Talk:Doosra

Untitled
cant we get an animation like they have for leg spin? and how about a photo of saqlain mushtaq rather than Bhajjii 's? Daneyal007 (talk) 21:19, 29 April 2010 (UTC) Has anyone ever seen the actual results of the ICC study into bowling actions? It's been widely reported, and was used as justification for changing the laws on legal bowling actions, but as far as I can tell no one outside of the ICC has actually seen the report.
 * Didn't the ICC try and make it private which stirred up some controversy by basically covering up the fact that some bowlers are throwing the ball? bacco007 10:03, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

They just plugged this article on TMS. --Jshecket 11:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Urdu
The word doosra comes from Urdu, and shouldnt be related to hindi. The move was invented by a Pakistani, and his language was Urdu. Please dont try to cram India in to everything Pakistan related. I dont see this happening the other way around. Unre4L ITY  23:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC) I am an urdu speaker, and even I find what you've said to be absurdly stupid. Doosra is a word, and it is in a language spoken by people in the subcontinent (both urdu and hindi). It has nothing to do with india/pakistan, there are many urdu-speakers in India.. all this emphasis on nationalism yet none on logic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.159.2.34 (talk) 05:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Dan Cullen
Much of the section on Dan Cullen is unencyclopedic presskit/fanclub material and should probably go. The mention of how much Cullen straigtens his arm isn't cited and doesn't mention whether this is true when he bowls his doosra, and in fact, it isn't confirmed that he even bowls one. How about we condense this section to something like: "South Australian Dan Cullen, yet to play Test cricket, is rumoured to bowl an international-standard doosra"? Thedangerouskitchen 07:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Hindi Script
An editor has claimed that the word Doosra is of Hindustani language. This is a lame excuse for imposing an irrelevant script as Hindustani language has split into two different languages i.e. Urdu and Hindi (based on cliams at Wikipedia). As the inventor was born in Pakistan and is a Pakistani citizen where Devangari script is as alien as dignity is to Wikipedia, therefore, addition of Devangari script is nothing but POV-pushing and an attempt to present Devangari as native to Pakistan which is wrong. Addition of Devangari is also an indirect claim over Doosra technique for India which has been the case in many other Pakistan related articles too. Such POV-pushing and false claims for India with scripts and other sneeky tactics should be stopped. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.49.116.55 (talk) 18:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC).


 * I don't care whether the article has Urdu, Hindi or Swahili scripts, but if you could spend a fraction of the effort that you spend in edit-warring in improving the articles of Pakistani cricketers, they wouldn't be uniformly bad as they are now. Tintin 19:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Well said. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.49.116.55 (talk) 21:40, 16 January 2007 (UTC).


 * Heh, a competition to get better article ratings on either India or Pakistani cricket bios....Well, I remember when Mahawiki kept on whacking Marathi tags on SRT, Tendulkar, Dravid, Agarkar, etc, and "claiming" cricketers without improving the article so that the readers can see what they actually achieved...Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

(RfC), Language Dispute
This cricket move was invented by a Pakistani, in Pakistan, and his language is Urdu. The word came into meaning because of a Pakistani guy speaking Urdu.

Now, why is there a need for having a description of Hindustani, and the hindi translation? The description has nothing to do with the article, but might and (just might) belong to the Urdu article.

I am requesting for comments on this. Should the article contain a description of Hindustani and have a trnaslation of hindi?

Please comment. -- Unre4L ITY  23:21, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Urdu and Hindi are the same spoken language with different scripts and literary vocabulary. The word doosra is also found in Hindi. Hindustani refers to the spoken langauge which is common. Personally, I don't see this as an important issue. Writing about the doosra is far more important than the writing the word doosra in another language. GizzaChat  &#169; 23:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

