Murali (2 Viewers)

[budj]

Rubx, would you go to a country to earn a living if the primeminister called you a paedophile? No!, fkn staple shit

 

[RUB!X]

stfu n00b ... he said "chucker" u diked

 

[Pace Setter]

Originally posted by ZeGoat
treating him with the same rules give him a lower tolerance level than other bowlers...

No, same amount of degrees, same tolerance.

Originally posted by ZeGoat
and for your athlete with one leg there is the paralympics where competitors may not just be judged against their competitor alone...

Theres also international disabled cricket. Perhaps he should participate in that competition if the rules need to be bent simply to cater for his deformity. Of course, if he simply stuck to not bowling his doosra, there would be no need for this discussion, let alone any controversy at all.

Originally posted by ZeGoat
yes i suppose you can call him that until the time in the not to distant future when he will be allowed to bowl it...

Honestly, for the sake of cricket, I hope they dont change this rule, because if they did, "crap" bowlers like Stuart Macgill might start bending their arm more and using a "quicker" arm action, which would probably make him a touch more unplayable than he is now.

Unless your saying they should change the rule ONLY for Murali...which is an entirely different story.

Originally posted by ZeGoat
as you said an optical illusion, which is something a a human eye can see which may not be true, that is why the comparisons would not have been just by humans, but will be compared using computers as well...

Yes, but I have not yet seen evidence to prove that he does not add a bit of extra "zing" into the delivery when the pressure is on...or have they also measured, tested and analysed that?

Originally posted by ZeGoat
well even on tv, you can hear/see calls of chucker in australia, you can usually see some sort of sign...

Maybe, but I usually pay more attention to the cricket than the crowd when I'm watching it on TV.

 

[how u doin?]

Originally posted by ZeGoat
and on that note, that will only happen in australia and possible england, have you ever seen anything like that happen in another country...

This is the sort of piss weak answer that takes any credibility away from the Murali debate. The fact that Australian and English umpires have had the guts to put their careers on the line for the benifit of cricket is not related to race. Murali, and Murali supports constantly sight this as a reason, which is bullshit.

He has been proved to illegally deliver the ball, which he could not otherwise deliver within the rules - here lies the 'advantage'.

Furthermore, if the icc had any desire to ensure the accuracy of cricket statistics and history, they would re-test his 'stock' ball, which is also boarderline at best. Somehow Murali supports think the fact that he has passed a test in the past means his action is legal. All this proves is that he CAN bowl a legal delivery, not that he DOES.

 

[how u doin?]

it also says something about the character of the guy, who statistically has the best 'bowling' (I use the term loosely) statistics in the history of the game, yet is too weak and insecure about valid critiscim that he wont go on tour too challenge the best cricket team in the world.

 

[ZeGoat]

Originally posted by Pace Setter
No, same amount of degrees, same tolerance.


Theres also international disabled cricket. Perhaps he should participate in that competition if the rules need to be bent simply to cater for his deformity. Of course, if he simply stuck to not bowling his doosra, there would be no need for this discussion, let alone any controversy at all.


Honestly, for the sake of cricket, I hope they dont change this rule, because if they did, "crap" bowlers like Stuart Macgill might start bending their arm more and using a "quicker" arm action, which would probably make him a touch more unplayable than he is now.

Unless your saying they should change the rule ONLY for Murali...which is an entirely different story.


Yes, but I have not yet seen evidence to prove that he does not add a bit of extra "zing" into the delivery when the pressure is on...or have they also measured, tested and analysed that?


Maybe, but I usually pay more attention to the cricket than the crowd when I'm watching it on TV.

if you give him the same tolerance level, he will not have the same amount of degrees, because his degrees should start from when his arm is the straightest it can be and therfore they cant both be the same in current rules...

and about the international disabled cricket, you can see how much trouble he gives normal batsmen, WITHOUT the use of the doosra, imagine him in a competition where everyone else was at a significantly lower level to him, it would be pointless for him to bowl in that competition...

and if a bowler had a quicker arm action, thats another variation to his bowling attack, it by no means illegal...

and if there is a little extra "zing" especially under pressure, if it included bending the elbow more, im pretty sure they would have realised...

i pay more attention to the cricket than the crowd as well, but you can usually notice these things...

