Games are meant to find out how much we can do, how far we can go, and how spirited we can fight with our two hands, two legs, a torso and a brain by pitting ourselves against one another. You cant restrict cricket only to those who have no deformity. Murali has genuine deformity. Thats what the nature has intended for him. If that gives him an advantage you should let him have it. Can you ban a left-handed bowler because he confuses the batsman and that gives him an advantage? Can you ban a person whos more than seven feet tall from playing basketball because that gives him undue advantage and he can easily dunk into the basket? As long as a person is not using artificial means such as using artificial limbs or taking drugs to enhance performance we should not restrict anyone. Banning Murali is inhumane. It will send a wrong message to those who have deformities and even more to the handicapped ones. You are in fact telling them that you are not a normal human and you cant be part of what we do.
bowling consistently with a bent elbow is different from chucking. If the elbow is straightened [ not necessarily completely ] during the act of releasing the ball, its a chuck; Murali bowls all his balls with a bent elbow; This def.ly gives his wrist more flexibility and range of motion as opposed to a straighter arm, but since he is consistent in using a bent elbow, either he should not have been allowed to play intl. cricket, or just be let alone!! see the timing of new allegations and prospective punishment, they are trying everything except good sport to beat him to the world record ; GRRR.. Partiality shown by icc is not new. high time something is done about it;
Should people with congenital problems be give undue advantage? If someone is 24 feet wide and 8 feet tall , should that person be allowed as a soccer goalie?
I agree with the writer a lot. I think Murali is a great spinner and it almost seems like everybody wants to find reasons to pick on him because he gets so much turn. When people can make pitches to make the ball spin more, why can't they accept a bowler trying a slightly different action to get the ball to spin more?
It's a great arguement and kudos to the writer for pointing it out. Good job!
Hi, I'd like to raise just one query. The doosra - try to bowl it without bending ur elbow. The doosra, as u can see often, is bowled by releasing the ball from the back of the hand. It's kind of hard to put in words, but if you know how to bowl a googly, then adapt the same knowledge to off spin, and u'll know what i'm talking about.
The doosra is what separates some of these more "elite" bowlers from the other run of the mill off spinners. Now, tell me - isn't there an advantage?
Mr.Swami! I do believe that chucking is illegal and gives an 'unfair' advantage to the bowler, spinner/medium-pacer/ fast bowler. Murali chucks - pehla or doosra no bar! When chucking: 1) The 'bowling' action is not smooth and the ball is harder to spot in the bowler's hand. 2) The batsman's shots are not designed for deliveries that are moving from his one side to the other.
Imagine the kind of strokes that need to be manufactured!!! Changes in stance, backlift & footwork, more head-movement when following the ball to bat, more shuffling - are all inevitable. Common sense, eh?
(Have you ever 'appreciated' round-arm actions?)
Many countries have withdrawn chuckers without a fuss - and that's gentlemanly (whether black or white). Its high time the Lankans made the big league!
I am sorry but chucking does make a HUGE difference to spinners. You can bowl the ball faster, flatter and get more rotation on the ball. I used to play cricket in my back yard all the time where we had to chuck because of lack of space. A spinner is able to impart spin on the ball in any direction with his action looking the same.
Dear swarmy, have you ever faced Murali? He bowls it a lot quicker than the amateur spinners you would have faced in your time - yes that is because of his bent elbow. The bending of the elbow gives more flexibilty to your wrist. Therefore you get more spin and as a result you can get the ball to turn even at high speeds. If you allow him to chuck it he will be unplayable and it just would not be cricket.
For the record I am a Sri Lankan who is very much in favour of Murali. I don't think he chucks with his off break, but from television even I have to admit that when he bowls his Doosra his elbow is more bent than when he bowls his off-break. Whether he straightens it more or not I cannot tell.
Totally agree with the article. If every bowler is scrutinised the way Murali has been, most would have some problems. If Murali was so bad, he should have been banned before he took his 10th wicket and not after he has taken 500 and heading for a record ! This is absurd....LEAVE MURALI ALONE!!!!
According to me there is nothing wrong in Murali's action. The interesting factor is, in most of the cases, asian players are called for chucking again and again even though those particular players are cleared by the ICC. All these problems will come only when an asian country is playing against australia in australia or england in england and in that if they come to know that some bowler is really unplayable, the next day there will be a report in any australian or english paper stating that, that particular bowler is chucking. But the simple truth is they are really afraid of these bowlers and they should do something that will affect the career of that bowler. When english players found akram's and waqar's reverse swinging balls unplayable, they called them as ball tamperers, but when Darren Gough started to do the same thing, they called it as the perfect reverse swinging delivery. The same is the case with Murali also. If there was something called as "chucking" in batting also, english men or the australians would have tried to find some thing wrong in sachin's or dravid's batting style also.
