CRICKET Australia v Sri Lanka
- Thread starter 1910
- Start date
- Mar 4, 2008
- 35,065
- 41,909
Kuhnemann reported for suspected illegal bowling action
Australian spin bowler Matt Kuhnemann has been reported for a suspected illegal bowling action, following his terrific series against Sri Lanka.www.abc.net.au
Does anyone find it ironic that in the country that has had the most renowned chucker, someone else was reported.
Sri Lanka's chucker had the rules changed to allow his action to continue, which allowed him to become the highest wicket taker in history.
The rules at the time of Murali allowed a certain amount of bend for spinners (which he failed IIRC) and a different amount of elbow bend for seamers, which Murali came under. The rules then changed so there was only one degree of bend allowed for all bowlers ... Happy days for Murali
BroncosFever
State of Origin Rep
- Jun 6, 2014
- 6,240
- 11,097
Murali wasn't bowling off spin.
I don't know what he was bowling but it wasn't finger spin.
I don't know what he was bowling but it wasn't finger spin.
mitch222
State of Origin Captain
- Apr 4, 2014
- 8,803
- 8,909
That top 3 are all frauds. Surely there are better players at home that could have been picked.
BooKhaki
NRL Captain
- Sep 16, 2020
- 3,065
- 3,990
Short is the least fraudulent, but still shouldn't be in the side.
Unfortunately the selections are starting to just give away test and ODI caps like we did for many years with little success. Connelly playing test or ODI cricket is an absolute farce, and McGurk is a genuine park slogger.
- Jul 28, 2016
- 24,512
- 35,914
Well if it was Joel Wilson that reported him then he should have no issues on review
- Thread starter
- #172
The umpires are WI and South African. The location has nothing to do with it.
He hasn’t been accused of chucking, it might be one ball he bowls and might have been once or twice. If the umpire thinks he sees something they have to check it with footage after play and then if it confirms their eye test, they have to make the report.
The panel and the science at the time said that if you kept it at the current law you would have to no-ball everyone- Even McGrath was above the threshold- it was changed to 15 degrees because that's the first time the human eye can see a bend.
What the ICC needed was more information, and the Champions Trophy that summer provided the perfect opportunity; with all of the world’s best teams in the same place, in an environment run by the ICC, they were able to test away to their hearts’ content. The results were astonishing, and had a wide-ranging impact on the sport going forward.
The results of the study, released in November 2004, revealed that only one of the bowlers they had tested had a degree of elbow flex below the five-degree limit – Ramnaresh Sarwan, whose looping leg-breaks were seldom employed by West Indies, was the proud possessor of a technically clean action. The report suggested that a jaw-dropping 99 per cent of bowlers in cricket’s history had been throwers, according to the ICC’s definition. That included Glenn McGrath, Shaun Pollock, Michael Holding (part of the six-member investigating panel of Test cricketers) or any other bowler known to possess a traditionally clean action.
- Aug 25, 2018
- 18,277
- 31,511
- Sep 6, 2013
- 56,892
- 69,499
Interesting concept and probably will end up with ODIs disappearing at some point but what is your rationale behind 30 overs for international?
- Aug 25, 2018
- 18,277
- 31,511
Lots of reasons:
1. T20 is junk food. It's easy to market as a crowd spectacle, particularly to non fans who don't have to endure 5 days, or even an entire day. It's had to knock, because of its success as entertainment, but it's hard to become invested in a team. Personally, I'm over it. I used to watch every ball of every match, and I rarely watch the BBL or even the IPL anymore.
2. T20 has sucked the life out of One Day Cricket to the point where we don't even broadcast internationals on FTA any more. Or do we? I've lost track. We barely play any domestic games. No one cares about it anymore. Let it die. Play more Shield instead.
3. T20 is too arsey. It's usually won by a single bat getting on a streak. Which isn't to say it's not entertaining, but reward the best of the T20 bats with more overs to strut their stuff.
4. Being a bit longer format makes it more of an event befitting a world cup or international. We might even start to care.
5. Three formats are too many, and player stocks are thin on the ground when they're raking in the big money on foreign T20 contracts.
6. Conversely, 50 overs is a touch too many to really flex. It doesn't really get going until the 30th over. Just cut out the first 20.
7. But mostly, something has to give. We have too much cricket that it's become disposable. t20 for going out with your mates and barely following the game other than getting excited by the big hits. t30 for feeling like something is at stake.
- Jul 28, 2016
- 24,512
- 35,914
If they were going to create a middle ground for limited overs cricket then they need to find the sweet spot with duration of a match.
T20's are about 3hr aren't they??
That's pretty good for viewers as it's just longer than a footy game.
50 over matches have to start at midday and then run till the same finish time.
That's garbage for TV audiences outside of school holiday times... and tactics made that middle 20-30 overs a slog with 3 run per overs off spinners.
Batters have forgotten how to bat 50 over ODIs because it's all hit and giggle... going at a T20 strike rate for a full 50 overs would be nearing scores of 450-500, which isn't sustainable... but they seemingly only have one gear nowadays
- Sep 6, 2013
- 56,892
- 69,499
Fair enough. Even with merit, it seems cricket is actually going in the other direction with The Hundred, basically you get a hundred balls or 16.4 overs. Then there is also the experimental T10 league. As frustrating as it is for purists, cricket is going shorter and shorter.
I wonder whether it might end up being:
Tests
T20 (I agree there is way too much of it and not much of it is very exciting if any)
Hundred / T10
ODs and ODI gone and those three above. What the third will be is of course a question.
Fernando
NRL Captain
- Jun 6, 2015
- 4,284
- 4,693
I kinda feel the same way about ODI'S. Couldn't really care about bilaterals and they are forgotten as soon as they are over, and the upcoming CC is particuarly pointless and stupid. But the ODI World Cup is still really good and the best thing outside of test cricket, it'd be a shame for it to go.
- Sep 6, 2013
- 56,892
- 69,499
Agreed but you have to make other ODIs relevant. It would be good to have a set window every year for tests, ODIs and other but no idea how you'd make it work.