Originally posted by how u doin?
This is the sort of piss weak answer that takes any credibility away from the Murali debate. The fact that Australian and English umpires have had the guts to put their careers on the line for the benifit of cricket is not related to race. Murali, and Murali supports constantly sight this as a reason, which is bullshit.

He has been proved to illegally deliver the bawl, which he could not otherwise deliver within the rules - here lies the 'advantage'.

Furthermore, if the icc had any desire to ensure the accuracy of cricket statistics and history, they would re-test his 'stock' ball, which is also boarderline at best. Somehow Murali supports think the fact that he has passed a test in the past means his action is legal. All this proves is that he CAN bowl a legal delivery, not that he DOES.

u have misunderstood me, i wasnt referring to the umpires, i was referring to the crowd and i was making the point, that most calls of being a chucker that are aimed at murali in a game from australia and sometimes england, its the perception of the general public, not the umpires...

 

[ZeGoat]

Originally posted by how u doin?
it also says something about the character of the guy, who statistically has the best 'bowling' (I use the term loosely) statistics in the history of the game, yet is too weak and insecure about valid critiscim that he wont go on tour too challenge the best cricket team in the world.

not valid criticism but controversial criticism, coming from the leader of the country and almost the entire crowd that goes to watch him.... i think what u just said was a bit of an understatement...

 

[how u doin?]

For starters it is obviously valid criticism, he it has been proven that his action brakes teh rules. John Howard is not an expert, the biomachanics are - they say he throws. And it does say something about his character, do you think if George Bush said Ian Thorpe's swimming action was illegal it would stop him from going to America to compete against his biggest threat (that Thelpes guy). I seriously doubt it. They say innocent until proven guilty, well he has been proven guilty- howard's well within his right to sight this fact. Now Murali has the chance to defend and prove himself to Australian fans yet he chooses not too. He chooses not too, probably because he knows he is lucky to still be alowed to deliver his stock ball which, ill say it IS ALSO A THROW!

 

[how u doin?]

Originally posted by ZeGoat
stfu, itz partly because of people like you that he isnt coming, think about it, if you went overseas to play a game and a majority of the crowd were throwing insults at you how would you feel u piece of shit...

The Australian Davis Cup team went to Spain for the final in 2000 i think. they were constantly booed and inulted during the game, and they didn't even cheat. They had an entire stadium cheer fault serves and boo them when they won a point. Yet every Australian knows that they would go back next year under the same circumstances because they have balls! not only do they have courage, they acknowledge the fact that they are professionals, earning large amounts of moneyand they have a job to do. How can a guy be considered the best ever, when he is in teh most basic sense of the word - a coward

 

[RUB!X]

roflmao ... u legend, couldnt have said it better myself
murali = coward

 

[budj]

I repeat, If THe Sri Lankan president openly, in front of press, when asked the question about Shane Warne's true identity replies "Shane Warne is a child raperand molester, womainser" THen I am sure Shane Warne will not turn up.

You say that Davis Cup team had balls, what about the boycott of Kandy during the WILLS World cup series of 1996? According to your definition, the Aussies back then were castrated. Security threat my arse. Why then tour Zimbabwe???

Murali is the best spin bowler in the world. I have complete confidence in the fact that the Doosara will be reinstated, or Murali will process another delivery.

Therefore by induction, Murali better than warne better than any other bowler

 

[how u doin?]

Originally posted by budj
I repeat, If THe Sri Lankan president openly, in front of press, when asked the question about Shane Warne's true identity replies "Shane Warne is a child raperand molester, womainser" THen I am sure Shane Warne will not turn up.

You idiot! Shane Warne is only half of those things If the Sri Lankan president said that he would be lying, he has no proof or right, to say that. John Howard has all the right in the world to say Murali does chuck, because....HE DOES!

 

[how u doin?]

Also, a threat to someones security is different from a threat to someones ego...

