England & Pakistan in UAE 2012

[Banglatiger84]

Would be great to see a Pakistan-South Africa or Pakistan-India 3 Test series right now

[zinatf]

Bravo Misbah and Co. BRILLIANT JOB!!

[simon]

Eoin Morgan is useless in Tests,should only play limited over games.
overpraising KP is not doing any good to his performance.
a BIG mistake Eng made is by not moving Prior up the order.

cute boy of Hafeez

[Dilscoop]

So ajmal's a chucker...

[Khaaan!!!!]

^^^
if Ajmal is a chucker then so is Murli

[Dilscoop]

Murali is a chucker. He is so badass that they had to change the freaking rule for him.

With Ajmal's recent mumbling, it's pretty clear that ICC's allowed him to chuck a bit because of his accident.

[Samurai_Ali]

Originally Posted by Dilscoop
Murali is a chucker. He is so badass that they had to change the freaking rule for him.

With Ajmal's recent mumbling, it's pretty clear that ICC's allowed him to chuck a bit because of his accident.

The facts about Saeed Ajmal


ESPNcricinfo can today provide the facts that prove the legality of Saeed Ajmal's bowling action.

Ajmal was Man of the Series against England after taking 24 wickets in the three-Test series and playing a prominent role in Pakistan's first Test whitewash against England.

Ajmal caused confusion when he gave a TV interview following the series and appeared to indicate he had been given dispensation by the ICC to bowl above the 15-degree tolerance limit.

Countless fans have contacted ESPNcricinfo through social networking sites and by email asking us to clarify the situation regarding Ajmal. After a thorough investigation, including extensive discussion with the ICC, these are the facts.

Ajmal's action is well within the ICC range of tolerance. While he does bowl with a bend in his arm, it does not straighten more, on average, than about eight degrees.
His arm does come through at a bent angle but that is allowed so long as it doesn't straighten beyond the tolerance level.

The figure of 23.5 degrees mentioned by Ajmal is the average angle of his arm at the beginning of delivery.

The ICC put Ajmal, along with other bowlers, under constant scrutiny and evidence suggests that there has been no significant deterioration in Ajmal's action since he was tested in 2009.

Contrary to widespread belief, Ajmal's off-break and quicker ball actually cause his arm to straighten more - though only a fraction more - than his much-debated doosra.
The ICC is reluctant to discuss bowling actions in detail because officials fear the subject is too complicated to explain.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/pakistan...ry/552579.html

[Navo]

^^ pwned

[Dilscoop]

@Ali, I said what I said AFTER reading that article. "ICC won't explain it because it's complicated." I sure hope ICC doesn't think the general people too dumb to understand w/e they have to say...

Ajmal chucks. Just like Shakib is the number 1 ALR. Just quite bending the truth. (bending the truth, you see what I did there.)

[Samurai_Ali]

Originally Posted by Dilscoop
@Ali, I said what I said AFTER reading that article. "ICC won't explain it because it's complicated." I sure hope ICC doesn't think the general people too dumb to understand w/e they have to say...

Ajmal chucks. Just like Shakib is the number 1 ALR. Just quite bending the truth. (bending the truth, you see what I did there.)

*sigh*

I don't get it. Are people so bitter, so stubborn that they are doubting scientific studies. I mean seriously, do you even know the rules about a lawful bowling action?

For all those who are interested, not only in this issue but would like to see how professionally ICC has gone about dealing with "dodgy" bowling actions should listen to the 16 min podcast of George Dobell on cricinfo. I don't know if its allowed here but a member of PakPassion "Whippy" has very kindly transcribed it. I'll paste it here. Mods can delete it if its not allowed.

This is a must for cricket fans.

'The bottom line is that Ajmal's action is absolutely fine. It is well within the ICC parameters for international cricket. The confusion came about because you had a man talking, in not even his second language, about a very complex bio-mechanical process. Understandably, he became a little bit confused. To be honest, I'm not sure Ajmal completely understands how it works either - I think he has a very natural action, and he doesn't really think about it. He became confused, and he said something which caused this controversy. Ajmal was talking about being allowed to bowl with a 23.5 degree of flexibility in his action. I think what he meant is that, just before he bowls, when his arm is gathering behind his back, the angle of the elbow bend is about 23 or 24 degrees. Nothing particularly abnormal about that; nothing at all illegal about that either.

As Ajmal's arm comes over, and he bowls, and he goes through his delivery, he's actually bowling with an arm bent at about 16 degrees - again quite legal. This means that the degree of flexibility in that action is about 8 degrees, which is well within the 15 degree limit. Where there is confusion is that people think you can't bowl with a bent arm; you absolutely can, nothing against that at all. If you bowl with a bent arm you should, of course, finish with a bent arm, just as you would bowl with a straight arm and finish with a straight arm, as long as the arm doesn't change more than 15 degrees - that's the key thing. Ajmal's doesn't.

