Bangladesh news March 21, 2016

BCB files notice of review against Taskin suspension


Play 04:14
Chappell: Taskin, Sunny ban unfair to Bangladesh

The BCB is filing a notice of review with the ICC to appeal against Taskin Ahmed's suspension due to an illegal action, the board's chief executive Nizamuddin Chowdhury said. The BCB's move comes a day after it lodged an appeal with the ICC; board president Nazmul Hassan spoke to ICC chairman Shashank Manohar and chief executive David Richardson.

Taskin and left-arm spinner Arafat Sunny were suspended from bowling in international cricket on March 19, after an independent assessment found their bowling actions to be illegal. The pair were reported after Bangladesh's World T20 first-round match against Netherlands on March 9.

According to Chowdhury, the board is trying to expedite the review and is exploring the scope of review in line with the regulations. This is a more "by the book" approach compared to Hassan's actions, which the BCB president said was not the usual way of appealing for such a case.

"If any player asks for such a review the ICC tries to do it within a reasonable time," Chowdhury told ESPNcricinfo. "We are in touch with the ICC regularly so that we can expedite the review. Every regulation will have argument points for both parties. Whether this player will be in a position to participate in the remaining match will depend on the outcome of the discussion."

ESPNcricinfo has learned that the BCB is expecting a result of its review "within a day or two". The hearing could be held through a teleconference in the presence of the BCB and ICC officials and the player, though he can be represented by a legal expert.

ESPNcricinfo understands that the BCB will seek a review under article 2.3.1 of the ICC's regulations for the review of bowlers reported with suspected illegal bowling actions. This article deals with a Judicial Commissioner Review. It is learnt that neither the BCB nor Taskin are questioning the independent assessment report but the review is based on a procedural issue. Article 2.2.15 of the ICC's regulations states that: "in circumstances where the Player contends that the ICC has not followed its own procedures under these Regulations in the lead up to and/or during an Independent Analysis, the Player shall be entitled to seek a review of the procedural aspects of his case by a Judicial Commissioner".

The ICC, on Sunday, said that the umpires in the Bangladesh-Netherlands match had cited general concerns about Taskin's bowling action. According to BCB sources, however, the fast bowler was suspended after three of the nine bouncers he bowled during the assessment were deemed to have been bowled with an illegal action.

According to the ICC's regulations for the review of bowlers reported with suspected illegal bowling actions, during the assessment a medium fast/fast bowler will be required to bowl a minimum of six good-line and length deliveries, six yorkers and six bouncers, along with any other variations they usually bowl or that have been reported as suspect by the match officials. Taskin reportedly was asked to bowl these three types of deliveries because the umpires didn't specify a particular variation of a delivery in their report.

"The umpires cited general concern with his action in the match report, as they suspected it could be illegal based on what they observed in the match," an ICC spokesperson told ESPNcricinfo. "They are entitled to report their concerns relating to any bowler, and that bowler will then be independently tested.

"A medium/fast bowler is required to deliver yorkers, length deliveries and bouncers because an assessment of these lengths of delivery is considered to be an assessment of his standard bowling action. If any of these deliveries are illegal, his action is considered to be illegal. As there were no other variations specifically cited in the umpires' report, he was only required to deliver these three lengths during the assessment. The lab assessed that some of his deliveries were under the 15-degree tolerance, and some were over. He was therefore suspended."

Mohammad Isam is ESPNcricinfo's Bangladesh correspondent. @isam84

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Mahmudul on March 22, 2016, 20:21 GMT

    @a4abhik, I understand the confusion but it does not imply "atleast 6 deliveries". These are legal bindings, and a whole lot is at stake fro the players and teams. I'm not only talking about Bangaladesh or Taaskin but any player or a Team who will be reported for action. Nowhere in the ICC document it says "at least". If you see the doc it says "six 'bouncers'" and that's the binding requirement.

    I believe, there has to be check and balance. These are professional players and in most cases this is the mode of their livelihood. By unfairly punishing one you are taking away that. If a player makes a mistake he is punished but do you think if those who are testing makes mistake should also be punished monetarily? I think it should and that will be the check and balance. It was nice having a civilized conversation! :)

  • jeevan on March 22, 2016, 19:55 GMT

    People are so ignorant.. always complaining about BCCI.. if any one follow our domestic cricket or not i am not sure, the bowling action of bowlers are thoroughly checked at domestic cricket level, for eg iqbal abdulla who plays for mumbai has to sit out from ranji team and there are other bowlers been asked to remodel there action prgayan ojha, there are lots of other domestic players,

  • Abhik on March 22, 2016, 18:58 GMT

    @DUR_POROBASH ON MARCH 22, 2016, 16:58 GMT :

