|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Saturday, 20 November 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Sports | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
Keeping pace with the times In this modern age where technology supersedes everything else, the old die-hards of cricket must come to accept the fact that recent evidence unearthed by the International Cricket Council's (ICC) on fast and slow bowlers however astonishing, must be accepted whether it is against their conscience. If technology can be used to determine the dismissals of batsmen which has now become an accepted fact then why not when it is extended to other areas of the game? The astounding evidence that has surfaced with regard to the bowling actions of some of the leading bowlers of today is something that the past cricketers are finding difficult to accept. They have been brought up in an era where the umpire's word was law. But with the advent of technology and its frequent use in cricket, times have changed so much that even the umpire has to now and again rely on it to ascertain certain decisions which the human eye has failed to detect. In this context one has to agree with Sri Lanka's spinning icon Muttiah Muralitharan when he said that people who have accused him of being a 'chucker' are ignorant of the bio-mechanics of the arm. In a carefully worded statement Muralitharan said: Science is accepted in all other walks of life. The ICC Cricket Committee has recommended an increase in the tolerance levels to 15 degrees for all bowlers because high speed photographic evidence and the analysis carried out by three specialist scientists (2 Australian and 1 English) have proved to them beyond doubt that bowlers who had smooth actions that could not be detected by the naked eye do not bowl within the present law. These are bowlers who are said by most cricketers to have pure actions. They have never been subjected to any scrutiny, let alone accusations of 'chucking', although research by human movement scientists in the recent past had revealed that the majority of fast bowlers were bowling outside the current law." For years Muralitharan had endured the unjustified allegations of being branded a 'chucker' by leading past and present cricketers. In his own words: "I have attempted to maintain my dignity and have tried to keep away from personal controversy pending the results of the recent ICC committee's investigation and analysis of the entire issue." It all began when he was first no-balled for throwing by Australian umpire Darrel Hair in a Test match at Melbourne nine years ago. Since then, apparently jealous at his outstanding achievements with the ball certain past and present cricketers began taking a dig at his bowling action. Whenever a chucking controversy arose it was Muralitharan's name that was thrown up first as an example. One area where Muralitharan has scored over other bowlers with suspected bowling actions is that he has never attempted to bowl in long sleeves to try and hide the fact that his arm is bent. "I have always known that I am innocent of the accusation of chucking. I have never been never scared to be scrutinised by experts, cameras or commentators," he said. Going overboard The recent findings of the ICC's bowling committee gave Muralitharan a new lease of life. "I believe that science has vindicated me," he said. Probably unable to control his delight he went slightly overboard by expressing his views on it much to the embarrassment of opposing bowlers and his own cricket board. He has in a press release stated that he had never called anyone a 'chucker' and that he had been misinterpreted. One has to accept Muralitharan's word unless otherwise refuted. Where Muralitharan transcended and got into troubled waters was that he did not seek prior permission from his employers - Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) before talking to an Australian radio station that was keen to get his views. As a player contracted to SLC it was obligatory that he does so. Failure to do so is to be unprofessional. At this level of competition such failures should be tantamount to being chastised. Failure to do so by the relevant authorities will only lead to indiscipline. No one is above the law and SLC should treat all players alike whether they are icons or just ordinary members of the national team. And Muralitharan is no greenhorn being the second most capped player for his country after Sanath Jayasuriya. This is not the first time Muralitharan has been found to be on the wrong side of the fence. There was a previous instance where the cricket board had to caution him for speaking out too loudly by delving into an area which he should not have treaded when he criticised its administration. We reliably understand that the SLC Executive committee which meets on Tuesday will discuss the issue and then decide on what course of action they should take. The cricketing world awaits their decision. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