There's a further complication with him, in that his elbow rotates in the action as he delivers the ball by about 15 degrees. Which again is fine, but it gives the illusion to the camera that it may have straightened, which is why photographic evidence of Ajmal's bowling can look quite damning. This is to reiterate, however, an illusion.

I went to the ICC this morning; I've seen the report conducted by the University of Western Australia in 2009, when Ajmal was reported after concerns about his action. I thought at the start of the meeting that they should publish the full report, so that everyone could read it and understand it - but it's just too complicated. And the problem is that some of the photographs in the report are quite misleading! They show Ajmal with a bent arm and what appears to be a bent arm afterwards. It's an illusion - the cameras do lie. The report is many pages long, deeply scientific, and the ICC have been through it in great detail. They are satisfied the action is fine. Having seen all of the information, so am I. To be honest, I was before. I don't think there's any problem whatsoever with his action.

This came about because you had a man trying to give an interview, out of good will it's worth saying, in a foreign language, and about a very complex subject. So, it really doesn't amount to that much, and hopefully he'll be able to carry on, and hopefully the media will ignore it in the future.

There really isn't any room for cynicism at all. It's not a matter of opinion, this one. Cricket's all about opinions, and it's great that we all have different opinions. This one isn't. This is factual. You cannot argue with the science. I could go into a lot more detail - I could say they tested his doosra, they tested his offie, they tested his quicker ball. It didn't really make a lot of difference. Funnily enough, with his doosra his arm straightened less, so it's even more legal, if you like. It was actually his off-break, which nobody's really had any complaints about, that had the greater degree of change.

The other point to make is that all the international umpires were given a copy of this report, and they can compare any of the images in the report with any deliveries Ajmal bowls in the match at any time. So, if there were any concerns last week, the umpires could have freeze-framed the deliveries, and compared them with the deliveries that he bowled in Western Australia in 2009. They are identical. I don't know anything about Ajmal's teesra - I haven't seen it. Maybe if he bowls that we can all look at it again, and the speculation will renew. That's something to look forward to, isn't it? [Sarcastically] But as far as his doosra and his offie go, his action hasn't changed, he was cleared in 2009 - there's absolutely no grounds at all to suspect that anything has changed, and that his action is anything other than good.

What's really unfortunate is that this has been a really keenly contested series in a difficult context - we all know about what happened in 2010, and the certain animosity there's been between England and Pakistan for, on the whole, about 20 years or so. This series has been pretty good. I mean, England have taken a complete beating, but the spirit between the sides has been very good, partly thanks to the captains. It's been really entertaining, despite the 3-0 result which makes it look a bit one-sided. It would be a real shame if people who didn't quite understand the situation used this [the Ajmal controversy] as a stick to beat the Pakistan side with, because it's just not fair. There's nothing wrong with Saeed Ajmal, and English cricket would do much better to learn from him than moan about him.

Now, it might be that they know that already. I haven't heard any of the players moan about Saeed Ajmal. I know Andy Flower's backing of him has had the odd caveat in it, but he's hasn't said anything negative. I think, generally, it's the media looking for a somewhat facile story, and hopefully this clears it up.'

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/sh...1&postcount=16

This is an absolutely brilliant piece of sporrts journalism. The guy actually went to ICC's HQ. Went through the Uni. of Western Australia's report. I mean cmon is there anything left to discuss.

Earlier i had talked about the rules. How many knew this, because I certainly didn't.

Where there is confusion is that people think you can't bowl with a bent arm; you absolutely can, nothing against that at all. If you bowl with a bent arm you should, of course, finish with a bent arm, just as you would bowl with a straight arm and finish with a straight arm, as long as the arm doesn't change more than 15 degrees - that's the key thing. Ajmal's doesn't

As to Dilscoop's comment about ICC thinking the people are too dumb. Well some are but I suppose the wise among t us should ask for a copy so the can verify the findings in their personal bio-mechanical labs.

I went to the ICC this morning; I've seen the report conducted by the University of Western Australia in 2009, when Ajmal was reported after concerns about his action. I thought at the start of the meeting that they should publish the full report, so that everyone could read it and understand it - but it's just too complicated. And the problem is that some of the photographs in the report are quite misleading! They show Ajmal with a bent arm and what appears to be a bent arm afterwards. It's an illusion - the cameras do lie. The report is many pages long, deeply scientific, and the ICC have been through it in great detail. They are satisfied the action is fine. Having seen all of the information, so am I. To be honest, I was before. I don't think there's any problem whatsoever with his action.

