Let science be the judge

Muralitharan - let science decide his fate © Getty Images Enlarge

We can safely assume that Chris Broad will not be booking his winter holiday this year on the palm-fringed beaches of Sri Lanka's west coast beaches. He might not be lynched, but his morning mango juice could well be spiked if he did. Broad has hurt a nation, and he will no longer be welcome.

However, this is not the time for kneejerk emotional and racially tinged reaction. Whether Sri Lanka likes it or not, the legality of Muralitharan's action is the subject of a polarised debate throughout the world. When Wisden.com's old computerised rankings system named Murali as the best bowler in the history of Test cricket it prompted an avalanche of complaints.

But for Sri Lanka, and indeed many in Asia, Murali is far more than a prodigious wicket-taker. His success on the field gives millions of people, who have a history of subjugation and oppression still etched on their soul from colonial times, reason to dream of a better world, a world of equality and opportunity.

In this context, we should not be surprised by the emotional backlash to Muralitharan's reporting by Broad. There are familiar strings to this latest chucking controversy, including the involvement of Australia and the context of a major milestone just ahead, which gives people some reason to be suspicious.

Broad has not helped himself by not checking his facts. The assertion that Muralitharan's doosra is "new" is, quite frankly, ludicrous. Murali first learnt the delivery from a schoolfriend called Priya Wickramatunga at St Antony's College. He started to bowl it in international cricket post-1996, and has mastered it in the last 12 months.

Those of us who have watched Murali, series after series, have seen him bowl it a thousand times. Just read old newspapers on the web and see how India's journalists marvelled at the delivery way back in 2001. That same year, Broad was a commentator for TalkSport Radio in Sri Lanka.

The problem here is the power of the English media, coupled with Murali's mischievous nature - which he learnt from Shane Warne, who announces a new delivery each tour. When England were the visitors last year he played along with Fleet Street, preparing them for new tricks which were never there.

Murali does not possess a slider, a flipper, a googly, a zooter or a legspinner. He has two deliveries: an offbreak and a top-spinner, which is actually the one that has now been dubbed the doosra. This delivery has been perfected, he claims, not by any straightening of the arm but by the increasing strength of his elastic wrist.

Of course, Broad is quite entitled to question the legality of any delivery, no matter when it was first conceived. Unfortunately, though, his assertion that it is "new", because he has been told so by "informed sources", has undermined his credibility in Sri Lanka - every tri-shaw driver in town knows that's tripe.

Ross Emerson's recent comments in the Melbourne Age have added fuel to this conspiratorial perception. Emerson, who no-balled Muralitharan for throwing in 1996 and 1998, has revealed that he was encouraged to do so by officials within the Australian Cricket Board. Emerson says: "The ACB never told me his action was all right. Quite the contrary, [an ACB official] encouraged me to call him a week before Adelaide in January 1998."

So Broad has walked into a hornet's nest and out of Arjuna Ranatunga's Christmas-card list. But while the inevitable emotional backlash is understandable and predictable, it must be suppressed. This is not a time for the heart but for the head. Cool rational and scientific analysis is required.

Murali's bowling action is complex, unique and weird. It's a natural action that cannot be untangled by the naked eye. Many people have strong opinions based upon what they have seen in still photographs and on television, but these are extremely misleading. People must base their opinions on science.

Many believe Murali's testing by the University of Western Australia in 1996 was a sham. But how many have seen the actual report? Contrary to popular opinion, the conclusion was not simply that he had a congenital deformity and therefore could not straighten his arm. Yes, his permanently bent arm was identified. But, also, no partial straightening was detected from six different cameras, shooting at a fifty frames per second.

How many people realise that after these tests, Murali undertook two further - and voluntary - tests on his bowling action, in Hong Kong in 1996 and in England in 1999? Those even used sensors on his arms and elbow to detect partial movement - and again the conclusion was that his action was legal.

Unfortunately, the whole debate is clouded by high emotions and misinformation on both sides. The Sri Lanka board, which jumped on the racial bandwagon in 1996 and in 1998, must shoulder some blame for this and must understand that greater transparency is required this time. The bio-mechanical reports on his action should have been published after 1996.Too many people do not know what was in the original report.

Likewise, respected commentators, like Michael Parkinson, should be more careful in what they say. Nicknaming Muralitharan "Muchichuckalot", as he did in a recent column for the Daily Telegraph, was a grossly insensitive quip that ridicules Murali and hurts thousands of people. Parkinson is entitled to his opinion, but this issue demands greater tact and closer attention to science.

Thankfully, though, there could be a silver lining to this ugly and untimely controversy. During the next six weeks Murali will be examined by Professor Bruce Elliott, an ICC-approved "human-movement specialist" who first voiced doubts about the doosra a couple of weeks ago. His assessments must be respected.

There was a good argument, even before this tour, which was discussed openly in some quarters: that Murali, in the context of recent media speculation in England and Australia, should have voluntarily undertaken research to clear his name once and for all before he takes the world record.

That has now been forced upon him, and it is an opportunity to clear up - at last - the suspicion that hangs over his head in some quarters. Science must be the judge and the jury, not the heart or the naked eye. Let the experts decide, and accept their judgment - that's all that Murali asks.

Charlie Austin is Sri Lankan editor of Wisden Cricinfo.