The throwing fiasco (15 February 1999)

15 February 1999

The throwing fiasco

Neil Perera

The throwing controversy regarding Muralitharan has received unprecedented publicity in the sports world. The reason for isolating Murali for this type of harassment by the Australian establishment and the Australian public is because he is the best offspin bowler in the world at present, and could perhaps end his career by being the best offspin bowler of all time. It was only a short while ago that Australia was claiming that they had the best batsman and best bowler in the world. This claim they cannot make any longer.

When I met the present Chief Executive of the Cricket Board in UK, Tim Lamb in his office in December 1992, the first object that caught my eye was a video tape on which cover was written "Muralitharan", lying on his desk. Looking closer at another video tape that was under Murali's video I saw the title 'Warnaweera'. I made a mental note of this and duly informed our Cricket Board of this discovery on my return. The Englishmen no doubt made a study of these videos and there was no further official information of their findings. There was however, views expressed by local cricket experts that Warnaweera did occasionally throw. I believe Warnaweera did take note of this view and changed his action. With regard to Murali, there was only one former Sri Lankan cricketer who was himself an orthodox offspinner of the old school who thought that Murali was a "chucker". Whether he has changed his mind after seeing the reports of medical experts, close ups of slow motion videos and the views of World class cricketers like Ian Botham, Ian Chappel, Allan Border etc., I am not aware.

When I managed the team to New Zealand in 1994, where our team won the first test abroad, the Referee for the tour was Barry Jarman, the former Australian Wicket Keeper. At the end of the 2nd Test, he met me and told me "Murali is a "chucker" and he would be reported to the ICC". I promptly told him that according to the existing laws of cricket it was a matter that should be handled by the umpires at the centre and not a matter for the Referee to decide. (Things have changed since 1994 and the Referee and the ICC have a role to play in this regard).

Bob Simpson who was the then Manager of the Australian team too had opined that Murali threw the ball. Simpson carried on the crusade against Murali even after he was appoined an ICC Referee. The fact that none of the Australian players were able to play Murali with any degree of confidence, and because their supposed supremacy in cricket was in jeopardy were the reasons which prompted them to gang up to 'hang' Murali.

I am sure Bobby Simpson, Barry Jarman and the Australian players would have influenced Hair and Emerson to "No Ball" Murali. The fact that Emerson even went to the extent of 'No balling' Murali when he bowled leg spin, leaves no doubt that the whole thing was premeditated. No umpire has ever no balled a bowler for bowling leg spin when the ball comes from the back of his hand. You simply cannot throw the ball from the back of your hand.

Murali is unique in that, he is perhaps the only spinner in the world who uses so much of 'wrist' to assist his 'finger' spin. No off spinner in the world, past or present has been able to spin the ball as much as Murali and that too on any surface. The definition of a throw itself has now become a matter of controversy. What Sir Don Bradman said 40 years ago during the English tour of Australia as pointed out by Ronnie Weerakoon in a daily newspaper is most relevant today. Bradman said - "Mr. Brown (Manager of the English team) there are two points. First whether umpires are interpreting the law correctly and secondly whether the law should be altered. In my opinion it must be one or the other".

In my opinion the large majority of bowlers all over the world straighten their arm at the elbow even a degree or two and some perhaps more, at the point of delivery. It is almost impossible, for the Head Umpire standing up to have sufficient time to observe both the bowler's hand and the bowler's foot at the time of delivery. The leg umpire who is in a better position to judge, is far too distant to observe any straightening of the arm by a few degrees unless it is a blatant throw. The naked eye of a human being will not be able to see the straightening of the arm by a few degrees. In my opinion the definition of the throw should be changed after observing the actions of all current international bowlers and it could be a matter for the Third up umpire after that, to decide on a "throw".

The best thing the ICC and our Cricket Board should do is to make a complete scientific study of other bowlers in international cricket and see as to what degree they would straighten their arm at the point of delivery. I am sure the Cricket World will be in for a surprise when this is done and the definition of a throw will be a changed.

Neil Perera is a former secretary of the Board of Control for Cricket in Sri Lanka.

Source :: Daily News (https://www.lanka.net)