The importance of being one Muthiah "Magic" Murali

[Movie Cop]

Just creating a new thread for a true legend of the game while his farewell Test in Galle is currently underway. A cricketer who entertained millions of cricket fans around the world with his sheer wizardy. A bowler who was considered by almost every single batsman in Test cricket as a "walking nightmare". More to follow. :)

[leosimha]

Congrats Muthiah Muralitharan on taking 800 test wickets. :clap:

[Sanjeevi]

:clap:

[ajaybaskar]

Murali... You made my day.. :clap:

[Dinesh84]

:clap: :bow: Murali.. Thamizhgathu maapillai..

[Prabo]

Murali :clap: :notworthy:

[PARAMASHIVAN]

MC :thumbsup:

You jumped before me in creating a thread for 'the' Legend. I shall contribute as and when I get some time :yes:

[Siv.S]

:bow: :bow: :bow:

[19thmay]

800 wickets - OMG! :clap: :clap: :notworthy:

Even his last test match is a 5 wicket haul. Great player and an excellent human being! 8-)

[PARAMASHIVAN]

"I don't think anyone will get there, so well done to Murali for getting his 800," Warne told Sky Sports.

"The way he's gone about it has been amazing. There's been a lot of controversy about his action but at the end of the day the ICC (International Cricket Council) cleared him, he's allowed to play, and what he did with the ball was amazing.

"To face it was quite difficult, especially in those spinning conditions in Sri Lanka."

[aanaa]

:notworthy: :clap:



டெஸ்ட் போட்டிகளில் இருந்து இன்றுடன் விடைபெறும் முரளி 800 விக்கெட் வீழ்த்தி சாதனை (http://www.tamilwin.org/view.php?2a2IPBe0dRjo60ecQG1V4b4D98scd3g2F3dc2Dpi3 b426QV3e23ZLu20)



[html:04e9e4e2e6]<div align="center">http://www.tamilwin.org/photos/full/2010/07/murali02.jpg</div>[/html:04e9e4e2e6]

[ilayapuyalvinodh_kumar]

Murali :clap: :clap:

[Rocky89]

:thumbsup: Murali.

[tamizharasan]

Records meant to be broken. But this record (800 wickets)will stand the test of time.

[Movie Cop]

[tscii:03ceea6a06]Pretty good inside information about Muralitharan from Charlie Austin (journalist covering Sri Lankan cricket). This is not so much about Murali's on-field exploits but a lot about his off-field persona.


Cheeky, chatty, charitableTo know Murali was to love him (and occasionally to wish he would be quiet)
Charlie Austin
July 22, 2010

It says much about Murali that you'll never hear a bad word spoken about him. Forget for a moment his prolific on-field record, Murali the man is deeply loved and enormously respected by team-mates and opponents alike. Kumar Sangakkara, his captain and close friend, summed it up most eloquently a few years ago: "The greatest tribute I can pay him is that I have met no finer man. He's great as a cricketer and even better as a human being."

Yet, somehow, Murali is still a little misunderstood. An Indian journalist asked me last week if it was true that Murali was a loner in the dressing room? I laughed out loud.

I guess I understand the question because his shyness can sometimes make him come across as reserved. But the real Murali, the relaxed Murali, relishes a group environment, is hyperactive, talkative, opinionated and fun-loving.

One thing is for sure: the Sri Lanka dressing room will be a far quieter place without him. Just as his bowling has dominated on the field, his effervescent personality fills any room he occupies. He's such a chatterbox, in fact, that his exhausted team-mates once challenged him to be completely silent for the duration of a three-hour coach trip to Kandy. He lasted about three minutes.

Mahela Jayawardene summed it up well in the Guardian last week: "He is the sort of guy you want in the dressing room, but sometimes you think: 'Why is he in the dressing room - he won't stop talking!' When he exhausts us, he goes to see the opposition. He is the only player I have ever known who spends more time in the opponents' dressing room than his own. You never sit next to him on an aeroplane because you won't get any sleep. Lal, the masseur, has that job. But ask him to make a speech and you will be lucky to get 10 words."

He's irrepressibly cheeky, too, one of his favourite pastimes being admonishing his top-order batsmen. While others are afraid to voice their opinions after a team-mate loses his wicket, Murali sometimes can't resist. Once, while playing for Lancashire, a towering Andrew Flintoff stormed into the dressing room, ashen-faced, having failed to end a lean trot. Murali sauntered over casually. "What happened - another shit shot?"

The wonderful thing, though, is that despite his huge success he remains so humble and down to earth. Sport is full of inflated egos. Sometimes arrogance even seems a necessary evil when competing at the highest level, but somehow Murali has managed to stay normal. The only time he can be accused of immodesty is after one of his cameo performances with the bat.

His polite and humble persona has much to do with his father, Muttiah, a man of few words and the polar opposite to Murali's effervescent and emotional mother, Lakshmi. Despite being significantly wealthy, having run a company called Luckyland Biscuits tirelessly since 1956, he carries himself with a Gandhi-like air of simplicity. He's easy to spot at Murali felicitations: the quiet, unassuming gentleman dressed in a simple, traditional white sarong, surrounded by flashy suits.

Murali, a naughty child, rarely spoke to his father during his childhood, but they enjoyed a relationship of great respect. Muttiah, a man with the strictest of working routines, taught his son the virtues of hard work and provided the never-say-die backbone that has epitomised Murali all these years. When the biscuit factory burned down during the terrible island-wide riots in 1977, Muttiah might easily have fled the country to join his family in India. Instead, refusing to turn his back on Sri Lanka, he went to the pawn shop the week after and negotiated a loan to rebuild the uninsured factory from scratch. That unbreakable spirit has always been evident in Murali.

Chandika Hathurasinghe, Murali's team-mate during the early years at Tamil Union and the current Sri Lanka assistant coach, recounted a story. He and Murali had stopped for a snack at a small café close to the Parliament grounds in Colombo. A young boy working in the shop asked for a signed photograph. Murali promised him one and left. The boy would probably not have not expected him to remember, but Murali did. After cricket practice the following day, he got Chandika to take a detour to the shop and duly handed over the signed photograph. The kid was gobsmacked. It was typical of a man who truly cares.

One time while playing for Lancashire, a towering Andrew Flintoff stormed into the dressing room, ashen-faced, having failed to end a lean trot. Murali sauntered over casually. "What happened - another shit shot?"

Murali's caring personality is reflected, too, in how committed he has been over the years in ensuring young players are looked after. On his first international tour, fresh out of school, when Sri Lanka toured England in 1991, he was among those entrusted with going to the launderette each evening. In those days the team was hierarchical and clique-y, and the senior players ruled like boarding-school prefects, but thankfully, since then Murali has been at the forefront of a transformation in team culture - it is now one in which everyone is treated equally. He invariably takes younger players under his wing when they come into the squad, taking them out for dinner and making sure they feel welcome.

I saw first-hand how down-to-earth he was in 2005, when I travelled with him to the tsunami-hit town of Batticaloa on Sri Lanka's east coast. Murali had single-handedly organised about 10 lorries of emergency supplies for distribution in the relief camps. In the evening we stopped at the Polonnaruwa Rest House to catch some sleep. They only had three bedrooms available for about 10 of us. Murali not only insisted on paying, he steadfastly refused to take a bed, spread a sheet on the floor, grabbed a pillow and slept happily.

Murali, like his father, who is famously charitable, is one of the most generous people I know. He can't say no to people - sadly a trait that has been exploited at times - and, always quietly, he has financially helped an enormous number of cricketers over the years. He has also contributed greatly to his charity, the Foundation of Goodness, founded by his like-minded manager, Kushil Gunasekera, often donating the entire proceeds of his endorsement contracts.

"When Murali takes on something, he does it properly," says Gunasekera. "When the tsunami struck, he told me we were going to build 1000 houses. I said that 1000 Test wickets would be easier. However, while he didn't get the 1000 wickets, he built the houses - 1024 of them, spread over 24 villages so far." The duo's next project has already begun, a Learning and Empowerment Institute in northern Sri Lanka based on their holistic rural development model in Seenigama in southern Sri Lanka.

Murali's charity work will undoubtedly now dominate his future life - after the World Cup, which he is committed to playing if selected - but it is hard to see him leaving cricket completely. He loves the game too deeply. He was obsessed from an early age, playing with his cousins for hours. They played softball cricket in the factory car park, "veranda" cricket in the house when his father was at work and even "book" cricket in the library at St Anthony's, when he was supposed to be studying.

Cricket left little time for studies. Murali spent hours and hours practising. School friends recount how he regularly skipped study time and dragged them to the nets, forcing them to keep wicket while he bowled endlessly at a single stump. For him cricket was the big priority then, and getting into the team was his No. 1 goal. When he was trying to break into the Under-17 team, he actually decided to take up bowling legbreaks for an entire season because there were two senior boys to bowl offbreaks already.

It is not a great surprise that he has decided to call time on his Test career. Being determined to leave at the right time and not stand in the way of young talent, he had been talking about it for some time. In fact, he considered quitting Test cricket in 2009 before being persuaded to stay on. He now feels, aged 38, that the unique physical challenge of Test cricket is too much for his body. As we have seen in this Test, he could easily play on with continued success, although probably not with the same potency and consistency for much longer. And if he did risk playing Test cricket too long, it would jeopardise his desire to continue playing the less-demanding Twenty20 and ODI formats. For Murali, a true pragmatist, the decision was simple in the end.

Unfortunately it won't be so easy for his team-mates and all his fans. Today will be the most emotional of days. Saying a final farewell to a legend will undoubtedly leave many teary-eyed. Hundreds of friends and colleagues are coming from all corners of Sri Lanka - and indeed some from different parts of the world. If you judge the calibre of the man by the love and loyalty of his friends, Murali is a very special person indeed. He will be sorely missed.

Charlie Austin is a former Sri Lanka editor of Cricinfo.

http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/468412.html

[/tscii:03ceea6a06]

[Movie Cop]

Anil Kumble on Murali after his farewell Test!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3rlNGvb-TQ

[Movie Cop]

"Magic" Murali's final delivery in Test cricket and what a historic moment it is. Sad we wouldn't see Murali anymore in Tests. :(
It's the same feeling that one had when Michael Jordan quit playing basketball, Pete Sampras quit playing tennis, Brian Lara last went out to bat in front of his carribean crowd and finally asked them after the game, "Did I entertain you?" :( .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogc1M0LKy7I

[tamizharasan]

statistics say that he is the best bowler ever. Except australians everyone will accept this fact.

http://www.cricinfo.com/sri-lanka-v-india-2010/content/current/story/468426.html

[VinodKumar's]

"Magic" Murali's final delivery in Test cricket and what a historic moment it is. Sad we wouldn't see Murali anymore in Tests. :(
It's the same feeling that one had when Michael Jordan quit playing basketball, Pete Sampras quit playing tennis, Brian Lara last went out to bat in front of his carribean crowd and finally asked them after the game, "Did I entertain you?" :( .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogc1M0LKy7I

:cry: :cry: :cry:

[raajarasigan]

I cried on the day when Lara retired.... :cry:

"Did I entertain you?" - Yes.. every moment when you were on the crease... Sorry for the digression..

[PARAMASHIVAN]

statistics say that he is the best bowler ever. Except australians everyone will accept this fact.

http://www.cricinfo.com/sri-lanka-v-india-2010/content/current/story/468426.html

Yah Ithu already therinja vishayum Aiche :|

[Plum]

Glad to see some points made in mainstream media now.
Like, for a long time in the net, I was the only commenter talking about his record against England, and that his good record against Bangal and Zim is offset by Warne's record against England. I never saw this argument in mainstream media until recently in Cricinfo.

Basically, I would even argue that an English/SA lineup against good spin is as weak as a Zim/Ban lineup. The Zim/Ban argument against Murali is really a straw man.

Regards chucking, I am all for changing rules to suit genius. Rules exist for games not the other way around. If the game is enriched by Murali's genius, how does it matter that according to your archaic rules, he chucks?(not granting that he chucks, but even assuming he does)

Lets look at this way. Suppose Murali is chucking, then there are two possibilities
1) Nobody else is able in future to do the same and bowl as well as him
2) There is a multitude of people who follow him and are able to replicate his feat

If (1) happens, we are really talking of a unique genius, whose feats cant be replicated even by bowlers who can replicate his chucking action. In which case, Murali is an unique talent to be celebrated
If (2) happens, then my take is that, if everyone can do it, and it adds variety to the team(Doosra certainly does - a world in which off spinners are toothless is not going to lead to great Cricket anyway), then what are we complaining about? It becomes a skill to master.

It just needs a shift in perspective as to which is important - archaic rules or bringing in skills into the game which arent really unfair. Afterall, without the Doosra, an offspinner today is really ineffective giving Batsmen a huge advantage in an already batsmen dominated game.
So, 15 degree, 10 degree whatever. A skill that adds value to the game without significantly altering the batsmen-bowler balance is to be welcomed into the game.

[PARAMASHIVAN]

[tscii:d2ab419b6b]Nobody could have done it betterMurali was top of the world on the field and classy off i


Years from now, it will become one of those where-were-you questions. There must be thousands of Indians who remember what they were doing when Sunil Gavaskar late-cut Ijaz Faqih at the Motera Stadium, just as legions of Pakistanis will recall the moment Ramiz Raja stared at the Melbourne sky and positioned himself under a skier from Richard Illingworth. Sri Lankans already have one such moment, at the Gaddafi Stadium in 1996, but this one ranks right up there. The perfect exit for the country's greatest cricketer. Even the denouement was appropriate - c M Jayawardene, b M Muralitharan for the 77th and final time.

A couple of years ago, at a function at the Tamil Union Club in Colombo, Chandra Schaffter spoke to some of us at length about its history and the role it had played in Sri Lanka's cricket. From Sir Donald Bradman's visit in 1948, through innumerable brilliant innings played by Mahadevan Sathasivam, to the riots of 1983, there was little that Schaffter's memory didn't dredge up. After evoking yesteryear's greats, he said: "Then, of course, in the early 1990s, Murali came down from Kandy." He didn't need to say more.

The modern history of Sri Lankan cricket is merely an extension of Murali's career. Aravinda de Silva's class and Arjuna Ranatunga's pugnaciousness were in evidence in the '90s, and Sanath Jayasuriya's devastating hitting illuminated a decade from '96. Chaminda Vaas was Tonto to Murali's Lone Ranger for most of his career, while Mahela Jayawardene and Kumar Sangakkara carried forward the flame of a batting tradition that dates back to Sathasivam and Fredrick de Saram. But while others came and went, Murali was the constant, the heart of a team that had found its place and voice in world cricket.

Murali may leave behind records that will never be broken, but he was never selfish. Time after time, he bowled himself into the ground for the team cause, and it was perhaps fitting that the final furlong to 800 was the hardest. In the first innings he needed just 102 deliveries for five wickets. The three in the second required 44.4 overs.

When VVS Laxman was run out, leaving India nine down and many in the crowd on tenterhooks, Murali merely smiled and celebrated with the other fielders. A lesser man would have been a bundle of nerve fibres, but Murali looked as calm as someone who knew that nothing could come between him and his destiny.

From the painfully shy hill-country boy who used to beg his captain to take him off so that he wouldn't have to front up to journalists' microphones if he took a bunch of wickets, to a chatty senior statesman with a wicked sense of humour, Murali's journey has been nothing short of remarkable. In Test cricket alone, he bowled 44,039 deliveries, more than twice as many as Bishan Singh Bedi, the most prolific of India's famous spin quartet from the 1960s and '70s.




For nearly two decades, Murali was Sri Lanka's Learie Constantine, the prime factor in his nation wresting respect from a grudging world

When he wasn't harvesting wickets by the bushel, Murali was dodging the critics' darts. Those that hold him responsible for legitimising "illegal" actions - Bedi among them - miss a very important point. The laws were not changed to accommodate Murali, they had to be tweaked because the research done on his action revealed that even those with "clean" actions straightened their arms more than 10 degrees.

Then there were the jibes about wickets against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, as though it was Murali's fault that the Future Tours Programme is a joke that denies Sri Lanka and several other teams a level playing field. Was it his deformed elbow that ensured he never toured South Africa after December 2002? Or the suppleness of his wrists that was responsible for Sri Lanka never playing a Test at the spin-friendly SCG?

A lesser man would have lashed out far more often. It's to his eternal credit that Murali rarely bothered to respond to the barbs. At the post-match presentation in Galle, he had another opportunity, when Tony Greig mentioned the umpires who had no-balled him all those years ago. Murali responding by talking of the naked eye, and them having to "do a job". If only those that belittle him had that kind of class.

My favourite Murali memory will be of an evening a few years ago. Feeling peckish before an interview, he had room service at the Taj Samudra in Colombo. When the food - simple fare of rice and dhal - was laid out on the table, the bearer gave him the bill. Murali grimaced looking at it. "650 rupees for dhal? It's made of gold or what?"

As the bearer stared at the floor uncomfortably, Murali smiled and exchanged a few pleasantries. You could see the man's mood change. By the time he left the room with the tray, his chest was puffed out and you could be sure that his colleagues would have had to endure multiple retellings of the evening Murali spoke to him.

