Muralitharan's action compared to javelin thrower by Bishen Bedi
Former Indian Test spinner Bishen Bedi has reopened controversy over Muttiah Muralitharan's bowling action, comparing the Sri Lankan off-spinner's bowling action to that of a javelin thrower
CricInfo
02-Feb-2002
Murali delivers Photo Reuters |
Former Indian Test spinner Bishen Bedi has reopened
controversy over Muttiah Muralitharan's bowling action,
comparing the Sri Lankan off-spinner's bowling action to that
of a javelin thrower.
"If Murali doesn't chuck, then show me how to bowl," Bedi said
in the interview.
"How can you call it bowling? He (Muralitharan) has no followthrough and he makes no use of his shoulders. "Murali's arm
doesn't go up at all. I have a picture of him bowling
somewhere. He looks like a good javelin thrower."
The legality of Muralitharan's unique action has been the
source of great debate throughout his prolific career, which
has seen him race to 400 Test wickets in record time.
Like Bedi, Australian umpire Darrel Hair, who described his
action as 'diabolical' in his autobiography, believes that he
straightens his arm and is therefore guilty of throwing.
Muralitharan has been called for throwing on three separate
occasions, by three different umpires, but only in Australia,
prompting accusations that his no balling was a cynical
nationalistic conspiracy designed to undermine Sri Lanka's
major weapon.
Murali - cleared by ICC Photo Colleen Briggs |
The first time was in the Boxing Day Test at Melbourne in 1995
by Hair and that was followed shortly afterwards by his no
balling by Ross Emerson and Tony Mcquillan in a one-day match
at Brisbane.
With his career in jeopardy, Muralitharan's bowling action was
analysed by University of Western Australia and the Hong Kong
University of Science and Technology. Both reports concluded
his action was legal.
The University of Western Australia photographed Murali's
action at 1,000 frames per second from six different angles,
concluding: `From certain angles he does look suspect but from
other angles there was not a problem.' The `throwing' was a
mere `optical illusion', the report said.
Murali - 400+ Test wickets Photo AFP |
After a three and a half day high tech examination in Hong
Kong, the university revealed that Muralitharan was physically
incapable of fully extending his right arm and concluded that
even his partially bent arm did not straighten when he bowled
off-breaks or leg-breaks..
An International Cricket Council (ICC) panel reviewed the
evidence and cleared Muralitharan before the 1996 World Cup.
Then, on Sri Lanka's next tour to Australia in 1999, Ross
Emerson called Muralitharan once again in a one-day match at
Adelaide, forcing captain Arjuna Ranatunga to lead his players
to the boundary edge in protest.
Emerson was largely castigated by the media for his decision;
taken whilst standing at the bowler's end. One leading Sri
Lankan commentator, Ranjith Fernando, accusing him of 'playing
God.'
No further investigation into his action followed, the ICC
apparently satisfied with its legality, although some contend
they were simply too anxious to avoid further controversy.
Since the recent introduction of a formal three-stage process
for analysing suspect actions, he has not been reported once
by an umpire in a Test or ODI.
But Bedi, for one, is unconvinced, brushing aside his
congenital deformity in his elbow as a legitimate explanation
for his bent arm.
"It's just too bad, honestly," he said. "Some people are born
blind... Will a blind man be allowed to fly an aircraft? So
why should a bowler be allowed to chuck because he has a
defective arm?"
He called for the ICC to take action.
"What does not conform to law is illegal and the law has to be
applied uniformly. The problem is that the parent body (ICC)
is not taking cognisance. It may soon become monstrous - every
team may end up with three or four chuckers."
Bedi was also critical of fellow countryman Harbhajan Singh's
action when he bowled his arm ball.
"In the good old days, it was called the floater. It was
bowled using the shoulder, like an outswinger.
"You bowled it with the off-spinner's action, but without
imparting any spin. You rolled it, and put in a little extra
shoulder, so the ball drifted away.
"Now they do it with their elbows and wrists. Anyone using the
elbow to turn it the other way is doing it illegally," he
said.