Malinga the Slinger

Watching him against S.A. today - his bowling action just doesn't look right, does it?

Mark

He's a chucker.

He has a very "low-arm" action (and I'll admit it does look somewhat unusual) but then so did Waqar Younis in his day. I think the main difference between the two is the delivery stride. Waqar used to rock right back before letting fly but I don't think Malinga does. He just reaches the bowling crease and lets it go which I think surprises batsmen who have to 'receive' a delivery earlier than they might expect. Can't be much fun when he's regularly bowling at 88-90mph.

quote:

He's a chucker.

Well his arm looks straight in that photo, just low. That is OK in The Laws (as long as the delivery hand goes above shoulder height ie not underarm). If the arm partially or completely straightens during delivery than it is a 'throw'. The amazing thing is that he can get any accuracy with such a low arm swinging across his body.

When I played Bruce, he would have been no-balled. Times change. Mind you so would more of todays more eccentric performers, I'm thinking of a spinner that is not Shane Warne. Of whom Michael Parkinson said "if that action is legal I'm Darcy Bussell".

If he stands up straight that shoulder height gets interesting.

quote:

I'm thinking of a spinner that is not Shane Warne

I'm sure you are referring to Murali. I've seen some pretty clear footage from a variety of angles that show his arm is bent but does not actually straighten during delivery-making his action legal the majority of the time, although he seemed less keen to expose the doosra to the same scrutiny!

FWIW Brett Lee's action looks deeply dubious with certain deliveries (especially around the wicket) and if you look back at old clips many people think Malcolm Marshall was dodgy (amongst others). I had the pleasure of an evening discussing bowling actions of the fast and famous with Englands finest ever bowler, Freddie Trueman, who sadly died last year. He had two of us trying to bowl bread rolls down his dining room in illustration. It did not help my bowling though, I still cannot get the leather to swing half as much as that buttered bap!

One intersting comment FST made I recall, asked if he could have been any bowler in the entire history of cricket he unhesitatingly nominated Warne, who he considered to be a genius (albeit through clenched teeth/pipestem)

Bruce

quote:

One intersting comment FST made I recall, asked if he could have been any bowler in the entire history of cricket he unhesitatingly nominated Warne,

Hi Bruce, I had the great pleasure of meeting FST at a sportsmans's dinner a few years back. I only wish I had thought to take my dad's copy of his book to get signed.

I seem to remember he said something similar when asked about greatest bowlers. Let's face it, he wasn't wrong was he? Warnie is so good you can almost forgive him for being an Aussie.

When talking about fast bowlers at that time, he held out Lillee, Marshall, Holding and Ambrose for special mention.

Regards,

Steve

Didn't they change the rules a couple of years ago which miraculously made Murali's action legal?

quote:

Originally posted by bob mccluckie:
Didn't they change the rules a couple of years ago which miraculously made Murali's action legal?

Yes, that's my understanding too.

It's a hard call for the umpires too - like one commentator said when an umpire was calling no-ball after no-ball. He's either watching the bowler's foot or the bowler's action. But the umpire can't do both at the same time.

I thought the square leg umpire was watching the arm action while the bowler's end one watched the foot.

I guess that umpires in International cricket have identified players before games about whom they have concerns from video etc. I suspect that calling for a 'throw' is a rather pre-meditated decison.

Rather like calling for ball tampering maybe?

Bob

quote:

Didn't they change the rules a couple of years ago which miraculously made Murali's action legal?

I think they changed it because they realised that when you studied bowling actions carefully a very large number of established players had illegal actions under the old definition!

Bruce

I suppose you could say, then, that Darrell Hair has some rather "pre-meditated" views about (certain) Sri Lankan bowlers!

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce Woodhouse:

quote:

He's a chucker.

Well his arm looks straight in that photo, just low. That is OK in The Laws (as long as the delivery hand goes above shoulder height ie not underarm). If the arm partially or completely straightens during delivery than it is a 'throw'. The amazing thing is that he can get any accuracy with such a low arm swinging across his body.

It might technically be ok, but I can't be having it!

My favourite bowling action is Jeff Thompson's slingshot.

Mark

I'll forgive Murali his bowling action when he takes 100 wickets for Lancs this season!

Mark

They now bio-metrically test suspect actions and there are set protocols for dealing with these matters (I suspect 'Rights' issues when dealing with livelihoods has something to do with it).

AFAIK, Murali's arm can bend (read 'straighten'?) something like 12 degrees beyond 'normal' which is why he sometimes looks like he bowls with a bent arm.

I think we should e-mail Sky and ask them to run a super slo-mo on him - sadly a bit late for the boys now.

Question for me (going off piste here)is how much lower can Freddie bat - all the makings of a no.9 given other performances.