Treasure the 800 wickets, but remember, too, the 1024 houses he built for those whose lives were devastated by the tsunami. They say more about the man than his athletic achievements ever will. Also recall the joy with which he played the game, the childlike delight that accompanied each plotted dismissal, the skip and jump into a team-mate's arms.

Neville Cardus once said of Learie Constantine: "When Constantine plays the whole man plays, not just the professional cricketer part of him. There is nothing in the world for him when he bats, save a ball to be hit -- and a boundary to be hit over. When he bowls, the world is three wickets, there to be sent spinning gloriously. Cricket, indeed, is Constantine's element; to say that he plays cricket, or takes part in it, is to say that a fish goes swimming. Constantine is cricket, West Indian cricket..."

For nearly two decades, Murali was Sri Lanka's Constantine, the prime factor in his nation wresting respect from a grudging world. There are a few more one-day scalps to claim and Twenty20 batsmen to embarrass. But for now he can put his feet up and contemplate a job that no one in the world could have done better. Top of the world on the field, and a different class off it. Truly one of a kind.

http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/468490.html[/tscii:d2ab419b6b]

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Glad to see some points made in mainstream media now.
Like, for a long time in the net, I was the only commenter talking about his record against England, and that his good record against Bangal and Zim is offset by Warne's record against England. I never saw this argument in mainstream media until recently in Cricinfo.

Basically, I would even argue that an English/SA lineup against good spin is as weak as a Zim/Ban lineup. The Zim/Ban argument against Murali is really a straw man.


Regards chucking, I am all for changing rules to suit genius. Rules exist for games not the other way around. If the game is enriched by Murali's genius, how does it matter that according to your archaic rules, he chucks?(not granting that he chucks, but even assuming he does)

Lets look at this way. Suppose Murali is chucking, then there are two possibilities
1) Nobody else is able in future to do the same and bowl as well as him
2) There is a multitude of people who follow him and are able to replicate his feat

If (1) happens, we are really talking of a unique genius, whose feats cant be replicated even by bowlers who can replicate his chucking action. If (2) happens, then my take is that, if everyone can do it, and it adds vaIn which case, Murali is an unique talent to be celebrated

variety to the team(Doosra certainly does - a world in which off spinners are toothless is not going to lead to great Cricket anyway), then what are we complaining about? It becomes a skill to master.

It just needs a shift in perspective as to which is important - archaic rules or bringing in skills into the game which arent really unfair. Afterall, without the Doosra, an offspinner today is really ineffective giving Batsmen a huge advantage in an already batsmen dominated game.
So, 15 degree, 10 degree whatever. A skill that adds value to the game without significantly altering the batsmen-bowler balance is to be welcomed into the game.

Plum ji

:clap: :exactly: well said !!

[PARAMASHIVAN]

There are many cricket fan(atic)s here, it is a shame to see only ' handfull' paid tributes to the Genius :(

[P_R]

Flau, pEsa vaikkureengaLE...


Regards chucking, I am all for changing rules to suit genius.Rules exist for games not the other way around.

Imagine a 'genius' who, because of a physical deformity can only roll the ball on the ground and can't pitch it. If bent arm can be legalized, why not underarm?

Presumably he'd be the most economical bowler in the history of cricket. He'll be a star and the headlines can scream: Stingy Splendour, Prince of Parsimony, Kanjoos Carbuncle etc.

What if there is someone who 'because of a congenital shoulder defect' cannot rotate his arm fully. Should we allow baseball pitches for him? And if such a 'bowling' is legal, it allows others too. That will make the bowlers faster and deflate the dominance of the batsman (hey I nearly sold this to myself!). But it will still
not 'significantly change the balance'. It is presumable that the batsmen can adapt to it. Perhaps they will make some cudgel bats
Will that, in your opinion, be a healthy change?

Just curious to know the limits of your accommodativeness.



(not granting that he chucks, but even assuming he does)
Oh assuming vEraiyA ? Did you see the leg-break with the straight arm videos I posted in the Ind-Sl thread? (If not search Murali + legbreak in youtube. I can't open now)

That shows that Murali can bowl with a straight arm if he wants to but 'chooses' not to. That IMO takes the whole argument to a completely new level. :lol2:

I am glad you did not try the argument that Murali supporters slip in that his skill does not owe to his action. You have spared me a puh-leeeze ! :-)

I dont' want to speculate how good a bowler he would have been without such an action. I don't think we can reasonably comment on that.

IMO Murali is about 'nothing succeeds like success'.

Plus they added a racial twist to it, that so many ppl, who I expected would have spoken up, were kinda gagged at the expense of the game. I have always been disappointed about this.

Unfortunately the only vocal detractor is Bishan Singh Bedi, who with his tasteless comments, only weakens this side of the argument. I do understand his sense of outrage though.

I wish someone breaks Murali's record but I know no-one will. :sigh: So I have taken it upon myself to disabuse future generations of any admiration that stems from this record.

Mathabadi nallavar, vallavar estra. one helluva committed cricketer, brilliant outfielder (a point noone seems to mention) - all taken.

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Murali: The man who reinvented spin bowling
Muttiah Muralitharan may be the greatest spin bowler ever Muttiah Muralitharan, who played his last Test on Thursday, may have been the greatest bowler to spin a cricket ball. Sports writer Suresh Menon reflects on the career of a remarkable cricketer.

Before the start of the Galle Test, Muttiah Muralitharan's last, India's ace spinner Anil Kumble paid him one of the warmest tributes from one great bowler to another.

"When you see that Murali has played exactly the same number of Tests as me and taken 173 wickets more," he said, "you begin to understand the magnitude of his achievement."

Spin bowling is about masks and disguises, sleights of hand and tempting arcs.

Batsmen reach for the ball that is not there, or adopt a superior air, ignoring the one that seems set to go past but then inexplicably changes course. They are rendered illiterate - unable to read the spinning ball.

Muralitharan's greatness lay in the fact that even when batsmen read him, there was little they could do to keep him out.

Test cricket's most successful bowler is 38, and even if the spirit is willing there is only so much a body can do.

Defining the delivery

Murali's record 800 wickets are likely to stand forever given the diminishing interest in Test cricket, but figures do not tell the full story.

Murali was responsible for cricket's first proper attempt to define the legal delivery.

Thanks to his action, umpires know there is a difference between what the eye sees and the computer calculates.

That he reinvented the art of spin bowling tends to be forgotten in the light of this fundamental contribution.

While studying Murali's action, it was noticed that some of the finest bowlers known for their smooth actions did, in fact, send down illegal deliveries.

By the earlier system - the naked eye - someone like Australian fast-bowler Glenn McGrath was seen as picture perfect. Then technology showed that he too fell outside the demands of the legal.


Muralitharan is a national icon That led to a new world order where a flexion (the act of bending) of 15 degrees of the bowler's arm was allowed.

Those who criticise him base their observations on the naked eye; those who absolve him go by the definition. Murali's action is legal, but he has suffered more than anyone needs to.

Few cricketers have had to shoulder his burdens - as a minority Tamil in a strife-laden country, as a bowler worshipped and reviled in equal measure, as a player in a team whose fortunes rose or fell according to his performance.

In nearly two decades at the top, he won over everybody - both sides of the ethnic divide and both sides of the bowling-action divide.

His work after the 2004 tsunami in Sri Lanka released him from the narrow confines of a sporting hero and anointed him a national icon. Through it all he has remained rooted, a charmer who finds it hard to believe that by merely doing what he loves the most, he has rewritten the rules of his craft.

Unlike most spinners, Murali didn't appear on the international scene a finished product, every trick in place, every nuance worked out.

It took him 27 Tests to claim 100 wickets; the hundreds thereafter came in 15, 16, 14, 15, 14 and 12 Tests respectively.

This wasn't a genius that was created behind closed doors, but one that evolved out in the open, in front of thousands of spectators.

Symbol

Every ball, every wicket, was tucked away in that remarkable mind; nothing was forgotten, nothing was useless. Muralitharan is the man who remembers everything.

He brought to the craft a new way of doing things, converting a finger-spinning exercise into a wrist-spinning one. He remains the symbol of a resurgent Sri Lanka, a talented side from its pre-Test days but one that needed a touch of iron to perform consistently.


Muralitharan was worshipped and reviled in equal measure Sri Lanka have won 61 Test matches in all. Muralitharan has played significant roles in 54 of these, claiming 438 wickets at 16.18, taking five-wicket hauls an incredible 41 times.

He might have finished with the best-ever figures for a single innings, but after he had claimed nine wickets against Zimbabwe at Kandy, Russel Arnold dropped a catch at short leg. Then, while bowlers at the other end tried desperately not to take a wicket, Chaminda Vaas accidentally had the last man caught behind amid stifled appeals.

Murali has taken 10 wickets in a match four games in a row. Twice.

That record alone would have ensured Murali a place in the pantheon.

But his influence is not restricted to his country's improved performance.

With better bats, shorter boundaries and tougher physiques, batsmen have threatened to eliminate the offspinner from the game.

Murali has kept the craft alive with a simple ploy - being successful at it. By developing the doosra - a ball which turns the opposite way to a traditional off-break - that was invented by Saqlain Mushtaq, he widened its scope.

He expanded the horizons of the game, bringing in elements that make it more complex, and therefore more interesting, and providing challenges in the meeting of which international batsmen made their reputations.

Nobody bowls like Murali; sadly, not even Murali towards the end, and the time had come. But he will be missed, as any one-of-a-kind performer will be.

There is no "Murali" school of bowling, no successor who bowls in his unique style. Murali stood alone, and now that he is gone, only memories - and video replays - remain.

Suresh Menon is a leading sports writer who is based in Bangalore.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-10708478

[Plum]

My point is this: If it is so easy to bowl a doosra, and reach the level of Murali, with a bent-arm, just go ahead and do it? Let me see how many such bowlers emerge?
If not, then we are talking of an unique skill, arent we?

Rolling a ball underarm - where is the skill in that? I am just saying it hasnt been proven to me that you can be as succesful as Murali or even half as succesful with a bent arm. And that doosra does it really alter the balance of the game?

[Plum]

Besides, I really want to know if the 15 degree business doesnt have any meaning at all.

[PARAMASHIVAN]

P_R

The ICC has cleared him of 'such bowling' , so there is no point in arguing about that.

I am sure they know far more about 'legality' of bowling than us. Period.

:sigh2:

[PARAMASHIVAN]

My point is this: If it is so easy to bowl a doosra, and reach the level of Murali, with a bent-arm, just go ahead and do it? Let me see how many such bowlers emerge?
If not, then we are talking of an unique skill, arent we?

Rolling a ball underarm - where is the skill in that? I am just saying it hasnt been proven to me that you can be as succesful as Murali or even half as succesful with a bent arm. And that doosra does it really alter the balance of the game?

:clap: :notworthy:

[P_R]

My point is this: If it is so easy to bowl a doosra, and reach the level of Murali, with a bent-arm, just go ahead and do it? Let me see how many such bowlers emerge?
If not, then we are talking of an unique skill, arent we?
Plum, everyone will bowl better if permitted to bowl the way Murali does. Of course they may not be as good as Murali. Sure. You can't take away the years of practice that has yielded him the kind of control it has had. But it was a trangression and IMO the game was - pardon the pun - armtwisted.



Rolling a ball underarm - where is the skill in that?Tell that to the proffesional bowling (skittles) folks :-)

Imagine underarm possibilities. Backspin, disguised topspin etc. Surely all those gully-cricket tricks.

So, if I understand right, you are saying 'every' transgression should be allowed. I notice you are not even talking about congenital condition etc. here.

And why is 'doosra' coming into the discussion at all here?

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Prabu

Please read the article, I posted above :|

[P_R]

P_R

The ICC has cleared him of 'such bowling' , so there is no point in arguing about that.

I am sure they know far more about 'legality' of bowling than us. Period.

:sigh2:

If the chucker in question had been a New Zealander ICC wouldn't have bothered.

The subcontinent is a cashcow and the ICC will mess the game in order to not antagonize us. Plus, most importantly, Ranatunga politicized it. And made a huge song about racism. So it became too delicate. So they came up with that silly amendment.

[Plum]

Congenital condition all included by default. Doosra because even the worst critics of Murali are pointing only to his Doosra as a transgression.

[P_R]

Prabu

Please read the article, I posted above :|

Read them Raghu.
I guess you are referring to the point that the rule was so because even many 'clean' action folks had a 15 degree bend. So it was not just to protect Murali.

To me it suggests a clear case of looking away from the fact that the rule was changed for Murali. How was 'clean' defined here? By the umpires opinions? If so, then was the rule taken to make 'umpire opinions' consistent? And how on earth are umpires going to implement this on the field?

I have never understood this business of umpires (post Murali - Hair/Emerson) not stopping bowlers but later reporting action as suspect. What good does that serve? :huh:

[P_R]

Congenital condition all included by default. Doosra because even the worst critics of Murali are pointing only to his Doosra as a transgression.

Then I am not among his worst critics I guess :-)
IMO every single ball he bowls is a chuck.

[Plum]

P_R

The ICC has cleared him of 'such bowling' , so there is no point in arguing about that.

I am sure they know far more about 'legality' of bowling than us. Period.

:sigh2:

If the chucker in question had been a New Zealander ICC wouldn't have bothered.

The subcontinent is a cashcow and the ICC will mess the game in order to not antagonize us. Plus, most importantly, Ranatunga politicized it. And made a huge song about racism. So it became too delicate. So they came up with that silly amendment.

Well, this is going into different territory. If the chucker had been New Zealander, no umpire would have called him in the first place. Sub Conti umpires usually avoid rancour and the Emersons I am sure arent such angels safe guarding the game - they were just motivated by Murali's colour and one-up man ship against sub continentals, which ICC still abets covertly. Chris Broad is a clera example of how anti-subcontinentals can thrive in ICC.

So, there is no question of ICC having to go through such circuitious routes to protect the said chucker.

The academics of the debate is different and I admit I am on weak ground there but the politics of it primarily arises because of white supremacy in ICC. The fact is they dont have the financial clout to indulge in it explicitly now but even then, they get away with Chris Broads and Ricky Pontings which shows their covert influence. Even today, most of the ICC punishments are doled out to Sub Continentals and certain nations are protected.

[P_R]

I think the victimization is highly exaggerated.

The height of the tasteless nonsense that this has resulted in, is the banning of Darrel Hair.

[P_R]

they were just motivated by Murali's colour
1995 December was the first time I was watching Muralitharan and it came as absolutely no surprise to me that he was no-balled.

What was your first reaction when you saw that? i.e. before it snowballed into the political controversy that Ranatunga ensured it became. Many people I know had their pure cricketing opinon recalibrated after the politicization :lol2:

[Plum]

The most tasteless thing I have seen is Slater sledging Venkatraghavan, the umpire. To date, he doesnt have an official black mark in the ICC records for it. When it comes to ICC politics, the clear winners have been Oz-Eng-NZ block with SA being thrown some crumbs occasionally which is why they side with India these days.

To date, Australian playes indulge in a thousand transgressions and get away with it thanks to some warped interpretation from Chris Broads. The iCC is clearly biased in favour of white nations. The reason is the greedy BCCI mandarins are not bothered about these issues - they are only bothered about issues that make money for them or give them some clout. Such imbalances dont bother them - if it did, it will be death knell for the Ricky Pontings. I wish someone takes the initiative and bans this uncouth Cricketer.

[P_R]

When the Chinese couple had a caucasian Kid, the husband wanted a divorce, because: "two Wongs don't make a white"

[venkkiram]

IMO every single ball he bowls is a chuck.please watch this 800 times.. he is not chucking.. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G83mwesFkj8&feature=related)

[Plum]

I get what you are saying but I want to be petty about this. Let Australians and England demonstrate fairplay and "two wrongs dont make a right" when they get a chance to dominate again. So, the next time we get a chance to dominate, we will show magnanimity, too.

As it is, I am only inclined to support BCCI to follow what ICC did before Indian dominance - that is, brazenly ride rougshod over other nations. Because I am dead sure that irrespective of how we treat them now, when they get a chance to dominate again, Eng and Oz will crush others. Heck, if they can protect Pontings and Watsons even now when their influence is supposed to be waning, imagine what they'll do when they have the official power again. I am not inclined to feel sorry for the Hairs and Emersons now.

[Dinesh84]

His bowling creates an optical illusion that he is chucking.. but when you see his action in ultra slowmo, you could clearly see that he doesnt bend his arm.. rather bends his wrist.

[venkkiram]

All about murali's arm.. please watch.. its a must watch to all who still claim he is chucking.. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDxRhcpBZio&feature=related)

[P_R]

I can't quote agree with that argument. Imagine extrapolating them to many political question and there is enough to make one uncomfortable.


I want to be petty about this
Okay. I feel reassured.

venkiram , right vidu-nga :lol2:

Dinesh, simple though experiment: imagine the same wrist action with a regular high-straight-arm offie action. pandhu pathadi kooda pOvaadhu.

[Vivasaayi]

statistics say that he is the best bowler ever. Except australians everyone will accept this fact.

http://www.cricinfo.com/sri-lanka-v-india-2010/content/current/story/468426.html

I dont think so.... Lots of non-australians will vouch for Warnie :)

Leg spin I think is the toughest art in cricket and we know how warne executed it with control and skill ....he is a pleasure to watch...

