Why so much fuss about Murali when Andrew Flintoff and Brett Lee also chucks ? - Peter Roebuck
Ian Thorpe
It is extraordinary that so much fuss has been made about a spinner at a
time when heads are being clattered and wickets taken by men whose menace
goes beyond an ability to turn the ball at right-angles. The delivery that
felled Brian Lara in Hampshire was the clearest throw since the ball that
removed Marcus Trescothick in Perth not so long ago.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/01/1096527941557.html
Andrew Flintoff and Brett Lee are Blatant CHEATING CHUCKERS - Peter Roebuck
Action must be fixed
October 2, 2004
Unless Andrew Flintoff alters his action, he will be thrown into an
avoidable fracas, writes Peter Roebuck.
Andrew Flintoff's bowling action is provoking concern. His action has
deteriorated since he returned from his latest injury and now contains an
unmistakable jerk.
Before long, the roughness of his style is bound to attract the attention of
observers prepared to remove their eyes from a harmless tweaker suspected,
at worst, of reverse-throwing at a mild pace.
It is extraordinary that so much fuss has been made about a spinner at a
time when heads are being clattered and wickets taken by men whose menace
goes beyond an ability to turn the ball at right-angles. The delivery that
felled Brian Lara in Hampshire was the clearest throw since the ball that
removed Marcus Trescothick in Perth not so long ago.
Cricket is trying to find its way through the scientific and legal quagmire
that illegal bowling has become. Not that the issue was any more
satisfactorily dealt with in the past.
Such is the prevailing confusion that the danger arises that bowlers of all
sorts will feel free to send the ball down without taking heed of the
restraints supposedly imposed by the rules of the game.
Every country has strong opinions about all bowlers except their own, a
habit also detected during the outbreak of corruption that bedevilled the
game a few years ago. But then, corruption is not merely a matter of money
and, as usual, the International Cricket Council is left holding the baby -
an overrated activity.
Flintoff's action requires attention. Of course, he might not be conscious
of the roughness that has crept in over the course of a few months during
which his career has caught fire in the manner of an Olympic flame.
The suggestion that bowlers with illegal actions are culprits to be put
alongside hijackers, greedy politicians and men rubbing mint into the ball
is unkind. Still, footage is taken of every over bowled in a match and shown
to players in the evenings, so cricketers are not without information.
Accordingly, it is hard to believe that no one in the England camp is aware
this issue might crop up.
Flintoff is an important member of an emerging England side. Besides his
buffeting batting, he is a "strike" bowler in the sense that he is used in
short bursts and given the task of upsetting an innings.
He bowls fast and with hostility and favours the short-pitched delivery.
Armed with the old ball, he opens his chest even more and tries to cut the
ball away from the bat, the celebrated "reverse" swing of recent discovery.
In short, he is a handful.
Injuries have threatened to curtail his career as a bowler, a circumstance
bound to inhibit a swashbuckling style of batting that has emerged after a
long period underground.
Subsequent to his breakdowns, desperate to retain his menace and anxious to
protect his body without losing pace, the Lancastrian has put greater
emphasis on the use of chest, wrist and arm to hurl the ball down.
Unfortunately, the elbow also has come into play, as is almost inevitable
when wrist and shoulder are pushed to their limits. His raggedness is more
obvious when he moves around the wicket and bends the ball away from
left-handers.
Flintoff may remain within the leeway of 10 per cent that has been permitted
to fast bowlers since slow-motion film revealed that, otherwise, hardly
anyone would pass muster. Alternatively, he may stray outside that range. By
and large, the 10 per cent allowance reflects the capabilities of the naked
eye, which remains the surest guide in these affairs.
Since Flintoff's straightening of the elbow can be seen from a distance, he
might contravene even the amended rules. In that case, the matter must be
drawn forthwith to the attention of responsible officials so that it can be
confronted before it is too late.
