The state of off-spin bowling/suspect actions/doosra bowlers worldwide

[MUFC1987]

Before I say anything here, why is whether his arm starts in the same position every time important?

You've used a picture of where his arm finishes (apparently, I assume that the still is from the point of delivery?), so how do you know where his arm started to for that delivery? In order to measure the degrees of movement, you need to know where it finished and where it started, no?

Surely that makes sense. You can't measure how far a car has travelled without knowing both where it ended up and where it started, after all.

 

[ethybubs]

The rule is that when the ball is released the arm can bend no more than 15 degrees, so it doesn't matter where it has come from if it exceeds that.

 

[MUFC1987]

No, the rule is that the arm can move no more than 15 degrees in terms of flex. I.e. if it starts at a 45 degree bend, it can move 15 degrees either way. It can be at 90 degrees if the bowler wants (or is possible!) the only rule is how much it moves during the action. The point I'm making is that I'd be shocked if Ajmal's arm is always at the exact same bend when he starts his action, because it's almost impossible, as he's a human being, not a robot. Therefore, you can't compare one picture at the start of his delivery, with another picture from an entirely different day and delivery, because it's unfair.

Hence the best method is the testing that is in place, which he's passed. I don't see what people expect to happen. He's been cleared, get on with the game.

 

[ethybubs]

No, the rule is that the arm can move no more than 15 degrees in terms of flex. I.e. if it starts at a 45 degree bend, it can move 15 degrees either way. It can be at 90 degrees if the bowler wants (or is possible!) the only rule is how much it moves during the action.

There is two different rules, one is about release point ad the other is about overall action. As for the 90 degree thing:

 

[ParkedTheBus]

Blogs: Hassan Cheema: Chucking: the debate rages pointlessly on | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[War]

Blogs: Hassan Cheema: Chucking: the debate rages pointlessly on | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

He failed to mention the fact that the ICC themselves have said they want to move live match testing of actions recently. That is an update in that ICC viewpoint on the situation, from the below statement from the ICC person that he quoted:

Dr Paul Hurrion, the ICC's head biomechanics analyst, says regarding lab tests: "There are stumps to aim at but no batsman, and we use synchronised footage of the player bowling in a match to check that they are not just going through the motions or altering their style. They have to replicate the speed of a delivery from a match, the deviation and the revolutions of the ball." And I do find it a little odd that the two bowlers most often accused, Murali and Ajmal, are also two who were cleared after testing, unlike many others.

So clearly if the ICC was 100% happy with the current closed door bio-test of bowling action, they wouldn't be planning to do that.

 

[Aalay]

Finally someone noticed.

Sri Lanka in England 2014 : Sachithra Senanayake's action reported | Cricket News | England v India | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[War]

^^

Ye long overdue that call.

 

[War]

BUMBLE'S WORLD: Sachithra Senanayake isn't the only bowler with a suspect action | Mail Online

While I feel there are plenty of modern bowlers who would be just as at home chucking darts at the Ally Pally as performing at Lord?s, I do feel Sachithra Senanayake is a victim of a haphazard and slightly unfair system.
I?d rather see anyone with a suspect action being put on notice and monitored in match situations instead of being sent to the laboratory. Tell them they?re being watched and get them to bowl in short-sleeved shirts so the umpires can see exactly what they need to.
If umpires continue to report any bowler, then they clearly have a case.

 

[War]

ICC news : Methods to detect illegal actions imperfect - ICC committee | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo

Big news!

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

from most of what I've read the problems surround the calling within the match and how to pinpoint who should be tested. Think you've made a bit of a leap of logic saying it's the testing that's at fault there War. To me Paul Hurrions comments don't suggest a failure in the testing, they suggest a failure in the understanding of the testing and a lack of trust in it. (to me it's rather obvious murali and ajmal get accused more than other bowlers because they're much better)

most people, fans and umpires, judge the players suitability for testing with their eyes. the only people with a more indepth, scientific, outlook on the subject is the testers, yet ironically they seem to be the least trusted. MUFC has already made the best point about this, noting that people calling for more science are the first to ignore the science and then offer photos with crude drawings painted on top in place.

So, I'm quite for in match testing but I do wonder how people are going to react if it starts throwing out results that people aren't happy with. People were willing to defer the trust in their eye-sight to biomechanics but because this didn't give people the results they expect no one has been satisfied.

 

[War]

from most of what I've read the problems surround the calling within the match and how to pinpoint who should be tested. Think you've made a bit of a leap of logic saying it's the testing that's at fault there War. To me Paul Hurrions comments don't suggest a failure in the testing, they suggest a failure in the understanding of the testing and a lack of trust in it.

Well the fact that the ICC Cric Com have now have come out & said the testing is imperfect, it pretty much puts the entire integrity of the testing in question from now on.

(to me it's rather obvious murali and ajmal get accused more than other bowlers because they're much better)

Not to me. I don't want to group Muali with the rest in a general sense. As we both know, due to body deficiencies, Murali's general action was deemed fine & the majority accept this.

The similarities with Murali's & Ajmal questioning is regards to their bowling of the doosra & the questionable amount "flex" they bowl with, when delivering that ball.

most people, fans and umpires, judge the players suitability for testing with their eyes. the only people with a more indepth, scientific, outlook on the subject is the testers, yet ironically they seem to be the least trusted. MUFC has already made the best point about this, noting that people calling for more science are the first to ignore the science and then offer photos with crude drawings painted on top in place.