And his image - rustic dirty legspinner..a spinner who had that heroic/anti heroic mass appeal..like the fast bowlrs and batsman do...

sattayellam alukoda....paratta thala..slowa vandhu flight panni... :clap:

[Nerd]

Actually, statistics in this case don't prove anything. Murali has played a majority of his tests in tracks that are conducive for spin bowling. Enough said.

[HonestRaj]

Actually, statistics in this case don't prove anything. Murali has played a majority of his tests in tracks that are conducive for spin bowling. Enough said.

& if u remove the 200 odd wickets against Bangladesh & Zimbabwe.. he is more or less equal to our own Kumble

[HonestRaj]

sattayellam alukoda....paratta thala..slowa vandhu flight panni... :clap:

right hander'ku leg side'la oru adi thaLLi pOttu... adhu pitch aagi break aagi.. right hander'oda off stump'ai edukkura azhagE azhagU

[VinodKumar's]

Actually, statistics in this case don't prove anything. Murali has played a majority of his tests in tracks that are conducive for spin bowling. Enough said.

& if u remove the 200 odd wickets against Bangladesh & Zimbabwe.. he is more or less equal to our own Kumble

Number of wickets excluding Bangladesh and Zimbabwe


Warne - 708 - 17 = 691

Murali - 800 - 166 = 634

kumble -619 - 53 = 566

[HonestRaj]

Actually, statistics in this case don't prove anything. Murali has played a majority of his tests in tracks that are conducive for spin bowling. Enough said.

& if u remove the 200 odd wickets against Bangladesh & Zimbabwe.. he is more or less equal to our own Kumble

Number of wickets excluding Bangladesh and Zimbabwe


Warne - 708 - 17 = 691

Murali - 800 - 166 = 634

kumble -619 - 53 = 566

this is krissnar's plan & arjunan's execution :lol2:

well.. I've already gave this stat when Kumble retired..

[sathya_1979]

Zim, of all countries were no mugs when coming to playing Spin Bowling - Flower Brothers, Campbell, Goodwin, Johnson etc are very good players.

If we intend to exclude the wickets against Bangla and Zim, we should also include the wickets against tail-enders. Illayaa? Adhukku yaraavadhu vandhu oru stats pOdaNum.

[sathya_1979]

http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/466589.html

Key Point:
Comparing Murali and Warne Murali - Tests Wkts Average 5WI/ 10WM Warne - Tests Wkts Average 5WI/ 10WM
v all teams 132 792 22.71 66/ 22 145 708 25.41 37/ 10
v all excl Zim and B'desh 107 616 24.88 49/ 16 142 691 25.40 36/ 10
v India 21 97 33.34 6/ 2 14 43 47.18 1/ 0
in wins (excl Zim and B'desh) 32 261 17.70 23/ 12 89 493 22.36 26/ 7
outside subcontinent (excl Zim) 29 162 25.85 14/ 5 119 575 25.13 26/ 7
4th innings (excl Zim and B'desh) 34 98 20.74 7/ 7 60 138 23.14 7/ 4

Irrespective of Zim / Bangla or Not, Murali is a always a millimeter ahead of Warne, For me.

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Murali is a always a millimeter ahead of Warne, For me.

vidunga sathya

No use in blowing a conch at a deaf man's ears :|

:(

[Plum]

Excluzde zim/ban wickets _ muttAL thanamAna argument.
1. Warne played a lot against Eng/sA/Nz - all of them used to pee in their pants just seeing him because they were such poor players of spin. Ban/Zim players are not worse than them.
2. Murali played only 16 tests against Eng - took. 112 wickets. Strike rate, average , wickets per test all way above Warne's record against England. So if you want proper comparison, remove Warne's stats against England

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Plum :lol2: good one :thumbsup:

[Vivasaayi]

What abt the bowling conditions that warne and murali used to play????

[sathya_1979]

Vivs, naan mEla post senja cricinfo comparison linkla ellaa vidhamaana comparisonsum irukku - home, away, in sub continent, outside sub continent, with zim bangla, excluding them etc

[P_R]

I will always have problem with that action. But people who are blessed with ability to overlook that should have absolutely no problem acknowledging the fact that he was the most dominating bowler ever.As a match winner Muralitharan is ahead of everyone.
He has been the trump card for extended periods of time and far more consistently than anyone.

For Warne - Murali, check this post (http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/466589.html)by the S.Rajesh.

[P_R]

All about murali's arm.. please watch.. its a must watch to all who still claim he is chucking.. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDxRhcpBZio&feature=related)

This one only 'proves' that his advantage (to use a polite word) is congenital. Tries to say that he can't help bowling the way he does.

This video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UUXgc1rLMQ) refutes that argument.

[sathya_1979]

Every great player will have 1 or 2 points stacked against them. oNNyum paNNa mudiyaadhu. As long as the sports governing body is fine with that player, end of matter for me, in most of the cases.

[raghavendran]

i personally feel he took most of his wickets in srilanka...pitches were prepared for him....
ennakku warne,saqlain innum pudikkum..who were more orthodox and less contreversial....murali action..oru excuse madhiri dhaan...

[sathya_1979]

raghav, no offence to warne, but he is less controversial? 2 incidents mate - match fixing and fined by ACB and getting banned for usage of banned substance. Also, check my link regarding Murali Vs Warne comparison. Murali had done in par or better than Warne outside of SL and also outside of subcontinent.

[venkkiram]

murali action..oru excuse madhiri dhaan... "சகிப்புத் தன்மை போதவில்லை" என சொல்ல வருகிறீர்கள் என்பதாக புரிந்து கொள்கிறேன். முரளியின் பந்தெறிதலை விமர்சனம் செய்வதற்கும், "நொண்டிப்பய!" என சக மனிதரை திட்டுவதற்கும் அதிக வித்யாசமில்லை.

[littlemaster1982]

முரளியின் பந்தெறிதலை விமர்சனம் செய்வதற்கும், "நொண்டிப்பய!" என சக மனிதரை திட்டுவதற்கும் அதிக வித்யாசமில்லை.

:shock: This is too much. We are just pointing out that Murali uses his naturally bent arm to his advantage. And that's an unfair advantage, IMO.

[P_R]

murali action..oru excuse madhiri dhaan... "சகிப்புத் தன்மை போதவில்லை" என சொல்ல வருகிறீர்கள் என்பதாக புரிந்து கொள்கிறேன். முரளியின் பந்தெறிதலை விமர்சனம் செய்வதற்கும், "நொண்டிப்பய!" என சக மனிதரை திட்டுவதற்கும் அதிக வித்யாசமில்லை.

1)Nice try, but even if so,is changing the rules to accommodate someone's disability an okay thing to do? I gave some ridiculous examples of changes that could be done in the future to accommodate disabilties. Where will you draw the line?

2) And note what the rule change means: it is not restricted to congenital chuckers. It now permits everyone to chuck. You are ignoring this.

3) And lastly, I will repeat this ad nauseam, the legspin video proves he can bowl with a straight arm and CHOOSES not to and instead chooses to use the unfair advantage of his bent arm. Curious that you, who tries to get moral on those on the other side of the argument, are not disturbed by this.

[Plum]

Well, I am going to take the time-tested English cunning position - the rules permit him as they stand and I'll add the time-tested Aussie defence - look at the scorecard . Yeah.

I can understand if you have rulebook based objections but stats, whichever way you slice or dice place Murali above Warne. There is something called average, strike rate, wickets per test - these are used precisely to differentiate the factors like home/away, zim, ban, england and other minnows etc. Just go and check - except for record in australia, warne is behind on all factors.

To have a lot of wickets being the only world class in your team sure is relatively easy. But look at the s/r, e/r and avg. Without a Mcgrath, gillespie etc from the other end, to maintain that rate is phenomenal and beyond ordinary mortals.

And to quote some extreme future possibilites of transgressions is taking the rule book to extreme. Sure it is subjective but if it is so easy to chuck and take wickets, why is durby not even half as good - he is allowed to and does chuck by the same defn, doesn't he? And he is the best of the rest. And yet, people argue that if others also chuck like murali, they will be as good as him. Just where are these guys? Show me! Rules have been relaxed for everyone right? So where's someone even half as good as murali? Why?

[sathya_1979]

Just where are these guys? Show me!
idhadhaan naanum sonnEn.

[Roshan]

Thanks Murali ! Not only for the record which by all possibility will not be broken by any one - but also for being one of the greatest sons of the soil of SRI LANKA. You will always be remembered for this. Every step you have taken so far has proven to be pragmetic by all means and we Sri Lankans sincerly hope your next step too would be something memorable which would surely focus towards national integrity.

800 all out ! Way to go !

[Movie Cop]

I will always have problem with that action. But people who are blessed with ability to overlook that should have absolutely no problem acknowledging the fact that he was the most dominating bowler ever.
Bayangara outrage (kolA veri) pola irrukku? :)




முரளியின் பந்தெறிதலை விமர்சனம் செய்வதற்கும், "நொண்டிப்பய!" என சக மனிதரை திட்டுவதற்கும் அதிக வித்யாசமில்லை.

:shock: This is too much. We are just pointing out that Murali uses his naturally bent arm to his advantage. And that's an unfair advantage, IMO.
Though I disagree with Venkkiram's analogy, "advantage" alright. But 'unfair', I disagree.

Garner, Ambrose, Harmisson/Broad are all in the 6'5'' - 6'7'' league. The short pitched deliveries of Harmisson/Broad is not even half as lethal/unplayable as Garner/Ambrose let alone the consistency/accuracy factor in hitting the deck hard with right line and length exploiting (to put it that way) the height advantage. My point is advantage or not, it's the skill/craft that prevails at the end of the day.

Whether Murali chucks or not is debatable (or atleast at the argument level). But not every spinner, regardless of having (or not) a naturally bent elbow, can become a Murali is the point.

[P_R]

Rules have been relaxed for everyone right? So where's someone even half as good as murali? Why?
Murali is a pioneer. Experts will take a generation or two to evolve.
Perhaps when chucking becomes the hallowed tradition he will be talked of as the innovative rebel who fought the conservative establishment and their pathAmpasili notions about bowling action.


Bayangara outrage (kolA veri) pola irrukku? :-)
last tonty five years-A kaththikittu irukkEn.
en kooda kaththina pala pEr oru maadhiri samarasam aayittAnga.
naan mattum latchiyathukku izhukku varaama maindain paNNittu irukkEn.

Regarding Ambrose etc. I have heard that earlier. If you find that logic convincing, then as I have said, you are blessed.

I cruelly wish that there will be players who will come in the future who will sneak in changes to aspects of the game, which you guys consider dear to the game. adhu varaikkum ennOda last laugh-ai adjourn paNNikkiREn.

btw vadai innum varalai reminder : he can bowl with a straight arm if he wants but chooses to chuck.

Is it?
Goodnight! :wave:

[Movie Cop]

1)Nice try, but even if so,is changing the rules to accommodate someone's disability an okay thing to do? I gave some ridiculous examples of changes that could be done in the future to accommodate disabilties. Where will you draw the line?

2) And note what the rule change means: it is not restricted to congenital chuckers. It now permits everyone to chuck. You are ignoring this.

3) And lastly, I will repeat this ad nauseam, the legspin video proves he can bowl with a straight arm and CHOOSES not to and instead chooses to use the unfair advantage of his bent arm. Curious that you, who tries to get moral on those on the other side of the argument, are not disturbed by this.
1) Plum articlated well (or at least lead us in that direction) in page 2 of this thread. Assuming for the sake of argument, in Murali's case, we don't have a clear conclusion whether he is chucking or not. And surely based on the divided opinion on his action, he seems to be sitting on the blind spot (at least in theory) with regards to passing a clean verdict. In this case, he deserves to be given the benefit of doubt, IMO. To me, it's the on-field umpire who is the best judge (in terms of the postion where they are standing) to make a call on this. Also, depends on who the umpire is, keeping Hair in mind. As much as we judge the players for integrity, we also need to judge the umpires as well for integrity.

2) Not sure whether adjusting the degree of arm bending is going to give more liberties for a bowler to chuck. Murali expreiments, actually, led into take a more closer look at an unimplementable text book rule. For decades and decades, calling a bowler for chucking is very fuzzy. I was told by some of the crciket pundits in my family (I wasn't born then) that Alan Davidson, one of Australia's finest fast bowler, action was pretty unorthodox and dubious during those times. He had a side arm, slingshot action But till date his action wasn't reported or even a question was raised. There are lot of grey areas to implement this rule to the letter. It's impossible for umpires to measure angles etc. on the extent to which the arm can bend etc. So, for the on-field umpires, this rule adjustment is going to irrelevant, IMO. For them, this is still just going to boil down to - what looks blatant vs. what looks normal/acceptable.

3) a. How are you sure that Murali is not bending his arm in this replay as much as you are sure he is bending his arm otherwise?
b. Even if on a 'relative' scale, if you think that Murali's action is relatively legal in this case, why should be choose to bowl legspin? His bread/butter (read: skill/craft) is off-spin. So, unless proven wrong, why should he has to be someone that he is not?

[littlemaster1982]

b. Even if on a 'relative' scale, if you think that Murali's action is relatively legal in this case, why should be choose to bowl legspin? His bread/butter (read: skill/craft) is off-spin. So, unless proven wrong, why should he has to be someone that he is not?

No, PR's point is, if Murali could bowl leg spin with a straight arm, why can't he bowl off spin the same way?

[Movie Cop]

b. Even if on a 'relative' scale, if you think that Murali's action is relatively legal in this case, why should be choose to bowl legspin? His bread/butter (read: skill/craft) is off-spin. So, unless proven wrong, why should he has to be someone that he is not?

No, PR's point is, if Murali could bowl leg spin with a straight arm, why can't he bowl off spin the same way?
My kostin is how are we so sure that Murali is bowling the leg spin without benidng his arm? Are you referring to the extent to which he bends? Still I'm not pretty sure. :?

[littlemaster1982]

I haven't seen the video PR has posted. I'm just reiterating what he said.

[Movie Cop]

How is it fair enough to ask Murali to bowl legspin because it appears less controversial, for supposedly no fault of his? It is as good as asking Murali to play cricket only as a batsman and quit bowling for good.

Ok, again for argument sake, even his leg spinners are clean - if he has to bowl doosra, let's say his physical deformity is not going to let him bowl it without bending his arm. So, this is where comes in a interesting situation of how far enough it is ok/acceptable to relax (or even change) a rule to accomodate a specially gifted player who has tested a rule (or was tested by a rule, depending on how you look at it), with his physical deformity?

[littlemaster1982]

The question is, if he does have a physical limitation (i.e, inability to strectch his arm), how was he able to bowl legspinners with straightened arm? It's not that PR is asking Murali to bowl *only* legspin.

[Movie Cop]

Ok, it really boiling down to either one of 2 things. A. Questioning Murali's integrity B. Questioning the rationale behing relaxing the rules (assuming that he is chucking).

So, sounds like you are batting for A. I would rather go with the experts who tested him inside out (though not in match conditions) and certified that he has a bent elbow. My original kostin still holds good though - how are we absolutely sure that he is not bending his arm beyond the allowed degree while delivering the leg-spin unless you actually conduct a test?

It's easy to have a strong opinion (and hence arguments) on B. But it's hard to prove or disprove anything when you are batting for A, illiaya? I'm not going to debate whether Murali has integrity or not. I admire him for his craft/skill. He is a sheer delight to watch with a ball on hand. The way he teases his batsman and the way he induces error in them are all exemplary stuff.

[littlemaster1982]

I'm not really questioning his integrity, as I haven't seen his legspin video. My issues are with the relaxation of rules. I simply can't overlook the fact that he has a physical deformity and that gives him a distinct advantage over others.

Your analogy of tall fast bowlers wouldn't exactly fit in, because they are not violating any rules while bowling.

[Movie Cop]

Even the relaxing of rules was not directly attributed to Murali isn't? The real chucking rules needed a overhaul, and Murali's case only gave an opportunity to take a closer look at it. It gets really fussy when you look as closely (as in bookish definition terms) on what is a legal delivery and what is not.

not directly related to our line of disucssion but kind of related. In the '98 "one-off" Oval Test, the then English coach David Lloyd spoke a lot about how Murali is a great spinner of our times and how he is going to be a huge threat for England blah, blah, blah. In a typical English sulk, after England lost that Test, Lloyd took a 180 degree dagalti and wrote in his column about Murali's action and how he is convinced that Murali is throwing. Reacting to Lloyd's criticism, David Shepard (considered one of the best umpires of his times), retaliated slamming back at Lloyd and stated that he belived Murali's action is clean. Who would you believe Lloyd or Shepard? The opinions ae divided with respect to his action. My analogy is not so much about the law. It is more in the spririt of - having a bent elbow doesn't guarentee better turn to everyone, by default. For all you know, it could even make it worse. If reports has to believed, more than his elbow, it's his super flexible wrists that makes all the difference, I think.

[littlemaster1982]

I'm not sure why an overhaul of chucking rules were necessary in the first place. I don't remember any discussion related to this, before Murali issue cropped up.