At least it is possible nowadays to realise matters of this sort without
feeling that a player's position is thereby put in peril. Flintoff's action
requires the cricketing version of surgery. Otherwise, it will be raised
again by those persuaded that authorities omit to treat every ball upon its
merits.
CricketLeague
"Ian Thorpe" <IanThor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fj2da0$sgj$1...@aioe.org...
So much extraodinary fuss about Murali is because Murali is an INFERIOR
BROWN SKINNED idiot from the subcontinent and Andrew Flintoff and
Brett Lee are SUPERIOR WHITE SKINNED from England and Australia.
RACISM is ALIVE and KICKING in the cricket world.
IVAR
"CricketLeague" <Cricket...@USA.com> wrote in message
news:4754b450$0$7520$8826...@news.teranews.com...
Peter Roebuck is a communist, he writes in commie rag Guardian,
he is a terrorist sympathizer, he is a leftist loonie, he is a lunatic,
he is a muslim lover, he is a Srilankan lover, he is a brown skin
lover, he is a subcontinental lover, Murali is his fag lover, Flintoff
and Lee turned down his advances........
Waiting for these responses from the resident racists especially
the cricket genius Andrew Dunford.
LMAO
Dave -Turner
mention.
> http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/01/1096527941557.html
>
> Andrew Flintoff and Brett Lee are Blatant CHEATING CHUCKERS - Peter
> Roebuck
If you actually go to the page you'll see that the title is:
"Unless Andrew Flintoff alters his action, he will be thrown into an
avoidable fracas, writes Peter Roebuck."
HOW DESPERATE ARE YOU ????? BWAHAHAHAHA
Ian Thorpe
"Dave -Turner" <n...@no.no> wrote in message
news:13l9ftj...@corp.supernews.com...
Oh its you, Dave Turner.
I dont have to respond to lunatics.
Brett Lee and Andrew Flintoff were never called for obvious reason of
not being from the subcontinent.
Excerpt from Peter Roebuck's column:
It is extraordinary that so much fuss has been made about a spinner at a
time when heads are being clattered and wickets taken by men whose menace
goes beyond an ability to turn the ball at right-angles. The delivery that
felled Brian Lara in Hampshire was the clearest throw since the ball that
removed Marcus Trescothick in Perth not so long ago.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/01/1096527941557.html
Andrew Flintoff and Brett Lee are Blatant CHEATING CHUCKERS - Peter Roebuck
Action must be fixed
October 2, 2004
Unless Andrew Flintoff alters his action, he will be thrown into an
avoidable fracas, writes Peter Roebuck.
Andrew Flintoff's bowling action is provoking concern. His action has
Andrew Dunford
> mention.
>
>> http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/01/1096527941557.html
Far be it for me to support an insane troll, but it is amusing to see the
number of posters lining up to bristle that Lee wasn't mentioned in the
article. The reference is in the mentioning of the "clearest throw since
the ball that removed Marcus Trescothick in Perth not so long ago", which
was a ball delivered by Lee and a pet topic of Roebuck for a long time.
Andrew
CricketLeague
"Andrew Dunford" <adun...@artifax.net> wrote in message
news:5rju7oF...@mid.individual.net...
Andrew Dunford,
The people who complained that Lee was NOT mentioned in the
column were all native language English speakers.
That makes it so much more sweet.
ROFLMAO........
By the way I always knew you NEVER killfiled me and I already
PROVED it LOGICALLY. Read it one more time Andrew. Hehehe....
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.cricket/msg/208e08a4d04a7ea3?hl=en&
Nobody killfiles me despite their public posture because they know
I educate them.......:-))
CricketLeague
Dave -Turner
> I dont have to respond to lunatics.
rofl, I'm not the loony changing the titles of stories to make them involve
people who aren't even in the story. desperate fool.
Ian Thorpe
Oh its you, Dave Turner the lunatic.
Your english is as good as the morons who asked me where Lee
was mentioned in Peter Roebucks column.