The ICC, the UWA and umpires all seem to be in agreement. But then again PCB could have bought them all to help out a 34 year old spinner.

[Khaaan!!!!]

Originally Posted by Dilscoop
@Ali, I said what I said AFTER reading that article. "ICC won't explain it because it's complicated." I sure hope ICC doesn't think the general people too dumb to understand w/e they have to say...

Ajmal chucks. Just like Shakib is the number 1 ALR. Just quite bending the truth. (bending the truth, you see what I did there.)

you can either bitch about it, or produce bowlers who can bowl the doosra. ICC has no invested interest in Ajmal and neither does PCB have enough pedigree in International Cricket. Ajmal is well within the 15 degree rule, and ICC have vouched for that in the past, even if they dont release the document.

[zman]

I used to think Ajmal's bowling action was suspicious looking. Wasn't fully aware of the interpretation of the 16 degree rule. The below excerpt was enough to convince me his action is legal. Nice find.

"when his arm is gathering behind his back, the angle of the elbow bend is about 23 or 24 degrees. Nothing particularly abnormal about that; nothing at all illegal about that either.

As Ajmal's arm comes over, and he bowls, and he goes through his delivery, he's actually bowling with an arm bent at about 16 degrees - again quite legal. This means that the degree of flexibility in that action is about 8 degrees, which is well within the 15 degree limit."

[zman]

Congrats to Pak on their first ever whitewash of Eng. Mind Bending stuff.

[Dilscoop]

I choose to bitch about it.


He has been given a "special offer" because of his disability, as stated by Ajmal.

[Zunaid]

Originally Posted by Dilscoop
I choose to bitch about it.


He has been given a "special offer" because of his disability, as stated by Ajmal.

Nope. Ajmal didn't understand his own clearance by the ICC.

Resolved once and for all here. Report by a Brit himself:

Consider yourself bitch-slapped.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/pakistan...ry/552586.html
Unravelling the mystery of Ajmal

The ICC have explained the science behind the offspinner's action after a TV interview caused confusion
George Dobell in Dubai
February 8, 2012

	Saeed Ajmal's arm straightens, on average, by eight degrees when bowling - well within the ICC limit © Getty Images Enlarge
Related Links News : Ajmal comment sparks action confusion Analysis : England fail first trial by spin Analysis : Pakistan ride on spin success Report : Pakistan secure series whitewash Players/Officials: Saeed Ajmal Series/Tournaments: England tour of United Arab Emirates Teams: England | Pakistan

A combination of language difficulties and scientific misunderstanding created the confusion over the legitimacy of Saaed Ajmal's bowling action.
Ajmal, man of the series as Pakistan inflicted a 3-0 whitewash upon England in the Test series in the UAE, sparked confusion in the aftermath of the third Test by appearing to suggest that the ICC had given him special dispensation to straighten his arm beyond the 15-degree tolerance currently permitted.

Speaking to the BBC, Ajmal appeared to volunteer the fact that the ICC had allowed him 23.5 degrees to compensate for an accident in which he injured his arm. Ajmal said: "Someone is telling me my action is bad because the ICC allowed me as a bowler 23.5 degrees, because my arm is not good. A few years ago I had an accident. Otherwise, no problem, the action was cleared by ICC."

The ICC soon denied that was the case and issued a partial explanation but a separate statement from the PCB seemed only to further muddy the waters due to an understandable, though unfortunate, error.

ESPNcricinfo has visited the ICC's headquarters in Dubai, spoken to David Richardson, the ICC's general manager of cricket and seen the report compiled by the ICC's Panel of Human Movement at the University of Western Australia in 2009, and can now clarify the misunderstanding.

The bottom line is this: Saeed Ajmal's action is well within the ICC range of tolerance. It is legal. While he does bowl with a bend in his arm, it does not straighten more, on average, than about eight degrees.

Now for the science bit: as Ajmal begins to bring his arm over to bowl, there is, on average, a 23.5 degree bend in his elbow (elbow flexion) - the angle to which Ajmal referred in his BBC interview. As he delivers the ball, his arm straightens (elbow extension) by, on average, eight degrees - well within the 15-degree range of tolerance for international cricket set by the ICC.

This means that his arm is flexed by around 15.5 degrees at the moment of delivery - but it is vital to remember that it is quite legal to bowl with a bent arm: it is the degree that it straightens from the bend that is monitored.

The situation with Ajmal is complicated further by the fact that his elbow also abducts - or rotates sideways - by around 15 degrees in delivery. This is not something that is limited by the rules on the bowling action but helps to create the illusion that his arm has straightened more than it has in reality.

Many well known international bowlers - including bowlers from England - have demonstrated similar amounts of flexion and straightening but, due to the way Ajmal's elbow abducts, the straightening in his action can appear magnified.