W.r.t Lloyd vs Sheperd, I regard Sheperd as one of the greatest umpires, but I couldn't agree with him. I'm not saying Sheperd was wrong and I'm right. Just that, Murali's bowling doesn't look right to me.


having a bent elbow doesn't guarentee better turn to everyone, by default. For all you know, it could even make it worse. If reports has to believed, more than his elbow, it's his super flexible wrists that makes all the difference, I think.

Not everyone with a bent elbow can bowl like Murali, and as PR said Murali practised a lot to use it as an advantage. I would say the combination of his flexible wrists and bent elbow is the reason he could extract so much turn on any surface.

[Plum]

[tscii:258c8cab10]A combination of your physical attributes and ppractive is what makes you unique and succesful. This is true of anyone. To be hung up on murali's unfair advantage, when it seems neither replicable nor acquirable, seems a little naïve, idealistic and utopian to me.
My point is simple. Your fear is either
1) Everyone will start doing it - in that case, where is the unfair advantage
2) Nobody else can do it - well, that's a unique skill then. Why be hung up about rules?

As for as things dear to me being violated in cricket, well, I guess I will switch to football or some other sport without much ado. Already, post Sachin's retirement, I am not sure if I will be interested at all. I don't follow odis and t20-Is already. Ipl only because of the old guard. So big deal for me if some archaic rule is being violated.
In what way cricket as a sport or entertainment or spectacle been violated by murali? An underarm skittler will take away from the spectacle, remember. So I guess we'll draw the line where it matters. It is fuzzy and I believe that we'll know where it gets beyond the line instinctively.

People like nasser hussain have confessed that they used to abuse him on chucking as a sledging tactic and never really meant it. It shows how much the case against him is racially motivated. For that reason alone, I say bhaad mein jaaye cricket. It is more important to cock a snook at certain racists out against him because of his colour and race.

I find it funny when someone cries for Hair. He knew what he was doing and he knew why. He doesn't deserve any sympathy. He is not a martyr. Spare the sermons please. Everyone had political objectives most of all certain nations which had a vested interest. Emerson confessed that an AcB official had privately asked him to call Murali. I'd rather side against such petty, cunning movers even if it means violating all Cricket rules.[/tscii:258c8cab10]

[Vivasaayi]

Plum,

I dont think in murali's case it was purely racial, when it comes to objections that came up.

For PR it looks like chucking .. appo PR is racial? vellakaran edhu sonnalum raciala?

[Vivasaayi]

Not everyone with a bent elbow can bowl like Murali, and as PR said Murali practised a lot to use it as an advantage. I would say the combination of his flexible wrists and bent elbow is the reason he could extract so much turn on any surface.

this is acceptable ... using everything in his hand to his advantage...arm,wrist,fingers to spin the ball [considering that everything in under rules].......its not simple and that too doing it for a long period of time.

[Plum]

Vivs, doi you think I can't make the difference? I quoted Emersonm saying ACB egged him on to do this? I find people trying to avoid racist charges because "not every veLLaikaaran is racist". How can you extrapolate that to vellaikaaran is not racist at all. You are not discussing the evidence at all! Didn't hair ever officiate in domestic or intl matches involving Lee? Did he ever call him. Study the evidence and then submit your case.
In this case, clearly they targetted him and it is clear ACB was influenicng umpires to do this. Doesn't that stink? Just to show yourself as above racist claims, you would want to ignore such evidence?

[Plum]

And I find aussie supporters(not guys here) taking out the reverse racism card everytime they are questioned. That is a typical cynical way of equating their racism which involved subjugation in history to a charge made in debates as though both are equally hurtful. Even symonds crying wolf over monkey was trivialsing the suffering of his forefathers by equating a sporting incident orchestrated and instigated by his captain to a soul crushing subjugation of a race over generations and centuries.

[Vivasaayi]

Plum,

Hair dint call lee as a chucker , so he dont have right to call murali as one?

this doesnt take away the charges against murali...it only proves hair is a racist.

btw, I dont find lee's action controvercial

[Plum]

Vivs, pls don't shift goalposts.
Feeyaar was feeling pity for Hair sdo I pointed out that they weren't motivated by love for cricket but their own petty ends. The debate on chucking is different.

Simply, I can understand if you love cricket and feel against murali for violating it but to make it like Hair and co are upholding dharma while murali is violating it is laughable.

[Vivasaayi]

Vivs, pls don't shift goalposts.
Feeyaar was feeling pity for Hair sdo I pointed out that they weren't motivated by love for cricket but their own petty ends. The debate on chucking is different.

Simply, I can understand if you love cricket and feel against murali for violating it but to make it like Hair and co are upholding dharma while murali is violating it is laughable.

feeyar feels murali's action is controvercial. so he feels hair did something right and hence the racist claim was absurd. Even if hair was a racist, this couldnot be attributed to his racist personality..right?..I mean all his actions could not be attributed to his racist side.

Then I think, anyone from australia/Enlgland who are prone to be racists should not be allowed to stand in the middle, when a player from sub continent plays.

wrt hair, I dont think there are any other racist claims against him[ I dont think brett lee chucks]...except for this one. He MAY not be a racist..but people will call him as one, if he takes decissions against sub continent players

[sathya_1979]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/cricket/news/article.cfm?c_id=29&objectid=10661016

ennoda pangukku eriyara koLLila ennai :lol2:

Excerpts:
"While you can't deny Murali his record - it is enshrined in cricket's official statistics - you similarly can't deny that it comes with an extra word ... 'but'.

Murali will never escape the stain of those no-ball calls and the still adamant contention of many that he got to 800 wickets while throwing the ball; cricket's horror crime of 'chucking'. It's a shame because he has enormous talent and manages to turn the ball prodigious distances with the aid of his freakily supple wrist and fingers.

He can drift the ball, he can make it dip or hang, he can beautifully vary pace and spin - much of which has nothing to do with the fact that he delivers the ball with a crooked arm; the sign of the chucker."

"Even in the act of writing this, it is inevitable that a storm of abusive protest from the subcontinent will follow; as surely as night does day."

"They pulled together a big-name technical committee, including test bowlers Michael Holding, Angus Fraser and Sunil Gavaskar. They undertook electronic research which purported to show that most bowlers, including some greats of the game, bent their arms further than the permitted angle of five to 10 degrees (five degrees for spinners; 10 degrees for quicks).

Using this platform, the ICC then decreed that all bowlers were permitted to bend their arms up to 15 degrees in match conditions. The joke? Murali usually bowls with a 14-degree flex. Is this sounding like a strategy yet?

Faced with having to rewrite the record books to contain a runaway Murali, the ICC took the easy way out - they rewrote the law book instead. It's a dubious accomplishment."

"It's just a shame that the ICC chose to accommodate Murali in a way that adds that 'but'. His record, like that of Sir Don Bradman in batting, will probably stand for all time.

But it is unlikely ever to be viewed, not even in the mists of time, as quite such a pure achievement."

[P_R]

To me, it's the on-field umpire who is the best judge (in terms of the postion where they are standing)
I agree. And had this been accepted from the start there would have been no controversy :-)


to make a callon this. Also, depends on who the umpire is, keeping Hair in mind. As much as we judge the players for integrity, we also need to judge the umpires as well for integrity. Pray, what is the problem with Hair ? Alleged racism?

In both cases: Murali and Pakistan @Oval, I maintain he did the right thing.


Alan Davidson, one of Australia's finest fast bowler, action was pretty unorthodox and dubious during those times. He had a side arm, slingshot action Ok. Like Malinga. That is not a chuck because he doesn't bend his arm in the last swing and throw.

MC, we complicate it when we try to be politically correct. You can bend before you reach shoulder level when you swing. After that you maintain a straight arm and release. Any contravention of this is a chuck. Even at school level cricket you will get catcalls for this.

Want an example of this: you can see in the legspin video. No bend at all.


No, PR's point is, if Murali could bowl leg spin with a straight arm, why can't he bowl off spin the same way?
No. I understand he is congenitally incapable of bowling offbreak with a straight arm.

I am saying he chooses to offspin with a bent arm when he can bowl legspin with a straight arm.

[Plum]

I find this funny - someine has an history of only targetting sub continental players. He is good and not racist it seems but people who point this out are racist it seems :lol:

[P_R]

The question is, if he does have a physical limitation (i.e, inability to strectch his arm), how was he able to bowl legspinners with straightened arm? It's not that PR is asking Murali to bowl *only* legspin.
Actually I am doing exactly that LM.

MC, I am only saying chucking is unacceptable to me regardless of whether it is motivated by intention to cheat or congenital handicaps.

[P_R]

Even the relaxing of rules was not directly attributed to Murali isn't? The real chucking rules needed a overhaul, and Murali's case only gave an opportunity to take a closer look at it. It gets really fussy when you look as closely (as in bookish definition terms) on what is a legal delivery and what is not.
Sure. Where do you a draw a line.

To repeat a ridiculous example. Tomorrow if there comes a guy with a handicap where he cannot rotate his shoulder at all, would you permit him (and everyone else) to just stand at the pitch and throw the ball baseball style.

If this seems ridicuous to you, you may get an idea of how ridiculous and unacceptable to me, Muralis' action is.

And even the stand and chuck will not change the balance of the game. I am sure batsmen will adapt to it and handle it. maatram onRE nilaiyAnadhu appidinnu silarAla embrace paNNikka mudiyum.

Will you be able to ?

I am sure you will draw a line somewhere and develop dyspepsia beyond that. This is the line for me. And it has been transgressed.




not directly related to our line of disucssion but kind of related. In the '98 "one-off" Oval Test, the then English coach David Lloyd spoke a lot about how Murali is a great spinner of our times and how he is going to be a huge threat for England blah, blah, blah. In a typical English sulk, after England lost that Test, Lloyd took a 180 degree dagalti and wrote in his column about Murali's action and how he is convinced that Murali is throwing. Reacting to Lloyd's criticism, David Shepard (considered one of the best umpires of his times), retaliated slamming back at Lloyd and stated that he belived Murali's action is clean. Who would you believe Lloyd or Shepard? The opinions ae divided with respect to his action. My analogy is not so much about the law. It is more in the spririt of - having a bent elbow doesn't guarentee better turn to everyone, by default. For all you know, it could even make it worse. If reports has to believed, more than his elbow, it's his super flexible wrists that makes all the difference, I think.[/quote]

[Plum]

[tscii:8606cd1b4f]Someone said ICC wouldn't have rewritten rules if murali were from nz. By the same token, western writers won't be sweating to write so much on chucking if murali were nz-er. Hair wouldn't have called him and this much controversy won't be there at all. Basically, he would have been universally hailed GOAT by now if he belonged to Aus/NZ/Eng.

Even after pointing out that ACB influenced umpires to call Murali, some of you steadfastly are maintaining that Hair and co. are innocent and motivated by the good of the game. What can I say to you guys? Are you naïve or adamant?[/tscii:8606cd1b4f]

[P_R]

I find this funny - someine has an history of only targetting sub continental players. He is good and not racist it seems but people who point this out are racist it seems :lol:
Who are the other chuckers and ball tamperers that Hair has let go ?

It happens to be the case that Murali and Shoaib are the most blatant chuckers in cricket.

[P_R]

And I find aussie supporters(not guys here) taking out the reverse racism card everytime they are questioned. That is a typical cynical way of equating their racism which involved subjugation in history to a charge made in debates as though both are equally hurtful. Even symonds crying wolf over monkey was trivialsing the suffering of his forefathers by equating a sporting incident orchestrated and instigated by his captain to a soul crushing subjugation of a race over generations and centuries.

This centuries of subjugation bit is to be done away with quickly - in every damn sphere.

I am reasonably sure Harbhajan swore at Symonds and Tendulkar lied to defend him due to some misplaced sense of solidarity. avarukku kEttuchunnu unakku eppidi theriyumnu kEkkalaam. I can't know for sure. But I believe this is the most likely thing that would have happened. And in my books, I will always nurse a slight pang of disappointment regarding Sachin - who IMO the greatest gentleman who ever breathed air in a cricket field.

You have to be race neutral not perpetually race-hyper aware. Then one wouldn't be half as defensive about Murali and Shoaib Akthar.

[Plum]

Ok so Hair is yada yada hi dharmsya thappu nadandhA piravi edukkum krishna bhagwan. Murali is naragaasuran. POdhumA?
All this makes me more glad that the power is with bcci and guys like hair get their comeuppance. Rulesngara pErula oru saaraarai matrum punish seyyunm aniyaayam nadakara varaikku, cricket sethAlum paravaillai, One eyed nelsons-ai unfairaagavaavadhu eliminate seivOm.

Cricket is just a game. It is less important than shwoing racists their place.

[Plum]

Let's talk about that. Do you htink cynically instigating a oppnent's temper to make him say something abusive and systematically ganging up to report him, and the ICC machinery - but for BCCI's muscle - almost implementing that agenda is good for cricket?
If you are race neutral, and cricket loving, why don't you feel as hard about it as chucking. To me that is a bigger menace. I don't think chucking is that important to me. So?

You can't keep saying race is the only reason murali is in the game is because of race when the only reason he is in controversy is because of race. Do you believe western press will place an asterisk against him if he weren't a subcontinental? Does anyone summing up Warne's career talk a line about drugs and match fixing? No. That should tell you who is getting the benefit of race.

[P_R]

[tscii]Someone said ICC wouldn't have rewritten rules if murali were from nz. adhu enna someone. Naan dhaan. debit ellAm oyinga kudukkaNum.



By the same token, western writers won't be sweating to write so much on chucking if murali were nz-er. Hair wouldn't have called him and this much controversy won't be there at all. Basically, he would have been universally hailed GOAT by now if he belonged to Aus/NZ/Eng.
Disagree.
And acknowledge spotting a deep rooted reverse-racism (oops!) which I had hitherto mistaken to be something you were joking about.




Even after pointing out that ACB influenced umpires to call Murali, some of you steadfastly are maintaining that Hair and co. are innocent and motivated by the good of the game. What can I say to you guys? Are you naïve or adamant?
Plum, if you look at that action and still think it is 'fair' then, we end it there.

But I don't think that is the case with you.
What you are saying is: 'deep down I know it is a chuck' but I will overlook it for political reasons.

And the conspiracy theories as far as I have read are flimsy and designed to appeal to those who want to make it out to be caucasian witch hunt of a brown man etc.

[Plum]

Who decides it is flimsy? The history of ICC is about punishing asians but letting caucasians scot free. Why would I believe otherwise in face of such evidence? Like I said bhaad mein jaaye Cricket, which is coming in the way of rightly denouncing such people.

And if you believe Hair is pure and motivated only by cricket rule book, then what can I say? The man tried to sell his silence to the same ICC for a few quid. You believe in his integrity? More power to you.

[P_R]

To me that is a bigger menace. I don't think chucking is that important to me. So?
I have always been critical of this tough man business, McGrath foul mouthing etc. But I have also not 'appreciated' Sarwan 'giving it back' or Ganguly's disgusting on field toughness etc. Combleet neetral-nga.

I have never condoned sledging. Or for that matter even this oversold 'aggression'. Any behavior one wouldn't do off-field ought not to be done on-field. I can never lament the ungentlemanly ways of modern cricket.



Do you believe western press will place an asterisk against him if he weren't a subcontinental?
I do. You don't.

Ian Meckiff was called names throughout his life. And back then players weren't supposed to talk to press so he couldn't even hit back. Even today when they mention Meckiff, the article will surely mention his action.



Does anyone summing up Warne's career talk a line about drugs and match fixing? No. Talking for myself, I do. I particularly enjoy Ranatunga's aRikkai sparring with Warne and perpetually bringing up drugs.

And btw match pixing ellAm kidaiyAdhu - weather/pitch report. To me 'fixing' is 'throwing a match away by playing below par'. I don't think Warney will do that. OTOH I don't believe it when he said he wasn't aware about the performance enhancing drugs. I believe he took them intentionally.

[sathya_1979]

He He He! White gang will get away with Foul-mouthing, spitting, etc etc with 10% fines and people who retort gets banned! And we have to trust that the people who enforce such biased and prejudiced rules are saints, angels, upholding the laws of game. Comedy!

[P_R]

And if you believe Hair is pure and motivated only by cricket rule book, then what can I say? The man tried to sell his silence to the same ICC for a few quid. You believe in his integrity? More power to you.

So everyone who agrees for an out-of-court settlement is a snivelling cheat eh ? Tabloid logic. It can be argued the other way, why did ICC bother to settle if he was indeed racially motivated ? :-)

If, say, Venkatraghavan had no-balled Murali what would your stand be? If I understand right, it would have been quite different from your reaction now, which is because he was called by a white man.

[sathya_1979]

And btw match pixing ellAm kidaiyAdhu - weather/pitch report. To me 'fixing' is 'throwing a match away by playing below par'. I don't think Warney will do that. OTOH I don't believe it when he said he wasn't aware about the performance enhancing drugs. I believe he took them intentionally.

TMK, in other sports, if a sportsperson is found using drugs he / she will be banned for life or at least for 5-10 years. Here, it is 10-11 months suspension (Asif, repeated violater is let off again and again, adhu another comedy). If THIS MILD LAW by ICC can be used by Warnie in an unfair manner to his advantage to prolong his career, why raise so much fuss about Murali?