This is the problem. There is no need for Hindi. Hindi has nothing to do with the article itself. Its just there to be compared with Urdu, and we already have articles for that. But if you want translations, why not add Sindhi and Punjabi? They are Pakistani languages after all. But I am looking for someone who hasnt been involved in edit wars on this article, to comment on this.-- Unre4L ITY  23:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * There is no reason to go into the history of the word "do." Why stop at Hindustani, for that matter? Why not go to Indo-Aryan? I don't mean to be facetious, but the point I am making is that, in this context it is enough to give the meaning in the language that was first used to describe the delivery.  If the word was first used in Pakistan, then the Urdu script and meaning is all that is needed, it doesn't matter if the same word is also used in India or Bangladesh (with the same meaning) Hindustani in any case was long dead at the time the cricketing term was invented.  (However, Hindustani would apply to a page like pajamas.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  00:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Does anyone here know Maori ? We urgently need someone to put the Maori script in googly because there is a strong line of argument that it came from a Maori word after Bernard Bosanquet used it during the series in New Zealand in 1901-02. Tintin 02:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Maori??? Oh, dear. The 'doo' for 'two' (see?) is nothing to do with the Pacific. It also exists in Aramaic. Maybe someone will claim now that Aramaic is a Polynesian language ...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.97.116.85 (talk) 19:14, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

The word was Urdu. It was being used by a Pakistani coach, who told the cricketer to use the "doosra walla" (other one). Some commentator overheard this and used the word "doosra" to refer to the move. Urdu is the only language being used here mate. But if you have any sources for your claim... -- Unre4L ITY  04:18, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * What nationality was the commentator, as it was the commentator that popularized the term. The coach could've said "doosra walla" because he forgot the term they used to describe it, which may have been completely different, but the commentator made the ball called the doosra. :P So who was the commentator, if it was a NZ commentator then Maori might be the only solution.  Noble eagle  [TALK] [C] 04:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment by one entirely uninvolved with this article, of neither nationality. It seems to me there is a case for including the small Hindi script. As I don't think it's a matter of '"translation" but representation of a variation, which is to me encyclopedic. It detracts nothing from its Urdu origin, the word is the same, very much embraced by Indian culture, (no doubt used by scores who wouldn't recognize it written in arabic or latin script) and ultimately the "property" of the entire world of cricket. A similar instance with a Scandianvian word would most likely include the small differences between Danish, Swedish and Norwegian, uncontroversially. - M URGH  disc.  04:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * That's a good point, by the way Punjabi people would say "dujja", so no point of writing it in Punjabi. The word, the series of sounds, has meaning in Hindi and Urdu. Note that I'm not going to revert Unreal, as I have said so on his talk page.  Noble eagle  [TALK] [C] 04:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

You raise a good point, but it wasnt "only" the hindi script. In the article there still is a comment about hindi being the reason why the word gained popularity, and there was an unnecessary statement about urdu being related to hindustani (aka hindi-urdu, which is the term I prefer since hindustani is often mistaken for hindi). But I dont see why we need historical information here since this is a cricket related article. -- Unre4L ITY  05:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, sorry, I was referring only to the inclusion of the Hindi script. The jab about Hindi being the cause of "widespread popularity" strikes me as a very unnecessary, distinctly un encyclopedic tag-on, giving the impression of an edit with an agenda. - M URGH  disc.  20:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I suggest that anything beyond a single mention of the Urdu script be taken to Wiktionary and linked from here; either to doosra or to specific entries for the Hindi, Urdu, or other-language versions of this word. Wikipedia is not a storehouse of etymological information. -- Visviva 07:18, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, there are many Wikipedia articles that discuss the etymology of the word before expounding upon it. BBC, a reliable source, mentions both Hindi and Urdu in their doosra article (see here or here) so I see no problem in mentioning it here next to the Urdu. As DaGizza stated, the word has older Hindustani origins that made its way into the standard registers of Hindi and Urdu. Unre4L, like you I feel that that the widespread popularity phrase is unecessary but feel that the Hindi script (following Urdu) is acceptable. Please let me know if the following rewrite of the introduction is acceptable:

