BTW he also was unable to straighten his arm fully a la Murali
>
>
>
>
> Does Murali go about claiming that he chucks .... ?

Did Meckiff ever have Tests with high speed cameras that showed he
threw?

Because Murali certainly has.


Colin Kynoch


28 Apr 2004 22:22:02
Afzal A. Khan
Re: What is a cheat?



Colin Kynoch wrote:
>
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 18:53:53 -0500, "Afzal A. Khan"
> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with this:
>
> >
> >
> >Colin Kynoch wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 11:58:33 -0500, "Afzal A. Khan"
> >> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with this:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Colin Kynoch wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Here is a dictionary definition
> >> >>
> >> >> "To violate rules deliberately"
> >> >>
> >> >> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
> >> >>
> >> >> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
> >> >> deliberately.
> >> >>
> >> >> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
> >> >> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
> >> >> other than Murali is a cheat.
> >> >>
> >> >> Colin Kynoch
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Some 45 years back, there was an Australian bowler,
> >> > Meckiff, who used to "bowl" from a very short run-up
> >> > but still generated frightening pace. He was soon out
> >> > of the game, though. Now, there are two possibilities.
> >> > Either that he thought it was quite possible to bowl
> >> > legitimately at that pace with such a short run-up.
> >> > Or that he was a .......
> >>
> >> Meckiff maintains to this day that he didn't chuck.
> >>
> >> BTW he also was unable to straighten his arm fully a la Murali
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Does Murali go about claiming that he chucks .... ?
>
> Did Meckiff ever have Tests with high speed cameras that showed he
> threw?
>
> Because Murali certainly has.
>
> Colin Kynoch



Even if he was not subjected to high speed camera tests,
it was known that he was unable to straighten his arm fully
a la Murali. Also, the fact remains that, despite the
absence of such Tests, people were quite certain at the time
that he chucked. Ultimately, an Australian (Benaud) realised
that his team and Meckiff himself just couldn't keep up with
the pretense anymore. So, since most people realised the
truth, without the tests, it does not stand to reason that
Meckiff didn't know this, his protestations notwithstanding.
The important point here is the very short run-up that he
required. I daresay that a paceman, bowling in the
legitimate style, can hardly produce that kind of pace with
such a short run-up. So if all fast bowlers of the time
had a long (or longer) run-up and only Meckiff didn't, it
does go to indicate something. Even Charlie Griffith took
quite a long run-up.


A. A. Khan


29 Apr 2004 06:36:54
Paul Robson
Re: What is a cheat?

Afzal A. Khan wrote:

> Even if he was not subjected to high speed camera tests,
> it was known that he was unable to straighten his arm fully
> a la Murali.  

Which is quite odd, because he claimed in his book thrown out
that he was going to try and conquer the illusion by keeping
his arm straight through the delivery.

I think "a la Murali" in Meckiff's case is not accurate,
Meckiff may have had some permanent bend but not like Muralis.

> Also, the fact remains that, despite the
> absence of such Tests, people were quite certain at the time
> that he chucked.  

It's laughably obvious from film footage. (as it is for Lock).

> Ultimately, an Australian (Benaud) realised
> that his team and Meckiff himself just couldn't keep up with
> the pretense anymore.  

Not really. Meckiff was called in a 1963 test.

> So, since most people realised the
> truth, without the tests, it does not stand to reason that
> Meckiff didn't know this, his protestations notwithstanding.
> The important point here is the very short run-up that he
> required.  I daresay that a paceman, bowling in the
> legitimate style, can hardly produce that kind of pace with
> such a short run-up.  So if all fast bowlers of the time
> had a long (or longer) run-up and only Meckiff didn't, it
> does go to indicate something.  Even Charlie Griffith took
> quite a long run-up.

Thomson.... and a short follow through, because all the energy
is expended in the chuck.

Meckiff claimed he ran as far as most fast bowlers, and probably
did, but observers described it as a leisurely approach.



29 Apr 2004 09:05:30
Colin Kynoch
Re: What is a cheat?

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 22:22:02 -0500, "Afzal A. Khan"
<[email protected] > parted their butt cheeks and let rip with this:

>
>
>Colin Kynoch wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 18:53:53 -0500, "Afzal A. Khan"
>> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with this:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >Colin Kynoch wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 11:58:33 -0500, "Afzal A. Khan"
>> >> <[email protected]> parted their butt cheeks and let rip with this:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Colin Kynoch wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Here is a dictionary definition
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "To violate rules deliberately"
>> >> >>
>> >> >> As Murali continues to bowl his doosra I will now say he is a cheat.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Up to now I have considered that he threw deliveries but did not do so
>> >> >> deliberately.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It in no longer possible to believe that he is not aware that his
>> >> >> doosra's are throws, so there is no other conclusion to be reached
>> >> >> other than Murali is a cheat.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Colin Kynoch
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Some 45 years back, there was an Australian bowler,
>> >> > Meckiff, who used to "bowl" from a very short run-up
>> >> > but still generated frightening pace. He was soon out
>> >> > of the game, though. Now, there are two possibilities.
>> >> > Either that he thought it was quite possible to bowl
>> >> > legitimately at that pace with such a short run-up.
>> >> > Or that he was a .......
>> >>
>> >> Meckiff maintains to this day that he didn't chuck.
>> >>
>> >> BTW he also was unable to straighten his arm fully a la Murali
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Does Murali go about claiming that he chucks .... ?
>>
>> Did Meckiff ever have Tests with high speed cameras that showed he
>> threw?
>>
>> Because Murali certainly has.
>>
>> Colin Kynoch
>
>
>
> Even if he was not subjected to high speed camera tests,
> it was known that he was unable to straighten his arm fully
> a la Murali.

Actually according to Meckiff it wasn't well known.

From "Thrown Out"

"Few people, and certainly none of the pressmen, have known that I
have this natural bend. It is impossible for me to make my left arm
go perfectly straight, no matter how hard I try, and I think this is
one of the reasons why people question my action.

> Also, the fact remains that, despite the
> absence of such Tests, people were quite certain at the time
> that he chucked.

This was written by E. M Wellings ( an English journo for London's
"Evening News")

"I have seen Meckiff bowl for the first time - yes, genuinely bowl"

This was just prior to the start of the Tied Test.


> Ultimately, an Australian (Benaud) realised
> that his team and Meckiff himself just couldn't keep up with
> the pretense anymore.

Well an umpire did call him several times and Benaud had stated he
would not bowl a bowler who was called for throwing.

He was true to his word.

Benaud did not crack the sads, nor did he manhandle the umpire. He
also didn't change the end the bowler was bowling from in an attempt
to avoid him being called again.


> So, since most people realised the
> truth, without the tests, it does not stand to reason that
> Meckiff didn't know this, his protestations notwithstanding.

Given that he bowled at one point with a splint and he was still
accused of chucking, even though he couldn't straighten his arm, it is
just possible that he was pretty confident he didn't chuck.


> The important point here is the very short run-up that he
> required. I daresay that a paceman, bowling in the
> legitimate style, can hardly produce that kind of pace with
> such a short run-up.

Holding seemed to be able to produce considerable speed off a quite
short run late in his career. As did Lillee.

A runup of 5 or more paces is all that is required. I think most
pacemen bowl of longer runs to improve their rhythm.


> So if all fast bowlers of the time
> had a long (or longer) run-up and only Meckiff didn't, it
> does go to indicate something. Even Charlie Griffith took
> quite a long run-up.

Yet Meckiff was by no means the only player accused of chucking or
indeed called for chucking.

Colin Kynoch