[sathya_1979]

And if you believe Hair is pure and motivated only by cricket rule book, then what can I say? The man tried to sell his silence to the same ICC for a few quid. You believe in his integrity? More power to you.

So everyone who agrees for an out-of-court settlement is a snivelling cheat eh ? Tabloid logic. It can be argued the other way, why did ICC bother to settle if he was indeed racially motivated ? :-)

If, say, Venkatraghavan had no-balled Murali what would your stand be? If I understand right, it would have been quite different from your reaction now, which is because he was called by a white man.

Similarly I presume ur disappointment with Sachin is because he supported the bad boy Harby. If this was done to support Gentleman Kumble / Srinath, ur reaction would have been quite different :D

[P_R]

He He He! White gang will get away with Foul-mouthing, spitting, etc etc with 10% fines and people who retort gets banned! And we have to trust that the people who enforce such biased and prejudiced rules are saints, angels, upholding the laws of game. Comedy!
You are getting this wrong.

After all I am not supporting the governing body which made amends to support Murali's action :-)

He spits so I will chuck is a logic that will take us nowhere except to a destructive spiral. This admiration of 'giving it back' has been stoked by the media because it is marketably cool. Tendulkar, de Silva, Dravid and Kumble have been projected to be saints who ought to be worshipped and not emulated.


Ok I was initially surprised that so many ppl could not see something that was clear as daylight to me - that Murali chucks.
Now I see that is not the case. In a weird way, I find it reassuring :-)

[sathya_1979]

Nobody (Spectators) knew what transpired on the field between Harby and Symonds. If Ponting and his team mates believed that Symonds is not at fault and supported him, Sachin believed that Harby is not at fault and supported him. IIRC, Sachin and Harby had a good partnership in that Sydney test and threatened to establish a big first innings lead. To avoid that and knowing Harby's fiery nature, Symonds had wound him up and Harby as expected fell in the trap by retorting. Harby kuttravaaLinu theermaanam senjittu visaaraNai nadathinaanga. Why was Ponting and Aussie team members' statements were only taken in to account? Why was Sachin's statement not taken into account?

[P_R]

And btw match pixing ellAm kidaiyAdhu - weather/pitch report. To me 'fixing' is 'throwing a match away by playing below par'. I don't think Warney will do that. OTOH I don't believe it when he said he wasn't aware about the performance enhancing drugs. I believe he took them intentionally.

TMK, in other sports, if a sportsperson is found using drugs he / she will be banned for life or at least for 5-10 years.
Without coming across as defending Warne, I will say this is related to the seriousness of the offence. In track and field for instance performance can be seriously enhanced by the drugs. The extent to which this is possible in cricket is questionable. However, rules are rules, and Warne was rightly punished.


(Asif, repeated violater is let off again and again, adhu another comedy). :-)


If THIS MILD LAW by ICC can be used by Warnie in an unfair manner to his advantage to prolong his career, why raise so much fuss about Murali?
Eh ? where was it used to prolong Warne's career. He was out of the game for a year. They did not 'extend' his career. They just 'did not cut it short'.

[sathya_1979]

After all I am not supporting the governing body which made amends to support Murali's action :-)
Fine. Similarly, voice should be raised against letting off Warnie for using banned substance and eliminate his records from history books - a la Ben Johnson, illayaa?

[P_R]

Similarly I presume ur disappointment with Sachin is because he supported the bad boy Harby. If this was done to support Gentleman Kumble / Srinath, ur reaction would have been quite different :D No. kutram kutramE. The game is bigger than the player.

Azhar is a pleasure to watch. sirpi maadhiri sedhukkuvaar IMO. adhukkaaga ban paNNAma irukka mudiyumA.

And btw the question you posed does not arise :-) Srinath is a guy who apologizes to batsmen when his bouncers hit them. And gets sworn at in return by the Slaters and Ponting - who I acknowledge go scot free. My question is: "adhukkaaga?"

[P_R]

After all I am not supporting the governing body which made amends to support Murali's action :-)
Fine. Similarly, voice should be raised against letting off Warnie for using banned substance and eliminate his records from history books - a la Ben Johnson, illayaa?

Oh dhaaraaLamaaga raisunga.
As I mentioned in the earlier post, I am not convinced of the extent of performance enhancement that can be done in cricket. In track and field, swimming etc. where what you need is small bursts of energy it is huge. In cricket it is about endurance and concentration. What Warne did was punishable, no questions about that, however I believe his punishment was commensurate.

[sathya_1979]

Idhukku orE solution ban entire Aus team. RCA senju paarthaa, indha maadhiri 99 % problems arise out of those cry babies. Fix the defect at the root, so that we dnt have any effects in live system.

Also, read my post regarding Sydney incident above. Do u have any proof of Harby's wrong doing and Sachin's INCORRECT support for Harby?

[sathya_1979]

And btw match pixing ellAm kidaiyAdhu - weather/pitch report. To me 'fixing' is 'throwing a match away by playing below par'. I don't think Warney will do that. OTOH I don't believe it when he said he wasn't aware about the performance enhancing drugs. I believe he took them intentionally.

TMK, in other sports, if a sportsperson is found using drugs he / she will be banned for life or at least for 5-10 years.
Without coming across as defending Warne, I will say this is related to the seriousness of the offence. In track and field for instance performance can be seriously enhanced by the drugs. The extent to which this is possible in cricket is questionable. However, rules are rules, and Warne was rightly punished.


(Asif, repeated violater is let off again and again, adhu another comedy). :-)


If THIS MILD LAW by ICC can be used by Warnie in an unfair manner to his advantage to prolong his career, why raise so much fuss about Murali?
Eh ? where was it used to prolong Warne's career. He was out of the game for a year. They did not 'extend' his career. They just 'did not cut it short'.
Sportspersons using banned substance should have been banned for life. Time to Amend the rule for good, now :P

[sathya_1979]

After all I am not supporting the governing body which made amends to support Murali's action :-)
Fine. Similarly, voice should be raised against letting off Warnie for using banned substance and eliminate his records from history books - a la Ben Johnson, illayaa?

Oh dhaaraaLamaaga raisunga.
As I mentioned in the earlier post, I am not convinced of the extent of performance enhancement that can be done in cricket. In track and field, swimming etc. where what you need is small bursts of energy it is huge. In cricket it is about endurance and concentration. What Warne did was punishable, no questions about that, however I believe his punishment was commensurate.
I am not talking abt me. I am talking abt people who says that what thalamudi did was right in calling Murali :lol:

[sathya_1979]

If rules and laws is to be upheld, it should be applicable to ALL cases. Selective amnesia is the order of the day with ICC and strict oppicers.

[P_R]

Why was Sachin's statement not taken into account? Eh ? Sachin's statement was the most important of all in that investigation, wasn't it? It is pretty much what let Harbhajan off the hook.

As I said, it is impossible for us to know what happened and we can only comment on what could have happened.

Hayden stole my words when he called Harbhajan 'an obnoxious weed' (sOkkA sonnAnyA dhool 'yA). People - who would have otherwise not hesitated to call harbhajan names - were getting all worked up because an Aussie had described him so. Our media fanned this big time. These are what I call misplaced 'sense of solidarity' (adheppadi namma veettu tea-yai nallA illaingalAm etc.)

And I wouldn't put it beyond Harbhajan to abuse Symonds. And as I have perhaps established thus far, provacation is hardly a defense. It only expands the set of people to be punished (which I am all for). Had Sachin explained the provocation and thus had made all concerned parties punished that would have been 'fair' in my books.

End of the day, we don't know what happened. arasiyal thalaivargaL 'pOdhiya aadhaarangaL illAdhadhaal' veLiya vandhudara maadhiri idhaiyum yEththukka vEndiyadhu dhaan.

[P_R]

Idhukku orE solution ban entire Aus team. Koot :-)


Do u have any proof of Harby's wrong doing and Sachin's INCORRECT support for Harby? Prove paNNa mudinjA yEn inga vandhu speculate paNREn. If it could have been proved then wouldn't the decisions have been different.

I believe a politician is corrupt. It is based on what I hear and infer. Obviously I can't prove it.

[P_R]

Sportspersons using banned substance should have been banned for life. Time to Amend the rule for good, now :P

The underlined is an category with a lot of flux and varies from sport to sport.

[sathya_1979]

End of the day, we don't know what happened.
We dnt know what happened. So, leaving aside Ponting, Hayden, Sachin etc, we cannot judge whether Symonds and Harby were at fault - both / none / one.

Appo Sachin's support to Harby is incorrect nu solradhu thappu illayaa?

Thappu yaar pakkamnu theriyaama, nee avanukku support seiyyaradhu thappunu solradhudhaan thappu!

[P_R]

Appo Sachin's support to Harby is incorrect nu solradhu thappu illayaa?
KarunAnidhu, Jayalalitha, Laloo ivanga ellAm oozhal paNraanganu solradhum thappu. yEn nA court-la niroobikka mudiyalaiyE.

Coming back to you Srinath example. If it had been Srinath v Symonds it is highly unlikely that Srinath would have behaved that way and I, quite justifiably, won't speculate the same way about this.


Thappu yaar pakkamnu theriyaama, nee avanukku support seiyyaradhu thappunu solradhudhaan thappu! thappu solradhukku avan yaarnu kEkkuradhu thappu.

[sathya_1979]

Appo Sachin's support to Harby is incorrect nu solradhu thappu illayaa?
KarunAnidhu, Jayalalitha, Laloo ivanga ellAm oozhal paNraanganu solradhum thappu. yEn nA court-la niroobikka mudiyalaiyE.

Coming back to you Srinath example. If it had been Srinath v Symonds it is highly unlikely that Srinath would have behaved that way and I, quite justifiably, won't speculate the same way about this.


Thappu yaar pakkamnu theriyaama, nee avanukku support seiyyaradhu thappunu solradhudhaan thappu! thappu solradhukku avan yaarnu kEkkuradhu thappu.

Yeah, I have seen Srinath getting foul mouthed by Ponting during 1999 India's tour of Oz for a bouncer. That was just an example. Since Harby has been projected as a baddie, it is natural to stack a lot of sins against him.

[Plum]

Oh on durby, my take is even if he were innocent, poi solliyaavadhu avanai Sachin mAtti vutturukkaNum(poimayum vaaimai logic ;) ). Adhu vEra vishayam.

first of all. Murali chucks is oru karuthu avLO dhaan. The governing body says otherwise and I believe them (this is called classic English defence :) ).

Adhu pOga, that politics and racism is not invlved in the witchhunt against him-nu solradhu dhaan enakku sirippAga irukku. Thalamudi(sathya, :lol: at this coinage) nallavaru, vallavaru, apdinellAm nambaravangaLai pArthu me only can :lol:.

Idhu pOga there are other things
1. Feeyaar speculated about future and transgressions that might make murali propoments actually feel bad about changes. Same way, round arm was illegal in 1820s. Appodhaiya frabhu raus will feel horrified at McGrath and co. - so? Deal with it. Don't stick to rule book and miss out on genius. Actually, Warne being so good is another reason to discredit Murali. Because statistically he trumps Warne, they needed something to discredit murali. That's it. If Sachin maintained a 100 average, they would have found ways of discrediting him. But he doesn't threaten Bradman's status so he is safe from insecure western press and opinion makers.
2. It is ok to believe that ICC wouldn't have protected a NZ-er like this but one can't believe that western press wouldn't have hounded him like this? I can concede that Icc wouldn't have protected a nz-er because that is how politics works. But you can't concede that same reason should clearly mean that so much media villification wouldn't have happened? What leads you to believe so much in western fair play when history is infact proof of the exact opposite?

[Roshan]

Plum, full form'la irukkeenga.. :thumbsup:

[P_R]

Adhu pOga, that politics and racism is not invlved in the witchhunt against him-nu solradhu dhaan enakku sirippAga irukku. Thalamudi(sathya, :lol: at this coinage) nallavaru, vallavaru, apdinellAm nambaravangaLai pArthu me only can :lol:.

As Vivs said, even if your allegation of political motivation is right, calling Murali was the right thing to do. Having said that, I believe that 'political motivation' conspiracy theory originate from the minds of brown men who feel they are being oppressed, suppressed and depressed.


1. Feeyaar speculated about future and transgressions that might make murali propoments actually feel bad about changes. Same way, round arm was illegal in 1820s. Appodhaiya frabhu raus will feel horrified at McGrath and co. - so?
Completely agree. I don't deny this at all.
I am horrified precisely because this is an assault on the game as I know it. That is why I call people who are able to deal with the change as 'blessed'.

enakku avvaLO foresight, accommodativeness ellAm kidaiyAdhu. I assumed some of you have some lines, that will outrage you, the way this outrages me. Looks like there is no line at all and you are most permissive. I am green with envy.

And yeah it will be the same game. I am reminded of the Platovian anecdote about the butcher who bragged that he had used the same knife all his career, just changed the blade a few times and the handle a few times, that is all.


What leads you to believe so much in western fair play when history is infact proof of the exact opposite?
Froop-A ? A series of accusations, conspiracy theories and vitrolic reverse racism do not proof make.

Because statistically he trumps Warne, they needed something to discredit murali. is your theory.
That's it. If Sachin maintained a 100 average, they would have found ways of discrediting him. But he doesn't threaten Bradman's status so he is safe from insecure western press and opinion makers. Oh ippo insekoorty-yai avangaLukku kuduthuteengaLA. :-)

So, any article that criticizes Sachin, cannot but be racially motivated porumal eh?

Tamilblogworld-ku paasisaum maadhiri ungaLukku rEsisaum pOla.

[sathya_1979]

Feeling that the judgement (?) is biased is not feeling suppressed / oppressed / depressed.

Not enough proof - Lillee's kicks and tantrums, Underarm, Usage of banned substance, loving the bookmaker, Mcgrath to Sarwan (edhu vENaa solluvaanaamaam, moodittu irukkaNumaam, assuming the saints at ICC a la Macolm Speed, Slow, Super Slowmo etc would give justice by saying "Hey Grath, look, Dnt make it very public. Make it subtle like Symmo. To close the case u r fined 7.36 AUD and to balance out I am banning the person u sledged unnecessarily"), claiming grassed catches, throwing gloves to stop the ball......... The list outnumbers the number of bombs dropped during WWII :lol:

Cases against Sachin would be mainly made to find 1 or 2 chinks in his armour to drive a point that few other inferior batsmen were better than him. He was stacked against a lot of players from around the world and not only gOrAs. Racism can be ruled out for arguments against Sachin.

Racially-motivated treatments comes into picture when the non-white gives back when they get some NICE Treatment from OZ / SA (NZ excluded as I don't remember any controversies involving them). They would want to make a big fuss out of a non-issue and get the person who stood-up, banned and crucify his character.

Harby Obnoxious Weed, appo Symonds, Pranting etc? Holier than God, isn't it?

[Plum]

What I don't understand is: according to people here, supporting Murali is politically motivated while opposing him is given a clean chit as fighting for the good of the game. Including Hair, Emerson and others when Emerrson himself confessed that ACB officials asked him to call Murali. Yet, you"ll smugly call us reverse racist and speak for people who admitted that they were influenced by a board that'll benefit from Murali's ban. Why?

Why are you giving a complete clean chit on racist motivation to Hair and co.? Where is the evidence for that? There is actually admission from Emerson of underhand dealings from their side. Still you'll give them complete clean chit while subtly and unsubtly calling us reverse racist?

[sathya_1979]

Plum, u had missed the point. OZ and Engs are the ones who were born to uphold the justice of the game (Domination by hook or crook and go scotfree for every offence). When they feel that the law is getting broken (their dominance is threatened), they will fight for justice (crucify the root cause). maththapadi avanga romba nallavanga!

[Plum]

What next? Clean chit for Chris Broad? Maybe if we don't agree that he is a paragon of justice, we are oppressed and depressed brown men?

[sathya_1979]

What next? Clean chit for Chris Broad? Maybe if we don't agree that he is a paragon of justice, we are oppressed and depressed brown men?
Ya Ya, if Mcgrath sledges and u keep mum, u are playing by the spirit of the game. If u give back, u r insecure feeling oppressed suppressed depressed brown man.

[Benny Lava]

Plum... :clap:

[P_R]

Harby Obnoxious Weed, appo Symonds, Pranting etc? Holier than God, isn't it? Appidinnu yaarum sollalai.


supporting Murali is politically motivated Well ppl know it is a chuck and still support as a way to stand-up to, give-it-back to Aus/Eng whoever your demons are. Isn't it?

It is you guys who made the political argument, isn't it? Oh I see no problem in the action, it is clean as a whistle, appidinnu neenga yaarum sollaliyE.

Whether urged by ACB or not, Murali should have been called. If Emerson had been urged by ACB to not call Murali (ACB sollitaalum :-)) for the sake of amity or some bull like that, then I would call that disservice to the game. While I guess you will accommodate it.

Hair and Emerson called Murali when he chucked. Weak kneed Steve Dunne did not. Hair did the right thing in Oval vs. Pak. Those are the facts and stand independent of any alleged motivations. And due to Pakistan pressure Hair was unfairly kicked out - which is quite a bummer to the game.