"A doosra (Urdu: دوسرا, Hindi: दूस्रा) (doo-srah) is a particular type of delivery by an off spin bowler in the sport of cricket. The term comes from Hindi-Urdu (do means two) and in this context it means 'the other one' (it literally means 'second' or 'the second one')."
 * I hope this helps. Looking forward to hearing your vaulable responses. Thanks, AnupamTalk 20:22, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello all. I have not received any responses to my comments and revised introduction (as shown above). If I do not receive any in the near future, I will change the introduction to my NPOV revised/consensus version, using the BBC sources as my reference. Cheers, AnupamTalk 18:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. I dont agree with you on this one. There is no need for the hindi text since the article is not about the Word, but the cricket throw. An introduction is only given because of A Pakistani cricketer inventing the move. Hindi is not related to this subject. The Cricketers language is Udru, and he was using urdu when referring to the term. 20:56, 19 January 2007 (UTC) Unre4L ITY 


 * Well thanks for your comments. Earlier in this discussion, you mentioned that you would consider suggestions as long as they are buttressed by sources. The BBC article on doosra mentions both Hindi and Urdu. If we are going to give a short sentence on etymology, we should give the complete picture. For example, see the pajama article, where Urdu, Persian, and Hindi are mentioned. For now, I have altered Urdu --> Hindi-Urdu in the etymology sentence. Your comments would be appreciated. With warm regards, AnupamTalk 03:26, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I am also open to suggestions for the hindi script. However, I dont think we should have a description of hindi in the article, or some claim that the word became popular because of hindi.

If you think the hindi script is important, then I guess it can be there, however any comparison of the languages should be kept to minimal since this is a cricket thread. -- Unre4L ITY  03:53, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Right, I agree with you. This sentence: The word has the same meaning in Hindi which helped it to gain widespread popularity. is definitely POV and I have thus removed it. For the reasons and sources I mentioned above, would it be okay if I readded the Hindi script? Looking forward to hearing from you soon. By the way, thanks for your prompt reply. With regards, AnupamTalk 04:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I guess it will be ok to add hindi script, if thats ok with Fowler&Fowler aswell. -- Unre4L ITY  15:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that's fine, but I think the inventor Saqlain M. should be mentioned by name in the lead. Any opinions?  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  02:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments. I think it would be a great idea to mention the inventor in the lead. The revised version could read as follows:
 * "A doosra (Urdu: دوسرا, Hindi: दूस्रा) (doo-srah) is a particular type of delivery by an off spin bowler in the sport of cricket, invented by Pakistani cricketer Saqlain Mushtaq. The term comes from Hindi-Urdu (do means two) and in this context it means 'the other one' (it literally means 'second' or 'the second one')."
 * Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks, AnupamTalk 02:47, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The root doo=two exists in many languages, including Aramaic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.97.116.85 (talk • contribs) 19:19, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

I think your revised version sounds reasonable and it would be okay with me if you put it up. Thx for your effort. Highly appreciated.  Unre4L ITY  03:39, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, thank you. Your concern was reasonable and you have been very genial in this discussion. Thanks for all your research and comments. With regards, AnupamTalk 04:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey, doosra is URDU words and used by Pakistani Off Spiner Bowlers,,,End of story.ok —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.12.194.68 (talk) 12:01, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Not 'OK' at all. The root doo=two exists in many languages, including Aramaic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.97.116.85 (talk • contribs) 19:19, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Removing Hindi
I am removing hindi from the article for following reasons: Political and cultural reasons:
 * The inventor of this bowling move does not speak Hindi and cannot read or write Devangari script.
 * Hindi and Devangari are not native to Pakistan; country of the inventor.
 * The inventor was born after 1947 in Pakistan, therefore, he cannot be related to so-called Hindustani language as it did not exist even at the time of his birth.
 * The term "doosra" was coined by Moin Khan, also a Pakistani, who, being born and raised in Pakistan, did not base this term on Hindi.
 * BBC Link given as "reliable source" only says: In Hindi and Urdu, doosra means "second" or "other". But does not explicitly say that Saqlain Mushtaq based this term on Hindi. One word having same meaning in two different languages is nothing to be amazed. In any such case of similarity of the meaning, we should prefer to cite only that language which is relevant to the subject.
 * Politically speaking, addition of Hindi scripts to Pakistan related articles is more of a political move rather than any good faith edit. Inclusion of Hindi in first line and paragraph where one can find that the inventor is a Pakistani gives an unfimiliar reader a strong impression that Hindi and its Devangari script are native to Pakistan. This is not only an out-right lie but also provactive as language is one of the factors which define a naion's and a country's culture. Putting Hindi in Pakistan related articles is a way of dminishing Pakistan's separate identity and points towards hidden political agendas brought to Wikipedia, hence, corrupting the reliablity of its articles.

