Murali: I will continue to bowl the doosra

[anzac]

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2004/MAY/145937_ICC_14MAY2004.html[/url]

Nowhere in it do they say that the ICC itself told Murali to stop bowling the "doosra". All they say is that Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) had provided them with copies of the advice they had provided to Murali. So you were wrong when you said Murali was told by the ICC to stop bowling the doosra. He is no liar or cheat! Proved! I will accept your apology in advance mate. Unless ofcourse you are just another Murali critic to whom facts don't matter.

Also nowhere does it say when SLC told Murali to stop bowling doosra if at all. Like I said ij my previous post, knowing the incompetence of the SLC, if I had to choose to believe between Murali and SLC, I will pick Murali anytime.

Yes, he mouthed off about continuing bowling the doosra and who knows why he changed his mind and I am not going to speculate. But given the concerted effort of many Australians (including ACB members now in the ICC) attempting to ban him from the game without any evidence, do you blame him for thinking this is anything but part of that campaign. He probably does not want to give them (the dishonest lot) the pleasure of success. That is my view anyway.

ok my apologies regarding some of my comments of a more personal nature - if you have seen more of my posts on other subjects you would have perhaps realised that they were not intended as an outright attack on your character, but more in tongue in cheek..........perhaps I should have used some more of those silie thingies

so far as the notification issue goes it is probable that we are both correct - in an earlier article (when the original comments re not being told came out), it was stated that under Phase 1 the ICC are not empowered to directly instruct a bowler to stop using the action in question - this is the responsibility of his home board. The ICC confirms the results of the testing to both parties, and confirms the obligations & timings of the relevant phases. You will note that I did not actually say anything other than this & did not say that they (the ICC) had told him to stop. Which brings us to your point re the SLCB.

Regardless of the competency of the SLCB, it does not excuse the fact that he knew the test results, and he at least had a moral obligation not to use it - after all he is an adult & should not have to be told what to do all the time - if he had any doubts he should have asked the question, even of the ICC themselves.

so far as that last article is concerned the ICC would have had Proctor advise both parties that they were now entering Phase 2, which meant that the ICC was now empowered to be hands on re the advice & reporting of any further use of the action. As such you are correct that this would have been the 1st time the ICC gave any official / direct instructions.

However, regardless of the fact that he was not breaking any rules by using the action during the 1st Test & was able to do so because of a loophole on the laws, does not IMO constitue sportsmanlike behaviour befitting the holder of the record, let alone a player of his abilities or record. IMO this is still tantamount to cheating because of the test results & his knowing his action to be found to be illegal.

So far as not wanting to give them the pleasure of success - IMO his behaviour during this last incident has done him nothing but harm so far as the neutral observers are concerned - because he doesn't have a leg to stand on because of the test results. Hence my assertion that his own actions have opened the door to his being labelled a liar, cheat & coward. It may well be that those assertions are based upon circumstantial evidence re using the action in Phase 1 & obtaining the record, and then not using it in Phase 2 after the meeting with Proctor etc, but it certainly does not portray him in a complimentary light.

As I stated earlier, prior to this incident I was a 'neutral' re Murali, & my criticisms of him are in relation to the current situation only, as anything prior to this is irrelevant to the tests results & the applicable laws. I'm just gobsmacked that he had the 'arrogance / ignorance' to have acted & behaved as he has both on & off the field with so much of the spotlight on him re the ptoetnail claiming of the record & when he was clearly in the wrong & knew it - as his prior behaviour had not been in question - his bowling yes & perhaps tactics & comments of his supporters, but not Murali directly until now.