The motivations alleged have little bearing on my evaluation of the decisions.


edhu vENaa solluvaanaamaam, moodittu irukkaNumaam Quite obviously you didn't read my earlier post.

To allow chucking to spite your white spectres is a classic case of cutting the nose to spite the face.

[sathya_1979]

Appidinnu yaarum sollalai. - Neenga sonneengannu naanum sollalai!

Also, read ur posts that u don't support sledging. But, when u know that serious offenders are going to get away without any punishment. What would a normal human being do? Try to give back on his own. This is not wrong, IMO, like this is wrong in ur IMO.

Chucking - Murali was tested 3-4 times by bio-mechanics extensively and his actions were found OK by ICC. There were quite a number of others who were not allowed to continue for suspect action - Shabbir for example. That's the difference

[P_R]

But, when u know that serious offenders are going to get away without any punishment. What would a normal human being do? Try to give back on his own. This is not wrong, IMO, like this is wrong in ur IMO. Yeah when you give back, you ought to be punished too. Particularly in cricket. I have above average behaviour expectations in this game.


There were quite a number of others who were not allowed to continue for suspect action - Shabbir for example. That's the difference Shabbir and (to give a white example James Kirtley) many others were thrown out. That is because, as Plum argued and I have also stated more than once, Murali and Shoaib Akthar are a class apart. Others, even with chucking, cannot compete. That is not the point.

[Plum]

I don't care about chucking - it doesn't offend my sensibilities. The political aspects come later. Just because it is right result from your pov, you can't give clean chit to Hair and co.
You can speak for yourself that you aren't politically motivated. If you think Hair and co share your concern for the good of the game, appreciate your innocence.

[P_R]

What next? Clean chit for Chris Broad? Maybe if we don't agree that he is a paragon of justice, we are oppressed and depressed brown men? Broad is perhaps the one guy who stands up in my eyes as an indefensibly biased record. andha aLavukku irundhaa dhaan bias-nu solla mudiyin 'ngrEn.

Even here I am careful not to use the term racist. I will call him that when he is unduly harsh to Monty Panesar, Sajid Mehmood, Jeetan Patel etc.

[P_R]

Just because it is right result from your pov, you can't give clean chit to Hair and co. You can speak for yourself that you aren't politically motivated.
There is no reason to believe that anyone who calls/called Murali was politically motivated. Murali ought to have been called and glad he was.


I don't care about chucking - it doesn't offend my sensibilities. Matter over here, actually.
I don't quite believe 'nothing' offends your sensibilities and that you are completely open to change in any aspect of the game. I am sure there is such a thing. I wish and hope such a thing changes in your lifetime.

[sathya_1979]

But, when u know that serious offenders are going to get away without any punishment. What would a normal human being do? Try to give back on his own. This is not wrong, IMO, like this is wrong in ur IMO. Yeah when you give back, you ought to be punished too. Particularly in cricket. I have above average behaviour expectations in this game.


There were quite a number of others who were not allowed to continue for suspect action - Shabbir for example. That's the difference Shabbir and (to give a white example James Kirtley) many others were thrown out. That is because, as Plum argued and I have also stated more than once, Murali and Shoaib Akthar are a class apart. Others, even with chucking, cannot compete. That is not the point.
1 - The person who provokes and who retorts should be punished. But, in 99.99% of the cases, IN CRICKET, the person who had done the provocation had been let off for free or with trivial punishment (10% of match fee) and the person who gave back was banned. This is what I am not fine with.

2 - When banning a few with suspect action is fine, why not ok with calling one a non-chucker, when the results prove as such?

[P_R]

why not ok with calling one a non-chucker, when the results prove as such?
What do the results prove ? IIUC they only prove that he does not intentionally chuck but just that he can't help chucking.

[sathya_1979]

why not ok with calling one a non-chucker, when the results prove as such?
What do the results prove ? IIUC they only prove that he does not intentionally chuck but just that he can't help chucking.
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/135220.html
It's not with him alone. It's with most of the bowlers and it is not chucking.

[Plum]

Feeyaar says : if you give back, you should be punished, too.
I ask where is the question of "too". In cricket, only the giver back is punished and as long as it keeps happening, people like me will never take the rule book of cricket seriously. Bhaad mein jaaye cricket aur uska rule book.
Sathya you are wrong in a way - it is not that only the giver back is punished - whether you are the instigator or reactor, you will bepunished if you aren't white. Simple.

[sathya_1979]

Feeyaar says : if you give back, you should be punished, too.
I ask where is the question of "too". In cricket, only the giver back is punished and as long as it keeps happening, people like me will never take the rule book of cricket seriously. Bhaad mein jaaye cricket aur uska rule book.
Sathya you are wrong in a way - it is not that only the giver back is punished - whether you are the instigator or reactor, you will bepunished if you aren't white. Simple.
and we have to believe that them calling Murali a chucker for their insecure feeling (Competition to Warne) is upholding the law.

[P_R]

sathya, it is an analysis of the video venkiram posted a few pages back. Nothing new in these links.

The writer evoking of neurological motion blindspots to explain is grasping at straws :lol2: Colossal arrogant-aavE irundhuttu pOrEn

Mukul Kesavan's article is quite sensible. The results of the universal check would have been quite interesting though.


Any spinners whose doosras (or for that matter, their 'pehlas') require a suspension of disbelief greater than three degrees (or four, or five, so long as the limit is low and general to all bowling species) will be sentenced to long hours in solitary watching videos of Bishen Bedi in his delivery stride from every angle that the archives can supply. :lol:

[sathya_1979]

Bedi pEsuradhu kEkka sonnaa adhudhaan periya punishment :lol:

[Roshan]

Plum Vaazhga ! :clap: Great going Plum ! :cool2:

[P_R]

kettadhulayin oru nalladhu, unesspetted koaters 'lErndhu Plummanaarukku suffort vaangi kuduthurukkEn :lol2:

[Plum]

Feeyaar :)

Roshan - finallyy something we are on the same side of :)

Feeyaar, actually, there could be a change in Cricket soon that sucks out my enthusiasm for the game - SRt, RsD and Vvs retirements. I don't think I am at the stage of my life where fresh talent could enthuse me. And, knowing myself, I guess I will adjust with whatever I get for sporting entertainment. Londonla irukkarachE desparateA rugby ellAm follow paNNEn :( so I guess I am not so attached to the game as I know it. I understand your popv but happenings in the ICC fail to conivne me that Hair and co are yada yadahi dharmasya

[Dinesh84]

kavalapadathenga Plum, Sathya...

inception range ku F_R mind la "Murali doesnt chuck" nu oru idea va plant panniralaam.. :lol2:

[Roshan]

Feeyaar :)

Roshan - finallyy something we are on the same side of :)

Yes for once :)

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Plum,

I dont think in murali's case it was purely racial, when it comes to objections that came up.

For PR it looks like chucking .. appo PR is racial? vellakaran edhu sonnalum raciala?

Sir

You need to study the issue a bit more , Murali has been abused because of his colour by few 'Lunatic' kangaroos from mid 90's till late 90's , during this 'Era' Jayasuriya was called a 'Black Monkey' by Glenn Mcgrath

Ithellam racists illaiyaiyaa sir :huh:

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Plum

Pineetenga, :notworthy: :clap:

Pls Kantinueee :thumbsup:

[aanaa]

Murali: The man who reinvented spin bowling (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-10708478)
Muttiah Muralitharan, who played his last Test on Thursday, may have been the greatest bowler to spin a cricket ball. Sports writer Suresh Menon reflects on the career of a remarkable cricketer. .....

Murali's record 800 wickets are likely to stand forever given the diminishing interest in Test cricket, but figures do not tell the full story.....


[html:09520c82eb]<div align="center">http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/48432000/jpg/_48432260_muraaalithafp224.jpg</div>[/html:09520c82eb]

[PARAMASHIVAN]

:redjump: :bluejump:

[Vivasaayi]

Plum,

I dont think in murali's case it was purely racial, when it comes to objections that came up.

For PR it looks like chucking .. appo PR is racial? vellakaran edhu sonnalum raciala?

Sir

You need to study the issue a bit more , Murali has been abused because of his colour by few 'Lunatic' kangaroos from mid 90's till late 90's , during this 'Era' Jayasuriya was called a 'Black Monkey' by Glenn Mcgrath

Ithellam racists illaiyaiyaa sir :huh:

params,

i dint say englishmen and australians are not racists..I just mentioned that all their actions couldnt be bracketed under racism..pr appo racista..as he raises doubts on muralis action.

munnavellam hubla logica fallacy, contextomy , ad hominem nu neraya pesuvanga..ipellam apdi pesaradhu illa...

[P_R]

logica fallacy, contextomy , ad hominem :rotfl2:

[kid-glove]

Feeyaar :)

Roshan - finallyy something we are on the same side of :)

Feeyaar, actually, there could be a change in Cricket soon that sucks out my enthusiasm for the game - SRt, RsD and Vvs retirements. I don't think I am at the stage of my life where fresh talent could enthuse me. And, knowing myself, I guess I will adjust with whatever I get for sporting entertainment. Londonla irukkarachE desparateA rugby ellAm follow paNNEn :( so I guess I am not so attached to the game as I know it. I understand your popv but happenings in the ICC fail to conivne me that Hair and co are yada yadahi dharmasya

La liga, EPL and Serie A seasons kick off. Door of Football thread is wide open :D

[ajaybaskar]

Murali slams Bedi, calls him 'ordinary'


Colombo: In his first media interaction after retirement from Test cricket, legendary spinner Muthiah Muralitharan has told CNN-IBN that his fiercest critic Bishan Singh Bedi "is an ordinary spinner who had no right to comment on him".

Murali vented his ire and asked Bedi to "look at himself in the mirror". "What he has done can be achieved by any ordinary bowler in today's cricket," he added.

"The few hundred wickets he has taken is not a major feat, there are 30-40 bowlers today who have done that with ease. He is making these comments on me because he wants to be popular," Murali said adding that "Bedi has never done anything for cricket".

The bowler, who finished with 800 Test wickets, said "controversies have not affected me, rather they have made me stronger".

"There are people who criticise you everytime, I don't care about them. Criticism is a big obstacle a cricketer has to pass and I have already passed them well."

He also singled out Indian off spinner Harbhajan Singh as the one having the "capability to break my record".

Muralitharan said taking 800 wickets "is a special feeling" and that now he will focus on T20 and ODIs.

http://cricketnext.in.com/news/murali-slams-bedi-calls-him-ordinary/49526-13.html?from=tn

[PARAMASHIVAN]

well said Murali :clap:

[P_R]

Oh..ivarai thittaNumnA evvaLavu wicket edukkaNumAm?
Walsh, Warne, Kumble andha range-la thittunA dhaan ivaru oru poruttA madhippAramA ? :lol2:


Bedi has never done anything for cricket
idhai remba naaLaa remba pEru sollittu irukkaanga.
What is 'doing something for cricket' ? apart from playing, that is.
AFAIK Bedi has been actively involved in coaching. And his main grouse against Murali is becomes he has personally observed a huge jump in the number of chuckers in the younger generation.

Bedi captained India in the tour of WI ('76 ?) where Lloyd used tactics quite comparable to bodyline - several bouncers in an over and an odd beamer. Bedi declared the innings after 5/6 wickets twice. This in an effort to save the bowlers - which included himself and Chandrashekar.

This has long been booed as chickening. But this needs to put in perspective.

Some today may say that Lloyd was well within his right to bounce even tailenders. It was just not a done thing. And this event is important when writing the history of the game's decline from its gentlemanly position. There were some in WI team who were against the tactic but were asked by Lloyd to "look away if they didn't like it"
Bedi took the decision to declare when India had plenty of time. Preserving the bowlers against such attacks was better than the few runs that may have been got exposing them. Contrary to it being called 'chickening', I think it was a firm decision that registered protest against the way the game was played.

One can clearly see what kind of standards he expects of the game. So his problems with Murali are not surprising at all.


Of course he is a disagreeable man. He is blunt and tasteless with expressions. He was perhaps the most unpopular coach/manager India ever had. After the tour of New Zealand ('84?) where we got lynched, Bedi said "this team ought to be dropped in the Indian Ocean".

But the counterargument 'what has he done to question me' is not exactly the right line of response.

Much as I find Bedi's ranting embarrassing, sometimes I feel, as a lone voice of sanity in this world he has to sound this insane to even be heard.

[PARAMASHIVAN]

P_R

Please freeya vidunga :|

[Plum]

[tscii:0a3b4df880]If Bedi can call him a cheat, javelin thrower and a robber, I guess it is to Murali's credit that he hasn't said anything atleast so far.
You cannot abuse someone like that in the name of your "belief". It is as if Gentleman's game is a religion.

Bedi had no business questioning Murali's integrity, esp after the latter did everything icc asked him to do to prove he wasn't chucking. He went through systematic, cynical and racist humiliation by a whole country and its racist crowd - donmt tell me the oz crowd booing him was motivated by the good of the game; you can't be so naïve.
To call such a man a cheat and a robber, Bedi deserves every repartee he gets - even if he doesn't deserve it :lol:[/tscii:0a3b4df880]

[Vivasaayi]

Going by murali's comment - noone else,even the "Best of all" (IMHO) Warne couldnot comment on murali because he has got lesser number of wickets than murali.

[Vivasaayi]

[tscii:cd4d85b181]

donmt tell me the oz crowd booing him was motivated by the good of the game; you can't be so naïve.
:lol:[/tscii:cd4d85b181]

I think if an English player was bowling like Murali , he would have been booed in oz better than murali was.


To call such a man a cheat and a robber, Bedi deserves every repartee he gets - even if he doesn't deserve it

what kind of a man - a man who was booed by oz....reminds me of thillu mullu .. "idhula enna peruma?"

or a man who was given a clean chit by ICC...ICC sonna yarum pesapadadha?

or a man who is humble and good natured? - apdi irundha election nikka solli vote vena podalam

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Going by murali's comment - noone else,even the "Best of all" (IMHO) Warne couldnot comment on murali because he has got lesser number of wickets than murali.



Pls read it carefully, Murali has kept his mouth 'shut' all these time, 'Tolerating' this 'dundanaka' abuse based on his ' Five senses' belief !

One can 'Tolerate' only for a limit, The world knows and 'acknowledges' murali's talent. I wonder how many Cricket fans knows this' Dundanaka' :rotfl3:

Bedi kantiribusan to Indian Cricket :rotfl3:

[Vivasaayi]

Going by murali's comment - noone else,even the "Best of all" (IMHO) Warne couldnot comment on murali because he has got lesser number of wickets than murali.



Pls read it carefully, Murali has kept his mouth 'shut' all these time, 'Tolerating' this 'dundanaka' abuse based on his ' Five senses' belief !

One can 'Tolerate' only for a limit, The world knows and 'acknowledges' murali's talent. I wonder how many Cricket fans knows this' Dundanaka' :rotfl3:

Bedi kantiribusan to Indian Cricket :rotfl3:

naan pengala thaayaa madhikiren maadhiri pesuna epdi?

Thats what Im saying - One need not have done greater achievements than murali to comment on him...

[Vivasaayi]

Going by murali's comment - noone else,even the "Best of all" (IMHO) Warne couldnot comment on murali because he has got lesser number of wickets than murali.


One can 'Tolerate' only for a limit, The world knows and 'acknowledges' murali's talent. I wonder how many Cricket fans knows this' Dundanaka' :rotfl3:



did u take 500 wickets to comment on bedi?... or does the cricket world know u?

can I say "How many people know this jinjinakka...while lots of cricket fans knows bedi"?

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Recently he has echoed the same criticisms against his countryman, Harbhajan Singh[17]. Regarding suspect actions in cricket, he said "When a bowler is chucking, he's referred to panels and the home cricket board. Why not do the same for a wide or no-ball, then?" [18]. He has accused one-day cricket, modern cricket bats and small grounds of causing a decline in classical spin bowling in India [7].

He has also attacked Sunil Gavaskar, calling him "a destructive influence" [19]. He said to Australian coach John Buchanan "Tell us, John, have you made this Australian team great, or have they made you?" [20]

More recently, Bedi has referred to T20 cricket as "the most vulgar expression of cricket".

[sathya_1979]

:rotfl:

[Vivasaayi]

Recently he has echoed the same criticisms against his countryman, Harbhajan Singh[17]. Regarding suspect actions in cricket, he said "When a bowler is chucking, he's referred to panels and the home cricket board. Why not do the same for a wide or no-ball, then?" [18]. He has accused one-day cricket, modern cricket bats and small grounds of causing a decline in classical spin bowling in India [7].

He has also attacked Sunil Gavaskar, calling him "a destructive influence" [19]. He said to Australian coach John Buchanan "Tell us, John, have you made this Australian team great, or have they made you?" [20]

More recently, Bedi has referred to T20 cricket as "the most vulgar expression of cricket".

Most part were acceptable!

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Going by murali's comment - noone else,even the "Best of all" (IMHO) Warne couldnot comment on murali because he has got lesser number of wickets than murali.