    In this very news report itself, where we all are giving comments, the author Isam clarifies that "According to the ICC's regulations for the review of bowlers reported with suspected illegal bowling actions, during the assessment a medium fast/fast bowler will be required to bowl a minimum of six good-line and length deliveries, six yorkers and six bouncers, along with any other variations they usually bowl or that have been reported as suspect by the match officials. "

    And even if you go by the quote of the ICC document, the link of which you given in your comment, it says ""In respect of a fast bowler, six „normal' - good length deliveries, six 'yorkers' and six 'bouncers' MUST be recorded." Isn't it simply self-explanatory with respect to the context that, 'at least' 6 deliveries of each kind to be recorded, not less than that; but more than 6 can be required to delivered too if needed to check as there's no upper limit is specified?

  • Mahmudul on March 22, 2016, 16:58 GMT

    @Jose...P, Could you please specify where you saw "minimum of six ball" in the ICC regulation. Here's the direct quote from the ICC regulation: "In respect of a fast bowler, six „normal' - good length deliveries, six 'yorkers' and six 'bouncers' must be recorded. Six deliveries of each spin variation for the leg or off spin bowler must be recorded. Standard video cameras should be used to assess the position the ball lands, along with the amount of bounce and turn created with each delivery. " If you think I came up with that regulation, please see the regulation doc at the link below.

    I'm eagerly waiting for your response with your source.

  • Jose on March 22, 2016, 10:44 GMT

    Glad that it is the "human interventions in technology" as Dhoni put it once, in a different context, which is being questioned and not technology per se.

    Biomechanis is a well grounded scientific discipline. (There had been rules governing what is a "grounded theory", since the fag end of the 19th century).

    The first major book on Biomechanics (De Motu Animalium of Giovanni Alfonso Borelli) was published in the 17th century.

    Its applications in Sports Medicine started in the early parts of last century, though cricket adopted it for testing bowlers only a decade or so ago.

    It is not like the UDRS technologies which still have not reached the status of 'grounded' science. Various components of DRS had not yet been whetted out. They had not yen been opened up for scrutiny by the world at large.

    So, the work done by highly qualified experts in the well equipped and globally accredited labs need not deserve the critiques from 'cyber experts' like us.

  • Omkar on March 22, 2016, 10:12 GMT

    Bangladesh has every right to ask for a review if they feel there were procedural lapses in the assessment. However to say that it is unfair to ban someone in the middle of a WC is irrational. A bowler can

  • raghu on March 22, 2016, 10:12 GMT

    sunil naraine (KKR) was before the final of champions league and probably was d the difference in the finals. so no question of wrong timing. b mature n stop blaming officials n umpiring

  • Jose on March 22, 2016, 9:48 GMT

    @JITENDRA ON MARCH 21, 2016, 13:41 GMT

    Jitendra, I know it. I had been a Professor since 1966. Still teaches well after retirement.

    We never penalise students, as long as they quote the correct source. And quote it correctly. And we also assign different weightage of credibility to different sources. Most of us experienced enough to gauge the students' own contribution. So, please don't worry about my credibility.

    Quoted Wiki, since it is written by commoners in commoners' language (not in legalese or rulebook dictum). It is certainly no worse than quoting each other, here in these threads. Wiki has after all immensely larger readership & subject to correction, unlike the posts here. I had been an assigned editor of Wikipedia in my areas of specialization.

    In another post, I had quoted from ICC's protocol, in another post. Used different modes, for different reader segments.

    Please don't worry about academic credibility & integrity. many of us teachers are taking care of it.

  • Pundit on March 22, 2016, 7:00 GMT

    I am Pakistan supporter, and in a way can understand the way Bangladesh supporters feel. The timing is all wrong, why can't they wait until the tournament is completed, also it's not like he choking everything...possibly jus the bouncer, so. Just warn him on that and address it after the event! Also it seems strange perhaps coincidental that it is always certain teams who appear to be subject to this. I dare say under close close scrutiny other bowlers from powerful boards could also be be done so to say. From the outside it looks that way but I guess it is sometime about how,your face fits into and the fact you have no power to cause an issue! My advice to Bangladesh is to get on with it and work even harder to prove your self as you may be playing against more than 11 players in the opposition!

  • Nasim on March 22, 2016, 6:18 GMT

    A lot of cricket is being played now. The on field umpires and the match officials unable to maintain equal scanning for all the bowlers. It is better to make a quarterly independent assessment of all the bowlers to check the illegal delivery, like the mandatory drug test for the players. Then every one will be equally treated.

  • No featured comments at the moment.