Message Board Archives

Link Text

In using still pics to ascribe chucking you have painfully conceived folly .

the pics look damning , but Shoaib Ahktar I belive had a similar backward flex and his action was clean to the trained eyes who understand what actually qualifies as chucking.

In reply to Str8_Drive
Bumrah flexing tu rass,not pelting.

In reply to granite

i really trying to see a pelt

In reply to Str8_Drive

Without looking at the rule in question, I assume hyperflexion is okay but not flexion

In reply to Str8_Drive

Shoaib was only a bowler to pakistanis of the most fanatical type. I remember following a rawlpindi express demolition of india, the indian commentators were all but saying akhtar's action was illegal. Michael holding did a frame by frame hyper-extension comparison between akhtar and
RP singh who also had significant hyper-extension but was clearly a bowler. Here's the program
Link Text
Also a comparison between a bowler who was actually called and Bumrah at the same point
Link Text

In reply to db

James Kirtley was also reported in 2001 vs Zim.
The resemblance in action(to bumrah's) is startling.
A photo of his test is on the article
Link Text

In reply to Jumpstart
Msybe the economic power of India in world cricket has saved Bumra

In reply to db Could be, doc.

So because of hyper extension some people want to claim they are pelting,it appears far different from bowlers who do not have Hyperextension but have a bent arm just before delivery.Who want to call them pelters you are free to vent your anger.I and thousands maybe millions don't think they are pelting.

In reply to granite why you feel him angry?