One can 'Tolerate' only for a limit, The world knows and 'acknowledges' murali's talent. I wonder how many Cricket fans knows this' Dundanaka' :rotfl3:



did u take 500 wickets to comment on bedi?... or does the cricket world know u?


Sir I said nothing about you, so it is better you refrain from personal attack! :twisted:

[Vivasaayi]

Going by murali's comment - noone else,even the "Best of all" (IMHO) Warne couldnot comment on murali because he has got lesser number of wickets than murali.


One can 'Tolerate' only for a limit, The world knows and 'acknowledges' murali's talent. I wonder how many Cricket fans knows this' Dundanaka' :rotfl3:



did u take 500 wickets to comment on bedi?... or does the cricket world know u?


Sir I said nothing about you, so it is better you refrain from personal attack!

neenga use panna word thana dundanakka.....i just modified to jinjinakka..

dundanakka..OK...Jinjinakka not OKvaa?

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Recently he has echoed the same criticisms against his countryman, Harbhajan Singh[17]. Regarding suspect actions in cricket, he said "When a bowler is chucking, he's referred to panels and the home cricket board. Why not do the same for a wide or no-ball, then?" [18]. He has accused one-day cricket, modern cricket bats and small grounds of causing a decline in classical spin bowling in India [7].

He has also attacked Sunil Gavaskar, calling him "a destructive influence" [19]. He said to Australian coach John Buchanan "Tell us, John, have you made this Australian team great, or have they made you?" [20]

More recently, Bedi has referred to T20 cricket as "the most vulgar expression of cricket".

Most part were acceptable!

In that case you cant take this 'dundunaka' seriously? can you ? :huh:

[Vivasaayi]

params,

I said most part were acceptable and makes some sense

[PARAMASHIVAN]

neenga use panna word thana dundanakka.....i just modified to jinjinakka..

dundanakka..OK...Jinjinakka not OKvaa?

That was 'refered' to bedi not to you :banghead:

[Vivasaayi]

neenga use panna word thana dundanakka.....i just modified to jinjinakka..

dundanakka..OK...Jinjinakka not OKvaa?

That was 'refered' to bedi not to you :banghead:

adhu theriyum

if it can be used on a public personality in hub why not on u?

[PARAMASHIVAN]

neenga use panna word thana dundanakka.....i just modified to jinjinakka..

dundanakka..OK...Jinjinakka not OKvaa?

That was 'refered' to bedi not to you :banghead:

adhu theriyum

if it can be used on a public personality in hub why not on u?

Read Hub Terms & Conditions

[sathya_1979]

TR padam effect :lol:

[PARAMASHIVAN]

:sigh2:

[Vivasaayi]

neenga use panna word thana dundanakka.....i just modified to jinjinakka..

dundanakka..OK...Jinjinakka not OKvaa?

That was 'refered' to bedi not to you :banghead:

adhu theriyum

if it can be used on a public personality in hub why not on u?

Read Hub Terms & Conditions

adhulathan dundanakka is allowed to use nu potrukangala?

[Plum]

[tscii:76252f93a4]

donmt tell me the oz crowd booing him was motivated by the good of the game; you can't be so naïve.
:lol:[/tscii:76252f93a4]

I think if an English player was bowling like Murali , he would have been booed in oz better than murali was.


To call such a man a cheat and a robber, Bedi deserves every repartee he gets - even if he doesn't deserve it

what kind of a man - a man who was booed by oz....reminds me of thillu mullu .. "idhula enna peruma?"

or a man who was given a clean chit by ICC...ICC sonna yarum pesapadadha?

or a man who is humble and good natured? - apdi irundha election nikka solli vote vena podalam

Dream on, Mate. They do rib each other playfully and ironically but the hatred is NEVER deep-rooted. It is amazing that people can believe that the Aussie crowd booed Murali because they are so well versed with the rules of the game, and were motivated by what they thought was good for the game. Amazing to me, really!

[Plum]

Vivs, you are being churlish. Murali did everything he was asked to do to clera his action. He is not a chucker per ICC rules. If you dont like ICC rules, go and watch a different game whose rules are according to your sensibility, if I may be harsh.

[Vivasaayi]

Vivs, you are being churlish. Murali did everything he was asked to do to clera his action. He is not a chucker per ICC rules. If you dont like ICC rules, go and watch a different game whose rules are according to your sensibility, if I may be harsh.

Now, whatever told by ICC should not be challenged or opposed?

ICC ku edhira yarume pesa koodadha?now bedi has represented the thought of people like PR right?

atleast for that sake it holds some weight

[Plum]

Bedi was a great spinner, no doubt. It was a different era so hi 266 wickets is not a small feat. He has his right to differ about Murali. But if he chose to use vitriolic words like "Cheat" and "Robber", it is really amazing that Murali kept quiet till now. Because Murali did everything that ICC, Churlish australian racists and others asked him to do about his action. He played the game with great joy and enthusiasm and to the best of his abilities. Too bad some people cannot respect the fact that ICC adopted with time to change the rules. If you are so hung up about the old rules, why cant you respect the new rules?

Either you say "ICC draws up rules, and has the right to change it constituitionally" and accept whatever the current rules are :huh:
Or you say "Whatever I knew when I started following must be the rules forever. I cannot accept any change". In which case, stop following Cricket because those are the current rules.

[Vivasaayi]

Bedi was a great spinner, no doubt. It was a different era so hi 266 wickets is not a small feat. He has his right to differ about Murali. But if he chose to use vitriolic words like "Cheat" and "Robber",

Well, that is wrong on Bedi's side. He should have registered his views in a correct way...robber, cheatlam not good choice of words.

[Plum]

Bedi has a right to speak. So has Murali. why cant you accept the fact that Murali's way of Cricket could be different and in his world, people hung up with old rules are dinosaurs :huh:

Why Murali opposers are talking from the high horse as if whatever view you represent is ultimate cricket and people who oppose your views are Cricket-killers?
You have a view and the ICC and we have an opposite view. Your view is NOT superior to ours. I respect your and PR's stand but please learn to respect ours.

[Ramakrishna]

Recently he has echoed the same criticisms against his countryman, Harbhajan Singh[17]. Regarding suspect actions in cricket, he said "When a bowler is chucking, he's referred to panels and the home cricket board. Why not do the same for a wide or no-ball, then?" [18]. He has accused one-day cricket, modern cricket bats and small grounds of causing a decline in classical spin bowling in India [7].

He has also attacked Sunil Gavaskar, calling him "a destructive influence" [19]. He said to Australian coach John Buchanan "Tell us, John, have you made this Australian team great, or have they made you?" [20]

More recently, Bedi has referred to T20 cricket as "the most vulgar expression of cricket".

What are trying to convey through this post?

[sathya_1979]

Vivs, yes, there have been a number of amendments to ICC rules citing changes in the game, technology etc - eliminating underarm, white balls, day-night matches to name a few. But, the point made by Plum was, with existing rules and analysis on action, Murali's action was cleared by ICC. They introduced the 15 degree rule as majority of the bowlers fell in that margin. Hence, y blame him alone? AvLodhaan bro :D

[Vivasaayi]

Bedi has a right to speak. So has Murali. why cant you accept the fact that Murali's way of Cricket could be different and in his world, people hung up with old rules are dinosaurs :huh:



ofcourse murali has all rights to call bedi ordinary.

number of wicketsa yardstick to comment on aa vechadhuthan konjam comediya irundhuchu

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Recently he has echoed the same criticisms against his countryman, Harbhajan Singh[17]. Regarding suspect actions in cricket, he said "When a bowler is chucking, he's referred to panels and the home cricket board. Why not do the same for a wide or no-ball, then?" [18]. He has accused one-day cricket, modern cricket bats and small grounds of causing a decline in classical spin bowling in India [7].

He has also attacked Sunil Gavaskar, calling him "a destructive influence" [19]. He said to Australian coach John Buchanan "Tell us, John, have you made this Australian team great, or have they made you?" [20]

More recently, Bedi has referred to T20 cricket as "the most vulgar expression of cricket".

What are trying to convey through this post?

His nature and his 'intellect' levels on 'Abusive' behaviour without any 'concrete evidence'

[Vivasaayi]

His nature and his 'intellect' levels on 'Abusive' behaviour without any 'concrete evidence'

params,

If you see he has no bias on anyone - he just mouths his opinions on whatever he feels.

But the way he registers s a bit too harsh

[Vivasaayi]

Vivs, yes, there have been a number of amendments to ICC rules citing changes in the game, technology etc - eliminating underarm, white balls, day-night matches to name a few. But, the point made by Plum was, with existing rules and analysis on action, Murali's action was cleared by ICC. They introduced the 15 degree rule as majority of the bowlers fell in that margin. Hence, y blame him alone? AvLodhaan bro :D

Satya,

I also like murali.Infact I have never mentioned anything about murali's action in any of my posts.

But guys who raised concerns about muralis action are motivated by other means nu soldradhuthan too muchnu soldren.

they didnot raise concerns about wasim akram, kumble and others succesful people..right?

[sathya_1979]

Params, no offence to us, but IMO Bedi knows cricket better than us. Leaving aside his views on chucking, his other views mentioned in ur post is largely correct -- buchannan, t20, decline of spin bowling in India. Not sure abt sunny gavaskar though.

[Plum]

Bedi has a right to speak. So has Murali. why cant you accept the fact that Murali's way of Cricket could be different and in his world, people hung up with old rules are dinosaurs :huh:



ofcourse murali has all rights to call bedi ordinary.

number of wicketsa yardstick to comment on aa vechadhuthan konjam comediya irundhuchu

I agree, that can never be a criteria. Like, I cant criticise a Kamal movie because I cannot act? agree, totally but I am just putting myself in Murali's shoes - such vitriolic attack for years together and complete lack of respect for him as a person, andha kaduppula apdi solli irukkalAm. The provocation was Bedi's so I think Murali can be granted some slack here.

Very often, people quote that the game is bigger than the individual. But Cricket, the game has pretensions to be greater than Life, and humanity itself. Let me put a new dictum

"Hey, Cricket, you are not bigger than Life and Humanity, itself. Just have some humility, okay. You are just a game. Your "LAWS" are nothing but RULES. Nothing sacrosanct about them. Just understand that and adakki vAsi. summA summA GAme is bigger Game is bigger-nu gudhikkAdha"

[Ramakrishna]

"Hey, Cricket, you are not bigger than Life and Humanity, itself. Just have some humility, okay. You are just a game. Your "LAWS" are nothing but RULES. Nothing sacrosanct about them. Just understand that and adakki vAsi. summA summA GAme is bigger Game is bigger-nu gudhikkAdha"

:rotfl: Imagining you talking to a wall.

[sathya_1979]

Vivs, the reason is his action is orthodox and he is from Subcontinent. Others like shabbir, one bangla guy forgot his name etc have been banned after analysis. Murali came out clean. Still he is being targetted. Adhudhaan Plum solla varraar.

[Plum]

Vivs, yes, there have been a number of amendments to ICC rules citing changes in the game, technology etc - eliminating underarm, white balls, day-night matches to name a few. But, the point made by Plum was, with existing rules and analysis on action, Murali's action was cleared by ICC. They introduced the 15 degree rule as majority of the bowlers fell in that margin. Hence, y blame him alone? AvLodhaan bro :D

Satya,

I also like murali.Infact I have never mentioned anything about murali's action in any of my posts.

But guys who raised concerns about muralis action are motivated by other means nu soldradhuthan too muchnu soldren.

they didnot raise concerns about wasim akram, kumble and others succesful people..right?

Chance kedaichA dhAnE...:huh:

BTW, Akram-ai ball tampering-nu sema kAchu kAchinAnga theriyAdhO? England and Australia cricket writers and analysts pathi enakku nallAvE theriyum - avanga romba nallavangannu vAdhidaravangaLai pArthA enakku sirippu dhAn varudhu.

[PARAMASHIVAN]

"Hey, Cricket, you are not bigger than Life and Humanity, itself. Just have some humility, okay. You are just a game. Your "LAWS" are nothing but RULES. Nothing sacrosanct about them. Just understand that and adakki vAsi. summA summA GAme is bigger Game is bigger-nu gudhikkAdha"

only fossible by you :clap: :notworthy:

[Vivasaayi]

"Hey, Cricket, you are not bigger than Life and Humanity, itself. Just have some humility, okay. You are just a game. Your "LAWS" are nothing but RULES. Nothing sacrosanct about them. Just understand that and adakki vAsi. summA summA GAme is bigger Game is bigger-nu gudhikkAdha"

Well I get your point. If allegations about the rules of the cricket being violated can affect an individual/community personally - then, its not worth it.

[ajaybaskar]

Surprisingly, Steve Waugh has supported Murali in this issue.

[Roshan]

Surprisingly, Steve Waugh has supported Murali in this issue.

No surprise as it is Steve Waugh ! :)

Again Plum :clap:

[Dinesh84]

Surprisingly, Steve Waugh has supported Murali in this issue.

No surprise as it is Steve Waugh ! :)

btw, he is not a saint!

[P_R]

Going by murali's comment - noone else,even the "Best of all" (IMHO) Warne couldnot comment on murali because he has got lesser number of wickets than murali.
Yeah that was my point.
Murali has every right to be offended and dish it back to Bedi. But this line of argument was funny.


I think if an English player was bowling like Murali , he would have been booed in oz better than murali was. No. If Greame Swann and Monty Panesar chucked, then Aussies would apparently boo only Monty. :-)

[P_R]

Recently he has echoed the same criticisms against his countryman, Harbhajan Singh[17].
Good.


Regarding suspect actions in cricket, he said "When a bowler is chucking, he's referred to panels and the home cricket board. Why not do the same for a wide or no-ball, then?" [18]. :lol: :thumbsup:


He has accused one-day cricket, modern cricket bats and small grounds of causing a decline in classical spin bowling in India [7]. Very true.


He has also attacked Sunil Gavaskar, calling him "a destructive influence" [19]. Ah...welll :lol2:


He said to Australian coach John Buchanan "Tell us, John, have you made this Australian team great, or have they made you?" [20] Warney would have loved this one :lol2:


More recently, Bedi has referred to T20 cricket as "the most vulgar expression of cricket". Okay...I am beginning to respect this guy :clap:

[P_R]

Bedi has a right to speak. So has Murali. Of course.

Bedi said cheat - thappu thaan
Murali said: koo are you - adhuvum thappu thaan


why cant you accept the fact that Murali's way of Cricket could be different and in his world, people hung up with old rules are dinosaurs :huh:

ungaLaala jeeraNikka mudiyAdha oru maatram varaNumnu jabam paNNudhu indha dinosaur


Why Murali opposers are talking from the high horse as if whatever view you represent is ultimate cricket and people who oppose your views are Cricket-killers?
............
I respect your and PR's stand but please learn to respect ours.

What is it that was disrespectful about what I posted?
I said, while Murali was well within his right to return Bedi's barb, his logic was flawed. And moreover to say Bedi has contributed nothing to Indian cricket is nonsense. He is an epochal figure and cannot be caricatured away. I just made that point.

I completely understand Bedi's anger and I even understand the isolation that makes his say distasteful things, which is nevertheless objectionable to me.

[P_R]

"Hey, Cricket, you are not bigger than Life and Humanity, itself. Just have some humility, okay. You are just a game. Your "LAWS" are nothing but RULES. Nothing sacrosanct about them. Just understand that and adakki vAsi. summA summA GAme is bigger Game is bigger-nu gudhikkAdha"

Plum, who said it was bigger than life ?

You have been trying to equate opposing Murali's chucking to supporting racism, inequality, colonialism and what not. So anyone who views Murali as a chucker places the game above these values 'ndreenga. Is it?

[P_R]

BTW, Akram-ai ball tampering-nu sema kAchu kAchinAnga theriyAdhO?
Oh ! adhuvum rEsiyalli motivated-A :lol2: ??

Let me record upfront that Akram is IMO the best bowler I have seen in cricket. But if he is charged with ball tampering I wouldn't be quick to call it racist.

Imran Khan seam-ai surandunadhA avarE oththukittAr. adhu enna ism? Perhaps as a noted anglophile, he was being more loyal the King by not sparing even himself?

[Plum]

"Hey, Cricket, you are not bigger than Life and Humanity, itself. Just have some humility, okay. You are just a game. Your "LAWS" are nothing but RULES. Nothing sacrosanct about them. Just understand that and adakki vAsi. summA summA GAme is bigger Game is bigger-nu gudhikkAdha"

Plum, who said it was bigger than life ?

You have been trying to equate opposing Murali's chucking to supporting racism, inequality, colonialism and what not. So anyone who views Murali as a chucker places the game above these values 'ndreenga. Is it?
No, I am merely saying that blanker absolution to everyone who calls Murali a chucker as a "Servant for the Good of the Game", including the notorious Oz Public, is laughable. How are you converting that to this?

[Plum]

And as for Cricket, no other game has pretensions like it has.
1. Phrases like "it's not Cricket", used to sort of imply that Cricket is an ideal way of Life that anything that is not "proper" in real life can also be described as "not cricket"
2. Calling its rules "LAWS".
3. Preaching gentleman's game, with some archaic conventions - basically, following the Victorian era morals. On the other side, Australians who make fun of teh gentleman's game have their own contradictory conventions - not walking is ok but we have to respect a fielder's word, even if that fielder is Ponting :lol:. And making it sound like these conventions are sarcosanct and place the Game above everything else
I tell you, this pretence, this arrogance of the Game nauseates me.

