Shabbir stopped from chucking, Shoaib Malik can continue
Pakistan's fast bowler Shabbir Ahmed has been banned for a year after his action was reviewed by the University of Western Australia. Shoaib Malik has been let-off with the warning that if his action deteriorated or if he bowled the doosra, he could be called again. Last month, the two were reported for chucking by the umpires in the first test against England at Multan.
It is interesting that Bruce Elliott concludes
It could therefore be concluded, given Mr Ahmed's current level of maximum elbow flexion, that he probably bowls some deliveries in each innings that are above the acceptable 15° tolerance limit as stated in the September 2005 report.If Shabbir only probably bowls some deliveries where his arm bends more than the maximum amount measured by the ICC's geometry box, why ban him? Surely a ban is called for when he definitely, as opposed to "probably", bowls deliveries illegally?!
As for Shoaib Malik, his situation is similar to what Harbhajan faced, in terms of needing to possibly get the ICC's permission via phone at the start of every over, informing them about the exact sequence of deliveries he is about to bowl.
Previously on chucking: James Kirtley banned, Shabbir and Lawson in trouble, Malik cleared, Malik in trouble and choosing who to ban for chucking.
Labels: chucking
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
|
Hey Jagdish,
While on chucking and bowling actions, have you seen the bowling action of Lasith Malinga from SL. His is the weirdest I've seen for a pace bowler!
Usually your arm will be over your head when you release the ball for delivery. But his hand is in a horizontal position at the time of delivery! Just the way one would hurl a shot-put.
I'm just wondering how come no one has said anything or noticed this weird action. Yesterday while watching highlights, I saw something weird and hence tried to observe.
What's your take?
By 
Minal (20 Dec 2005, 12:42:00 pm)
Minal: He certainly has a very "odd" action. I don't think there is anything illegal about it though. His is a "slingy" kind of action, similar to Fidel Edwards and Jeff Thomson. Earlier this year, the Kiwis tried to get Darrell Hair to wear light coloured trousers so that their batsmen could pick Malinga's delivery moment, a request rejected outright by Hair. In fact he gave them a scare in the drawn first test, which led to Fleming's request. Did you know that the first batsman he "hit" was named Bradman? :)
By Jagadish (20 Dec 2005, 1:22:00 pm)
Guys,
hat tip for putting Andrew Flintoff at the top of the list. Peter Roebuck, if I remeber correctly, was castigated for suggesting that Freddie's action was faulty. Looks like the ICC would now amend the laws to allow for a 20 degree leeway for the bowlers like Shabbir Ahmad.
yvsmadhav
viewlogic.blogspot.com
By yvsmadhav (21 Dec 2005, 1:12:00 am)
madhav: Andrew Flintoff is at the top of the list because the list is in alphabetical order [of first name], not because we/I think he is the worst chucker of them all. Thanks anyway. It is certainly my belief that he chucks.
By Jagadish (21 Dec 2005, 10:43:00 am)
We'd prefer if you posted comments with your real name to add more credibility to your opinions. However, the moderators reserve the right to delete comments, especially those containing offensive or unsuitable language. The opinions in the comments are your own views. You are welcome to provide a URL to your own cricket blog, but the moderators reserve the right to delete comments which only reference sites for viewing live streams.
Links within entries open in a new window. Some of the links may now be broken/not take you to the expected report since the original content providers may have archived/removed the contents. Some of the sites linked may require registration/subscription.
All opinions expressed are those of the authors alone. The authors' respective employers (past, present or future) are in no way connected to the opinions expressed here.
All pictures, photographs used are copyrights of the original owners. We do not intend to infringe on any copyright. Pictures and photographs are used here to merely accentuate and enhance the content value to our readers.
|
|
|
|
Post a Comment