This is question I always ask when this is mentioned. Since the bio-mechanic testing came around circa 2000, pretty much every bowler who gets called by the umpiring in a game using their "eyes", either has been banned or has to remodel his action to some degree - after they go through the tests.

Very few times has the bowler been called & the bio-experts results showed that the umpire has been wrong.

So while i accept that maybe our eyes could fool us to some degree based on the reports i read over the years - its an over-exaggeration to say that people with a solid understanding of the game, can't to some extent with the naken eye, judge whether a bowler is chucking.

So, I'm quite for in match testing but I do wonder how people are going to react if it starts throwing out results that people aren't happy with. People were willing to defer the trust in their eye-sight to biomechanics but because this didn't give people the results they expect no one has been satisfied.

As I mentioned when i started this thread, for me (can't speak for anyone else) if when the live match testing is implemented & it shows that Ajmal, Senanayke, Hafeez, Gazi, Razzaq are fine & Shillingford has been fairly called twice - the debate would be over for me.


Plus this issue with regards to the doosra (the main cause of suspect action) divides the game stupidly, we need have uniform consensus on this. You can't have the asian world coaches teaching young bowlers to do bowl it - then rest of world not encouraging it.

But yet when they get to international level, you have this dumb debate in circles where asian bowlers probably won't get called in Asia where the ball is accepted - but when they go on tour to AUS/ENG/NZ (prob SA at times) they get called.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

surely biomechanics agreeing with the eyes most of the time is to be expected though? it's those marginal cases that are important, if you are putting your trust in lab results that most of the time match up with what you're seeing it doesn't make sense to turn on it when you get isolated events that disagree with you.

that it agrees with experts most of the time is more reason to think it's working, not less.

Plus this issue with regards to the doosra (the main cause of suspect action) divides the game stupidly, we need have uniform consensus on this. You can't have the asian world coaches teaching young bowlers to do bowl it - then rest of world not encouraging it.

But yet when they get to international level, you have this dumb debate in circles where asian bowlers probably won't get called in Asia where the ball is accepted - but when they go on tour to AUS/ENG/NZ (prob SA at times) they get called.

I would suspect it's not getting taught through coaching anywhere in the world. it's a high level delivery, with some debate still surrounding how you actually achieve the turn. it seems like one of those things past on from a few bowlers to a few others. certainly there does seem to be more tolerance in other countries whereas in england it's fundamentally distrusted.

 

[War]

Good balanced article on the matter IMO, with some fair questions raised:

Osman Samiuddin: There's more grey to chucking than we might think | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

More significantly, they are also testing body sensors that could capture real-time analysis of a bowler's action during a game. These were tested by under-19 players at the recent World Cup but only in net practice, and much more work needs to be done before it goes further. The calibration of the sensors on the arm is a particular issue, especially after players dive in the field.

In time, that will be the least of the problems, because trickier questions will arise. Who will wear sensors in a game? Those who have already undergone testing once? Others we suspect have a kink in their action? Nobody, as the ICC says, is cleared permanently, so everyone is under the scanner theoretically. Singling out someone who may have a kink but has not been tested officially places an undue burden on the bowler and recreates, in a way, the TV trial Murali underwent. How real is real-time? Will we be able to see the results after each ball, after each over, after each session, after each day?

Mike Hesson has already asked how those with suspect actions will be policed: what happens, he said, if a wicket falls off a ball delivered by an action in breach of the laws? Will a TV umpire review it immediately? Umpiring technology hardly needs further complication. As it stands, these discussions haven't begun but these are difficult and complicated questions. It is, after all, a difficult and complicated issue, even if it feels sometimes that cricket has still not grasped this.

----------

surely biomechanics agreeing with the eyes most of the time is to be expected though? it's those marginal cases that are important, if you are putting your trust in lab results that most of the time match up with what you're seeing it doesn't make sense to turn on it when you get isolated events that disagree with you.

that it agrees with experts most of the time is more reason to think it's working, not less.

Sounds logical, but I'm not sure TBF. As i said, we back to square once cause the ICC themselves now the bio mecs testing in AUS is a faulty.

I would suspect it's not getting taught through coaching anywhere in the world. it's a high level delivery, with some debate still surrounding how you actually achieve the turn. it seems like one of those things past on from a few bowlers to a few others. certainly there does seem to be more tolerance in other countries whereas in england it's fundamentally distrusted.

Exactly its not being thought all over the world because majority of the non-asian countries. This is nonsensical for such a delivery that has had such a game changing effect of the game of cricket.

 

[War]

Muralidaran signs with Australia

The signing represents not only a significant coup to secure the foremost exponent of the ?doosra? delivery that has baffled Australian batsmen and bowlers for decades, and which is likely to play a decisive role in the UAE series with Pakistan?s Saeed Ajmal among the game?s most potent ?mystery spinners?.

It also signals a fundamental shift in philosophy for Australian cricket which, until now, has declined to propagate its own exponents of ?doosras?, ?carrom balls? and the other weapons employed by spinners throughout the globe because of ideological issues over the legality of those bowlers? actions.