Szhaider 17:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Consensus has been reached above.  — N o b l e e a g l e  [TALK]  [C] 06:29, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * A new discussion can be started at any time. And I believe I have provided plenty of material to do so. Three users joining against one user's opinions is hardly a consensus. Please discuss before any reversions. Szhaider 12:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

General Comment:All Bollywood artciles are accomp[anied by Urdu transliterations of title names. There is no agenda. Having said that i really feel no need for Devnagri. BTW Szhaider what makes you think Urdu is a Pakistani language. There are more native speakers of Urdu in India than Pakistan... Amey Aryan DaBrood&#169; 17:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for supporting me for removal of Devangari. My friend, Urdu was chosen by Quaid-e-Azam for Pakistanis. We do not have any exclusive claim over Urdu. We share it with millions of people around the world. However, we do not like to be attributed with what is not ours. Urdu and its Arabic script are used in India but Hindi and its Devangari script are not used in Pakistan. I know about Urdu in Bollywood articles, and there has been some debate among Indian editors whether to keep it or not. Frankly, I am not interested in Bollywood articles and whatever happens there, it does not concern me. Thank you again for supporting my point. 21:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Mr. Szhaider, the previous consensus did take days of effort and several comments before being restored the the version displayed above. Both Indian, Pakistani, and non South Asian editors participated in the discussion before reaching agreement. To address your issues: The etymology of a word will always be the same no matter what the topic is. Doosra will always be a Hindi-Urdu word (and yes, the languages evolved together). Hindustani still exists as the lingua franca of the northern Indian subcontinent. Both Hindi and Urdu are registers of Hindustani or Hindi-Urdu: See the definition of Hindi and the defintion of Urdu as given by "Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Copyright © 1997". BBC, a world wide known reliable source mentions both Hindi and Urdu when giving the origin of the word in brevity. I would agree to a compromise that would remove the Hindi script in the lead (per your wishes), although keeping the etymology section intact, based on the precedent BBC provides. Unre4L has kindly agreed to the previous version, suggesting that the academic term Hindi-Urdu be used rather than Hindustani. Hence, with all that said, a new compromise version would read as follows:
 * "A doosra (Urdu: دوسرا, doo-srah) is a particular type of delivery by an off spin bowler in the sport of cricket, invented by Pakistani cricketer Saqlain Mushtaq. The term comes from Hindi-Urdu (do means two) and in this context it means 'the other one' (it literally means 'second' or 'the second one')."
 * I hope this version will be acceptable to you and I will shortly change the article to reflect this version. If you do not agree with this version, please do not revert it but rather keep it as a median between your current version and the previous compromise version until others have provided their comments. In this way, an edit war will be prevented. I hope this helps. Looking forward to hearing from your valuable responses. With regards, AnupamTalk 22:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * No, it is not acceptable because of the term "Hindi-Urdu". It should be only Urdu given the reasons I have listed above. Szhaider 22:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, I can probably accept your current version then with a few grammar fixes. It would read as follows:


 * "A doosra (Urdu: دوسرا, doo-srah) is a particular type of delivery by an off spin bowler in the sport of cricket, invented by Pakistani cricketer Saqlain Mushtaq. The term comes from the word do, which means 'two' in Urdu and Hindi, and in this context means 'the other one' (it literally means 'second' or 'the second one')."


