Most knowledgeable cricket viewers have serious doubts about thepropriety of the bowling actions of a number of bowlers whom they havebeen watching closely over the years
V Ramnarayan15-Nov-2001Most of us in India watch cricket because we want to see India win. Weconstantly live in hope and find cheer in the smallest achievements ofour men, rare as they are. Over the years, we have, however, come tonot expect Indian victories and are quite willing to be satisfied withhonourable defeats. Unfortunately, we are denied even these smallmercies most of the time.
Most knowledgeable cricket viewers have serious doubts about thepropriety of the bowling actions of a number of bowlers whom they havebeen watching closely over the years. I have heard many of them,including Test umpires, voice strong opinions on the subject, althoughtheir public utterances may often be more politically correct. Equally depressing in international cricket are some other trends,which are not of India’s doing. I refer to the number of bowlers withsuspect actions dotting the scene and the irrational, even ethicallyunsustainable, stands sometimes taken by their respective cricketboards. The Pakistan Cricket Board has, for instance, announced thatit will support paceman Shoaib Akhtar if he challenges, in a court oflaw, the recent International Cricket Council decision to review thelegality of his bowling action. PCB officials have been reported asattributing any seeming abnormality in Akhtar’s action to a congenitalphysical idiosyncrasy. This is carrying a tired excuse to extremes,and the very idea that a member body can go to court against theparent is quite preposterous.Most knowledgeable cricket viewers have serious doubts about thepropriety of the bowling actions of a number of bowlers whom they havebeen watching closely over the years. I have heard many of them,including Test umpires, voice strong opinions on the subject, althoughtheir public utterances may often be more politically correct. Much asI admire the extraordinary qualities of head and heart of Sri Lankanoff-spinner Muttiah Muralitharan, I have strong reservations about thelegality of his bowling action, an opinion echoed by many aninternational cricketer, at least in private conversations.Increasingly, much of the debate among some of these expert spectatorsat Test matches tends to centre around the minor chucking epidemicthat seems to have swept international cricket. Doubts are frequentlyexpressed especially about the wrong ‘uns sent down by bowlers likeHarbhajan Singh and even Saqlain Mushtaq, the faster deliveries ofShahid Afridi, not to mention the express deliveries of Shoaib Akhtarand Brett Lee. Long experience suggests that what the naked eye of theexperienced cricketer sees is seldom proved wrong by technology.My own view on efforts by captains and cricket boards to defend thesuspect actions of their bowlers for emotional or patriotic reasonshas always been that it is just not cricket. It is an extremelydisappointing scenario that allows an Arjuna Ranatunga or a PCB tomake an international issue of what should remain a strictlycricketing problem of a technical nature, and subsequently takes awaythe powers of umpires on the field to rule on unfair bowling actions.Just as sadly, numerous cricket commentators of immense knowledge andexperience have supported such essentially political moves, forsakingthe time-honoured values of cricket. It is difficult to escape theconclusion that they are part of the gigantic promotional machinery ofthe cricket bandwagon that wants to perpetuate icons who sell, even ifthey are flawed.