 

[ZeGoat]

Originally posted by how u doin?
For starters it is obviously valid criticism, he it has been proven that his action brakes teh rules. John Howard is not an expert, the biomachanics are - they say he throws. And it does say something about his character, do you think if George Bush said Ian Thorpe's swimming action was illegal it would stop him from going to America to compete against his biggest threat (that Thelpes guy). I seriously doubt it. They say innocent until proven guilty, well he has been proven guilty- howard's well within his right to sight this fact. Now Murali has the chance to defend and prove himself to Australian fans yet he chooses not too. He chooses not too, probably because he knows he is lucky to still be alowed to deliver his stock ball which, ill say it IS ALSO A THROW!

the biomechanics also say that he should be still allowed to continue bowling the doosra..... and exactly what is an illeagal swimming action, also even if bush said it was illegal would the entire crowd watching the event be yelling out cheater or some other insult in chants? also he claimed to have personal reasons as well behind his decision to widthdraw, u may just be paying him out because his father is dying from a cancer or something serious like that...

Originally posted by RUB!X
roflmao ... u legend, couldnt have said it better myself
murali = coward

so if thorpe, being a champion, cites personal reasons and decides not to go to the olympics, he becomes a coward as well i suppose...

Originally posted by how u doin?
Also, a threat to someones security is different from a threat to someones ego...

there was no threat to security in sri lanka to anyone... if sri lanka was a threat to security, then all players shouldnt go anywhere near Zimbabwe...

 

[how u doin?]

Originally posted by ZeGoat
so if thorpe, being a champion, cites personal reasons and decides not to go to the olympics, he becomes a coward as well i suppose...



there was no threat to security in sri lanka to anyone... if sri lanka was a threat to security, then all players shouldnt go anywhere near Zimbabwe...

If ian thorpe chose not to go somewhere becasue people booed him then yes - because we all know this is why he isnt coming.

And Australia didn;t tour Colombo after a bomb went off, killing over 100 people. Id say thats a threat to security. (You know, research doesn't hurt)

 

[ZeGoat]

Originally posted by how u doin?
If ian thorpe chose not to go somewhere becasue people booed him then yes - because we all know this is why he isnt coming.

And Australia didn;t tour Colombo after a bomb went off, killing over 100 people. Id say thats a threat to security. (You know, research doesn't hurt)

how can u just presume that hes lying....

and if you conducted further research you will find out that the disputes were between sinhalese and tamils in sri lanka and had nothing to do with "foreigners", they arent targeted.... they targeted government and military.... all areas which i doubt a cricket team would have gone to...

 

[how u doin?]

There is no proof of Shane Warne raping anyone! There is proof of Murali bowling outside of the rules of cricket.
And if the Australian cricket team felt that their safety couldn’t be guaranteed in what seemed a very volatile environment, of course they had the right to boycott – as would Sri Lanka in Australia. And it pails in significance to the notion of one person boycotting a tour because he is scared of being booed, for something that has every right to be booed.
And Murali’s cowardness is only half of the issue, he also throws. Not a single piece of research has shown that Murali hasn’t thrown a delivery in a test match, only that he has the potential to bowl a legal delivery in controlled conditions. The research is misleading, they should retest him – should ban him and strike his stats from the record. HE IS AN EMBARRASSMENT TO CRICKET!

 

[ZeGoat]

Originally posted by how u doin?
There is no proof of Shane Warne raping anyone! There is proof of Murali bowling outside of the rules of cricket.
And if the Australian cricket team felt that their safety couldn’t be guaranteed in what seemed a very volatile environment, of course they had the right to boycott – as would Sri Lanka in Australia. And it pails in significance to the notion of one person boycotting a tour because he is scared of being booed, for something that has every right to be booed.
And Murali’s cowardness is only half of the issue, he also throws. Not a single piece of research has shown that Murali hasn’t thrown a delivery in a test match, only that he has the potential to bowl a legal delivery in controlled conditions. The research is misleading, they should retest him – should ban him and strike his stats from the record. HE IS AN EMBARRASSMENT TO CRICKET!

i didnt say warene raped anyone and i didnt deny that he was bowling outside the rules of cricket. im saying that that the rules need to be amended as to the recmmendations by the professionals that tested him until further research is carried out. and why is it so hard for you to even consider that he may have a personal reason as to why he isnt coming on this tour....
not a single piece of research shows that brett lee hasnt thrown in a match, he when tested will also have the potential to bowl a legal delivery, you can say that to everyone, not just murali. they shouldnt just ban him and wipe his records just because he has a disability and YOU ARE A TRUE BIASED AUSTRALIAN SUPPORTER!

 

[RUB!X]

u two should consider careers as lawyers, or atleast debating ...

 

[ZeGoat]

lol i have no interest... and we've got lyk peace treaty type thing happening now...