 * This version should be acceptable as it does not use the locution "Hindi-Urdu", to which you have objected. Please let me know how you feel about this version. Unitl then, I am changing the article to reflect this version. With regards, AnupamTalk 23:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

To quickly respond to Ambroody' claim that Urdu is "Indian",I'd like to point out you're wrong.Just because a country has a majority of speakers of that language,doesn't mean they can start claiming that language. For example,there are more English speakers in the world today than in England,and by Ambrooy's logic,it should not be known as a British language simply because the British are a minority among English speakers in the world today. Urdu is Pakistani because one of it's parent languages (sanscrit) originates in Pakistan.Ofcourse sanscrit being spoken by anceint Hindus is automatically clamied as "Indian" by Indian nationalists,when it infact isn't Indian really. So the point Ambroody,is that Urdu being spoken in India makes no difference.Urdu's other parent languages(Arabic,Farsi,Turkish etc.) do not originate in India.That should be enough to turn down your claim to Urdu being "Indian" Nadirali نادرالی


 * Why remove Devanagari? Wikipedia's first aim is to inform, not conform to political motives.  — N o b l e e a g l e  [TALK]  [C] 06:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * While I don't really see a point of Devenagiri here, I have always ALWAYS failed to see the point of providing ANY language other than english on english wikipedia.
 * Regarding 'sanscrit' being Pakistani, HAHAHAHA HAHAHAHA <- real laugh :))))) I hope some day User:Nadirali will be more learned and suffer less from identity crisis... <- not a personal attack! --æn↓þæµß¶-ŧ-¢ 21:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

teesra?
link to teesra? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.61.119.203 (talk) 22:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC).

Source for Murali section
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/49636.html was previously cited, but doesn't actually verify what it's cited as a source for. I've thus removed it for the moment. A new source would be useful for that section, since that one didn't really focus on the doosra anyway... 62.30.157.187 03:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Origins of the word "doosra"
An anonymous user has added the following paragraph a number of times:


 * I am not sure about the widely believed origin of the word doosra. If I remember correctly, it was during one of the test matches in Australia Mark Taylor and Tony Greig were discussing if Pakistani bowlers called this delivery by some name in their local language. Till then they called it the other one, and Tony Greig's limited Urdu language skills translated "other one" to "doosra". To me this is the origin of the word and not Moin Khan's reported use of this word.

This obviously belongs in the discussion page and not on the main page as it is an expression of opinion written in the first person. I have removed the offending paragraph. Before re-adding it or something similar, please discuss it here first and make sure to site some sources.--Siener (talk) 04:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Alternative versions of doosra
We should mention that the doosra is a particular technique used by finger spin bowlers to turn the ball the opposite direction to their usual delivery - but it is not the only technique. Whilst the wrong'un bowled out of the front of the hand with a finger spinner's action is rarely referred to as the doosra, it is effectively the same delivery and is actually a far more common delivery outside of the international arena. We should write a sentence on this at least...

It should also be corrected that the teesra is a backspinner, NOT a topspinner, as documented on teesra.

Jack Potter?
Amol Rajan's book "Twirlymen" states that Jack Potter was bowling the doosra in the 1960s. (Mentioned in this Cricinfo review.) The Jack Potter article here on WP also states that, so we have a mismatch between that article and the "invented by ... Saqlain Mushtaq" in this one. 86.132.142.224 (talk) 18:34, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

"it is unlikely that any off-spinner prior to him ever bowled a delivery which turned from leg"
This sentence is both utterly ridiculous and palpably incorrect. To suggest that in over 100 years of off-spin bowling, no cricketer, neither professional nor amateur, has ever bowled a variation that went the other way off the pitch is laughable. 213.70.98.2 (talk) 08:53, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

British English
I am surprised I have to explain this in such detail, but for those to whom it's not clear:
 * This article is about an aspect of cricket, a sport popular in the UK, India, and other Commonwealth countries (where British-style English is used, esp. as regards spelling), but not so popular in the US, where some other spelling rules apply. There's hardly any "strong national ties" to the US as described at MOS:RETAIN.
 * The article is clearly tagged with at the top of the article (third line in source edit view). That means the community has decided that BrEng is appropriate for this page, and it's been that way for nearly.
 * The spellings "levelled", "rumoured", and "sceptical" are British-style spellings and should be retained, to the US-centric spellings "leveled", "rumored", and "skeptical" as at User:Top Shot That's unexplained edits 1, 2, 3 and 4.

I will leave off mentioning edit-warring and edit summaries, as I want to focus on the content, not on disruption, and explain why I am again reverting to use the British spellings. I hope this will clarify the situation for User:Top Shot That and all other editors. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 00:00, 1 November 2021 (UTC)