While this has led to some apparently incriminating photographs, in this instance the camera can certainly mislead, if not lie.

Furthermore, contrary to widespread conjecture, Ajmal's off-break and quicker ball actually cause his arm to straighten more - though only a fraction more - than his doosra. The 2009 tests also obliged Ajmal to demonstrate his quicker ball - a delivery that approaches 100kph - and found that, in terms of flex and abduction, it did not differ from his stock delivery.

	"Ajmal's action has led to some apparently incriminating photographs but in this instance the camera can mislead if not lie"

Any umpire with any concern over Ajmal's action - or that of any other previously tested bowler - has the facility to freeze-frame any delivery from any international match and compare it to images taken during the test procedure at the University of Western Australia. It is understood that there has been no significant change in Ajmal's action since the tests in 2009.
Ajmal, in conducting an interview in a foreign language and attempting to explain a complex bio-mechanical process, inadvertently awakened a controversy that should have been resolved in 2009.

Ajmal tormented the England batsmen in all three Tests, claiming 24 wickets in the series at an average of just 14.7. Their inability to distinguish between his off-break and doosra caused particular confusion and vastly reduced the effectiveness of England's much-vaunted middle order. Ian Bell, Eoin Morgan and Kevin Pietersen all failed to average more than 13.

Richardson confirmed on Tuesday that Ajmal's action does not fall outside the 15-degree tolerance limit. "There is nothing preventing a bowler bowling with a bent arm, provided he does not straighten it beyond the permitted degrees of tolerance," he said.

The PCB also issued a statement attempting to clarify the situation although their claim that Ajmal's elbow has a natural angle of 23 degrees didn't match Richardson's explanation that it was 15 degrees, which also happens to be the ICC's tolerance limit for the degree of elbow extension (elbow straightening). It appears, in retrospect that the PCB confused flexion - which is the amount the elbow bends - with abduction - which is the sideways movement of the elbow.

The accident to which Ajmal referred took place on a bus while he was on Pakistan duty. The ICC suspect, however, that the unusually high elbow abduction - the angle at which the forearm leads from the elbow - has been with him from birth.
Differing opinions are, generally, to be welcomed and respected. On this subject, however, there can be no room for further speculation or doubt. Ajmal's action is fine. That is a scientific fact.

George Dobell is a senior correspondent at ESPNcricinfo
Feeds: George Dobell © ESPN EMEA Ltd.

[Dilscoop]

They said that about Murali as well, but that never stopped the speculation or doubt. That won't happen here either.

I never cared whether he chucks or not. Could careless if he bowls a tensra upside down. But does it get on their nerve? Yes.

[Zunaid]

Originally Posted by Dilscoop
They said that about Murali as well, but that never stopped the speculation or doubt. That won't happen here either.

I never cared whether he chucks or not. Could careless if he bowls a tensra upside down. But does it get on their nerve? Yes.

You don't care but you've been the posting the most on this topic on this here thread. Plus you have to care if you care enough to bitch, hein?

The sound of furious backpedaling is ominously loud.

[Dilscoop]

No, honestly I don't. At first I said it while I was on the bus. Khaaaaaaaannn!!! popped out of no where, in no time and replied. I was bored and it all went from there. But you had to ruin it.

And they can't except the fact that Shakib is #1 ALR. It's a scientific fact as well (I sound like a redneck)

[Zunaid]

Originally Posted by Dilscoop
And they can't except the fact that Shakib is #1 ALR. It's a scientific fact as well (I sound like a redneck)

Now, that's etched on the tablets Moses brought down from the mountain.

[Zeeshan]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ly9riuMMda...b0_2379630.jpg

[zsayeed]

Originally Posted by Zeeshan
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ly9riuMMda...b0_2379630.jpg

Bhaiya , etar ortho ki ai thread -e - bujhlamna.

[Dilscoop]

^ you wasted 30 extra 2nds then you had to. Before you know it, you'll older than Z.

[Samurai_Ali]

International Cricket Council general manager Dave Richardson talk about Saeed's action. [video]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/16948894

[Navo]

Originally Posted by Dilscoop
No, honestly I don't. At first I said it while I was on the bus. Khaaaaaaaannn!!! popped out of no where, in no time and replied. I was bored and it all went from there. But you had to ruin it.

And they can't except the fact that Shakib is #1 ALR. It's a scientific fact as well (I sound like a redneck)

Pakistani users and defenders of Ajmal's honour, Dilscoop was merely trolling.

Thanks for clarifying the details about Ajmal's action. Interesting stuff.

[Equinox]

Did anyone see the shot Shehzad, the Afghan wicket-keeper, just played against Ajmal?