• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

no one will ever convince me that malinga

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

stephen cartwright

Guest
is not a chucka

or is there someone on here, capable of producing an argument to prove me wrong?
 

His arm stays straight and is more than 90° from the ground, so it's perfectly legal.
 
NWC300372 said:
His arm stays straight and is more than 90° from the ground, so it's perfectly legal.
Click to expand...
its very slingy though imo

i see the umpires are now having to take off hats, as he gets the arm virtually in front of their nose before delivery.

another thing that has come to my attention is the amount of potential no balls, for the back foot touching the sideline of the crease, behind the stumps.

that is not being checked in reviews everytime either
 
NWC300372 said:
His arm stays straight and is more than 90° from the ground, so it's perfectly legal.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was going to add that my personal definition of a chucka is someone who bends their arm, I don't think he does that. It's just a ridiculous action that much make it much harder for him to be accurate never mind a batsman to pick it up.

It's just an eccentric action (Paul Adams?), nothing wrong in it that I can see.

I liked it when the batsmen asked Taufel to take his hat off because he couldn't pick the ball out when Malinga was bowling it from in front of Taufel's face :)

Edit - or I should have just let everyone else say what I was going to
 
fair do's lads case proven with the slinger

what about these back foot no balls?
 
dixonsafc said:
so when you said 'no one will ever convince me...', what you really meant is 'it'll be quit easy to convince me...' :roll:
Click to expand...
sort of. i am playing along like :lol:

i really think he throws the ball. when in the ultra slow mo, you can see it, but if the authorities rate it legal, it must be
 
NWC300372 said:
If the umpire is not looking for back foot no balls, then that's the umpire's fault, not the bowlers.



:lol::lol:
Click to expand...
i realise that but should it not be checked in a review situation. they check the front foot first, but never the back.

a few bowlers are pushing the limit on the back foot
 
stephen cartwright said:
i realise that but should it not be checked in a review situation. they check the front foot first, but never the back.

a few bowlers are pushing the limit on the back foot
Click to expand...

Well if a batsman gets out and wants to review it as a back foot no ball, I dont think there is anything stopping them.
 
NWC300372 said:
Well if a batsman gets out and wants to review it as a back foot no ball, I dont think there is anything stopping them.
Click to expand...
should it not be for either the bowler or a batsman, that to make sure, the back foot should be checked?

i can see the uproar, if tendulkar was given out on review and they failed to check the back foot, and its shown on the screen it was a no ball, a few mins later
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top