[Plum]

BTW, Akram-ai ball tampering-nu sema kAchu kAchinAnga theriyAdhO?
Oh ! adhuvum rEsiyalli motivated-A :lol2: ??

Let me record upfront that Akram is IMO the best bowler I have seen in cricket. But if he is charged with ball tampering I wouldn't be quick to call it racist.

Imran Khan seam-ai surandunadhA avarE oththukittAr. adhu enna ism? Perhaps as a noted anglophile, he was being more loyal the King by not sparing even himself?

No, Akram paNNA tampering. Harmison, Jones etc(2005)-la paNNA adhu "part of the game". The whole English press and its aunt said exactly that when the 2005 tampering controversy broke. Even the Australian press, whom you might have expected to take cudgels, didnt spend 1/1000th the energy attacking the Englishmen for this that they spent in attacking Durby(deservedly, ofcourse.). Even today, when a Pakistani gets caught doing arg-bargy, Akram and Younis are invoked. But everyone has forgotten 2005 now and nobody will mention these Englishmen in the context of an article on Tampering. And these are the same guys who are quoting rule book against Murali. How am I to take them seriously that they are motivated by the good of the game?

I dont care for the semantics of the word "Racist". Feel free to use a substitute. But I dont care for such guys at all. And can never take their quoting rule books to frame Murali seriously.

You are confusing my disdain for these guys with your own views. It may happen that your views coincide with these guys' in this issue but I cant equate you to these biased hypocrites. Unfortunately, you seem to be doing exactly that.

[P_R]

I am concerned precisely about the semantics of racism. IMO it is being bandied about at the drop of a hat.

If I understand right, you are suggesting that Emerson/Hair have genuinely no problem with Murali's action and the reason why they called him was because they want to give an unfair advantage to Aus.

All I said was, this is not the case as IMO there is sufficient reason for an umpire to call Murali. But for a moment suppose you are right. Still, where do you get racism? The word is a pretty important. Because once the race card is played, the world is divided. No-one wants to be seen as a racist, experts in particular are reluctant to give an opinion against Murali.

Imagine what would have happened if Bishen Bedi was not a brown man. Imagine...(heck I can't think of any white spinner :lol:), say John Emburey (sorry, this is the best I could manage!) was publicly critical Murali. People would be quick to call him racist.

What would we make of Bodyline? If Jardine had tried it with India then would we call it a colonial brutality? Bodyline targetted Bradman- the chief threat. Can't we just see it that way. As simply 'conniving to give one side an unfair advantage over the other'. Should we call it a British expression of disdain upon the descendants of convicts, or something like that.

And regarding ball-tampering...everything is the news the first time. After that it is yet another case. I recall Atherton was most famously exposed and hounded for tampering. If someone chucks today it wouldn't create as much of a ripple would it?

Even in the '76 series I mentioned yesterday there was a lot of animosity. But no-one brought in a race angle. It is a concoction of the recent times. And it has only made the average South Asian cricket watcher (more) xenophobic.

When talking about Gatting-Shakoor Rana, the average South Asian is elated that Rana 'won'. He gave it back to the arrogant white man etc. OTOH I am glad Rana 'won' because as a captain, Gatting's behavior was inexcusable.

This is not to say umpires are beyind mistakes. India has suffered the most of Pakistani umpires (unfortunately we can only be quaint and call these biases). But still a captain cannot behave like that. Teetering dinosaur that I am that is what I expect in cricket.

Long and short of it,
a) I think racism is much much smaller in cricket than many believe.
b) Regardless of the intentions, the pronouncements of Hair/Emerson are very agreeable to me.
c) Those who support b, ought not to change their opinions based on any 'revelations' about the intentions.

[Plum]

I'd take those paki umpires who made india suffer over steve bucknor :)

Your stand is fine. But I have nothing but contempt for Hair, Emerson etc I don't believe they'll do this to Graeme Swann. Check how Paul Harris is treated(sorry johan botha). Nobody gives him the same vitrool as they do to Murali. And he is coloured btw, so perhaps it is just a resentment against the sub-continent's influence in cricket. Even then, I guess the root cause for that is nAma arasAndu kOlOchiya Cricket idhunga kaiyila pOyiruchE...

[Dinesh84]

'Thundu Beedi' :evil:

[PARAMASHIVAN]

a) I think racism is much much smaller in cricket than many believe.


Oh dear Oh dear , am I missing something here ? :huh:

How about Zimbabwe and South Africa??? Do you have any idea how 'talented' 'black' players found it virtually impossible to play for the country in the 80's and 90's ??? Ellam marunthu pOcha :huh:

[P_R]

Paramu, straightA Muralitharan-lErndhu apartheid-ku jump paNNureenga paarunga, adhai thaan solREn.

Ian Botham after a bitter tour of Pakistan made a statement that 'pakistan is a country to which one would like to send one's mother in law".

Today for such a statement, Botham will be in a lot of soup. Besides other things, people will call him a 'racist'.

Botham, if you'd remember declined the invitation to play in the rebel tour in SAFrica saying : "how'll I be able to look Viv Richards in the eye, if I play".

IMO S.Asians have gotten very prickly about this subject in the last few years, which, again IMO, is an unfortunate development.

[Plum]

IMO S.Asians have gotten very prickly about this subject in the last few years
The root cause for this, in Cricket, is the inequality that exists in ICC in rulings on misdemeanours. Asians arent angels but they get punished for the most minor of transgressions but the Anglo-Saxons and their cousins get preferential treatment with guys like Broad working overtime to create imaginary excuses like Ricky Ponting's personal space :lol:

Aamer violated Ricky Ponting's personal spaceAmAm - I conjured up a (personally) very disturbing image of Ricky screaming "nahin!bhagwan ke liyE chOd dO mujhE!" to Aamer on reading that.

[P_R]

:rotfl2:

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Plum in Viswaroopam here :redjump:

[Bala (Karthik)]

:rotfl:

[Roshan]

Aamer violated Ricky Ponting's personal spaceAmAm - I conjured up a (personally) very disturbing image of Ricky screaming "nahin!bhagwan ke liyE chOd dO mujhE!" to Aamer on reading that.

What does this mean ?

[P_R]

Will jump in before Plum stresses the pun and gives me a cleaning job...

It is the Hindi film equivalent of a potential rape-victim crying out at the villain: "ennai vidu"

Literal translation: "For God's sake let me go"

[Movie Cop]

http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/470754.html

A very ordinary "fanboy" article/tribute from a English sports journalist which focusses on Murali's Bradmanesque Test statistics. However, this bit below really echoes my own sentiments (at least along those lines) on what the genius of Murali really brought into the game for a craft that was almost dying in the wake of limited overs cricket.


"It is better for our souls to believe in something marvellous that turns out to be false," mused Simon Barnes in the Times on Monday, apropos athletics's drug-spattered reputation, "than to sneer at something that turns out to have been marvellous all along." And how much better for that soul, that intangible essence of humanity, to revel in the knowledge that something that seems marvellous really is just that. This young century has witnessed three competitive artists whose feats so far exceed the norm that they attract wonder and cynicism in equal measure: Lance Armstrong, Usain Bolt and Murali. If I were a betting man, I'd wager every penny in my possession that Murali will be the one my great-great-grandchildren will be celebrating.

As a cricket fan, I never really cared about statistics - it's the flair, elegance, guile and the genius that matters for me more than anything else in cricket. Anyday, I would prefer watching a Mark Waugh's 40 over a Steve Waugh's hundred. I wouldn't have cared if Murali would have ended his career with, let's say, 300 Test wickets instead of 800. I would have still followed him with the same fervour I have been following him all these years. To me, this whole controversy over his action is really "besides the point" given the way he has thrilled me (not so much for the batsmen facing him) every tme I see him on TV with his bowling punctuated with several guiles and tricks up his sleeve.

[PARAMASHIVAN]

:clap: :notworthy: True Magician Indeed

[MADDY]

ah, marriage times, missed this threat

what arguements P_R and Vivs :clap: ...........Murali record is great, but i would never accept his action - IMO, ICC rules=BCCI rules.........i dont care for both, they are seldom in spirit of the game........

and why is Srilanka keen on producing world class chuckers - now look at Malinga - every time he bowls, i feel like switching channels.......im dreading the day, when he would finish his career with 900 wickets and people will hail him as the best fast bowler than Akram or WI legends.......

[Plum]

Maddy, no worry on Malinga. His action is said to be similar to Jeff Thomson's so per ICC rules, he will never be a chucker. Not only that, whole of media and dominant opinion makers in Cricket will be behind him. veLLakAran poi solla mAttAn. In this case, veLLakAran support Malingavukku uNdu so Malinga doenst chuck

[MADDY]

Maddy, no worry on Malinga. His action is said to be similar to Jeff Thomson's so per ICC rules, he will never be a chucker. Not only that, whole of media and dominant opinion makers in Cricket will be behind him. veLLakAran poi solla mAttAn. In this case, veLLakAran support Malingavukku uNdu so Malinga doenst chuck

Vellaikkaaran-avadhu, vettaikkaaran-avadhu, chucking is chucking........if malinga is not chucking, then baseball pitchers are also cricket bowlers......

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Maddy, no worry on Malinga. His action is said to be similar to Jeff Thomson's so per ICC rules, he will never be a chucker. Not only that, whole of media and dominant opinion makers in Cricket will be behind him. veLLakAran poi solla mAttAn. In this case, veLLakAran support Malingavukku uNdu so Malinga doenst chuck

Vellaikkaaran-avadhu, vettaikkaaran-avadhu, chucking is chucking........if malinga is not chucking, then baseball pitchers are also cricket bowlers......

:rotfl: Vijay fans kovika pOranga :lol2:

[raajarasigan]

Maddy, no worry on Malinga. His action is said to be similar to Jeff Thomson's so per ICC rules, he will never be a chucker. Not only that, whole of media and dominant opinion makers in Cricket will be behind him. veLLakAran poi solla mAttAn. In this case, veLLakAran support Malingavukku uNdu so Malinga doenst chuck

Vellaikkaaran-avadhu, vettaikkaaran-avadhu, chucking is chucking........if malinga is not chucking, then baseball pitchers are also cricket bowlers......Maddy, Malinga is NOT a chucker.. his action is a side arm bowling... ICC does NOT have any rule for side arm action.. Fidel Edwards of WI is also bowling with a similar side arm release... only when bending the elbow, a bowler can be called as a chucker...

there are bowlers who CAN chuck (in fact, chucked occasionally for purpose) but at the same time CAN bowl with a normal action.. Shahid Afridi / Shoaib Akhtar come into this category.. Afridi's quicker ones are mostly chucked... Akhtar's yorker esp when he bowls rounding the arm behind the back is chucking..

but, even if you notify this and called as a No Ball, they can easily escape from Panel since they can bowl with a normal action (without chucking)...

[PARAMASHIVAN]

:exactly:

[MADDY]

Maddy, Malinga is NOT a chucker.. his action is a side arm bowling... ICC does NOT have any rule for side arm action.. Fidel Edwards of WI is also bowling with a similar side arm release... only when bending the elbow, a bowler can be called as a chucker..

round arm action, side arm - all i know saar, i have problems with his "pause"

[MADDY]

before bowling

[MADDY]

I love fiedel edwards' action because his is very smooth

[raajarasigan]

I love fiedel edwards' action because his is very smoothmay be.. the pause is NOT there in his action :) but still, the pause is before bowling... so I don't see any problems there...

[Vivasaayi]

yes...Malinga's bowling action is like whipping.....

[Plum]

Rulesnu onnu irukku. Adhu dhaan final. Enakku pudikkalai, naan othukka maattenlam frustrated white man responses
(Ha ha, feeyar, idhu epdi irukku)

Ellorum enna solraanganna, naan nenachabadi indha rule illai adhanaala idhu thappu. Sorry, icc vekkaradhu dhaan rule. Mathadhellaam opinion.

Court solradhu dhan theerpu. Sattam thappunnu pattuchunna parliament poi amendment kondu vaanga.

[Dinesh84]

Frustrated white man's response na ball ah thooki shoulder la adikanum.. ippadi type adika koodathu :lol2:

[MADDY]

Court solradhu dhan theerpu. Sattam thappunnu pattuchunna parliament poi amendment kondu vaanga.

maybe project manager aanathukku appram, free tayathula panren, ippa time ledhandi :P :lol2:

Vikraman padam dialogue alert: aaga, rules pragaram dhaan muralia support panreenga, manasatchi pragaram illa :P.....

anyways, murali has done the record and it will stay forever - people reading stats book after 30 yrs wouldnt care abt these arguements - varalaaru theermaanam aaiduchhu.....

[Plum]

"Go Check the rules" - idhu Classic English Defence.
"Go check the scoreboard(record books)" - Classic Australian Defence.

India vallarasAgaNumnA, indha mAdhiri arumaiyAna vazhimuraigaLai namma kathukittE AgaNum!

That apart, you are quoting the previous rule book and using it to say Murali chucks. I am using the current rule book to say he doesn't. Both of us have started from a viewpoint and then used the appropriate rule book that supports our stance.

[MADDY]

That apart, you are quoting the previous rule book and using it to say Murali chucks. I am using the current rule book to say he doesn't. Both of us have started from a viewpoint and then used the appropriate rule book that supports our stance.

adhaa thaan ye(n)-maathuneenga??.......thani oru BCCI supporter-kku career-illayen, cricket-inai azhithhu viduvom :P......

seri vidunga, P_R solra madhiri avanga avangalakku yeriyura* madhiri oru rule amendment nadakkum.....

*i meant burning not chucking :P

[Plum]

adhaa thaan ye(n)-maathuneenga??.......thani oru BCCI supporter-kku career-illayen, cricket-inai azhithhu viduvom
No, because I believe this change enhances Cricket. You believe that it destroys it. There is no moral high ground to take here.

[MADDY]

adhaa thaan ye(n)-maathuneenga??.......thani oru BCCI supporter-kku career-illayen, cricket-inai azhithhu viduvom
No, because I believe this change enhances Cricket. You believe that it destroys it. There is no moral high ground to take here.

im not quite sure why should we talk abt morality here, Plum.......at the end of it, i believe Murali's action was inappropriate, thats it.........if u believe its appropriate (without referring to ICC's laws) - then thats the end of arguement, A2D :D........

[Plum]

Yeah, that's the summary, really. I dont believe Murali's action is destroying Cricket. If the ICC rules were prohibiting him, I'd be saying to hell with rules, which is exactly what you are saying now. So, I guess we are in sync all through.

[P_R]

MADDY, Malinga does not chuck.
His arm is as straight as it gets but it is side-arm so it appears odd.

[P_R]

naan othukka maattenlam frustrated white man responses enRu solvadhu very frustrated brown man response


(Ha ha, feeyar, idhu epdi irukku) parattai kEkkumbOdhu, thalaivar oru badhil solluvaar..

[MADDY]

Yeah, that's the summary, really. I dont believe Murali's action is destroying Cricket. If the ICC rules were prohibiting him, I'd be saying to hell with rules, which is exactly what you are saying now. So, I guess we are in sync all through.

naa simplistic views dhaanungo - P_R madhiri in depth-a paaka maattenungo.........anyways, its not abt as serious as "destroying cricket" or anything - spirit of the game is more appropriate IMO......anyways, u wud say, allowing murali's action is spirit of the game - so theres no end to it :lol:..........one thing i would like to say - warne,akram, saqlain, kumble got so many wickets, nobody had an arguement abt it - thats enough for me :D

[P_R]

seri vidunga, P_R solra madhiri avanga avangalakku yeriyura* madhiri oru rule amendment nadakkum.....
nadakkum.
nichayamA.
aanaa naama sirikka maattOm, yEn nA inge ellArukkum edhaiyum thaangum idhaiyum irukku.

GM : ooo oooo....ini un kaadhula aNuguNdai thaan daa pOdaNum

[P_R]

Yeah, that's the summary, really. I dont believe Murali's action is destroying Cricket. If the ICC rules were prohibiting him, I'd be saying to hell with rules, which is exactly what you are saying now. So, I guess we are in sync all through.

naa simplistic views dhaanungo - P_R madhiri in depth-a paaka maattenungo.........anyways, its not abt as serious as "destroying cricket" or anything - spirit of the game is more appropriate IMO......anyways, u wud say, allowing murali's action is spirit of the game - so theres no end to it :lol:..........one thing i would like to say - warne,akram, saqlain, kumble got so many wickets, nobody had an arguement abt it - thats enough for me :D

pandhai sodabottle moodiyAla suraNdalaam
pitch-la strategicA nagesh maadhiri twist dance aadi roughs create paNNalaam

possibilities are endless. ellAmE game-ai vaLappaduthum.

[PARAMASHIVAN]

Open a thread for Malingaaaa and talk about him there , not here :x

[PARAMASHIVAN]

ah, marriage times, missed this threat

...........Murali record is great, but i would never accept his action -..

Fine, I would never accept your view :huh: period!