• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Who Is Martin Crowe ?

The Reason Behind Martin Crow's Accusation of Murali !


  • Total voters
    29
  • Poll closed .

chipmonk

U19 Debutant
http://www.sundaytimes.lk/061224/Sports/sp414.html


ISSN: 1391 - 0531 Sunday, December 24, 2006 Vol. 41 - No 30
Sports

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nothing to Crowe about

From that infamous boxing day of 1995 when that now disgraced authoritarian Australian umpire Darrel Hair called Sri Lankan off spinner Muttiah Muralitharan for throwing, the world of cricket never has been the same. However so far the tale has been readng like Hair has been voted out or kicked out (you are free to choose the phrase you like to use) by the ICC’s cricket hierarchy while Muralitharan still continues to bamboozle the world’s leading batsmen now with an added weapon of the ‘doosra’ and claiming 674 wickets so far in his unfinished career.


Then from time to time cricket’s old cronies who are now sidelined and wants a little attention coming their way picks up a stone and casts it towards the huge Murali castle only to fall by the wayside once again and remain dormant.

Through the years lackey’s in the basket in the likes of Ross Emerson, Bishen Singh Bedi, Chris Broad etc have come out and tried their hand at stopping the Murali machine, but, thanks to the world of science and bio mechanism the so called pundits have been proven wrong over and over again. Ironically still Murali’s action remains to be a money making subject for those who are interested.

First it was the ‘burly’ Hair itself. First he calls Muralitharan and makes a huge ‘din’ about it and threatens to call him once again if he ever stands in a match that Murali is featured gets all the publicity and then comes out with his autobiography –“The Decision Maker” in the year 1999. Naturally Hair stood to make a lot of money at the end of it.

The latest to enter into the fray is another man with a blotchy past himself in former New Zealand captain Martin Crowe. Martin Crowe .was hounded by the media for reasons which are not a secret for those in the know how had a very shaky ending to his career as other activities took precedence to his skills in the field of cricket and had to ease out of the game gradually. However that is not our theme today.

He first came out with his doctrine on July 11 when he addressed the group who had converged to listen to him delivering MCC's Spirit of Cricket Cowdrey Lecture at Lord's. At this forum he clearly pointing his finger to Muralitharan said “Having been pinned in the head by chuckers over 15 years, having been bowled first ball in a Test by a certain Sri Lankan bowler, I've had more than enough of this aspect of the game.

"To straighten your arm from a bent position is a massive advantage. If the umpire believes he has seen a throw then he should, as part of the laws of cricket, be allowed to no ball it or at least report it.”

The very next day the ICC replied to these allegations in full detail about the 15 degree arm bending rule passed by the authority. It explained --“The regulations are based on the views of an expert panel of former players including Angus Fraser, Michael Holding and Tony Lewis - the current Chairman of the MCC's Cricket Committee," said David Richardson, the ICC's General Manager - Cricket. "This group studied the research of prominent bio-mechanists Professor Bruce Elliot, Dr Paul Hurrion and Mr Marc Portus and the scientific evidence they were presented with was overwhelming.

"The facts are that some bowlers, even those never suspected of having flawed actions, were found likely to be straightening their arms by 11 or 12 degrees. And at the same time, some bowlers that may appear to be throwing may be hyper-extending or bowling with permanently bent elbows.

"Under a strict interpretation of the Law they were breaking the rules but if we ruled out every bowler that did that then there would be no bowlers left. The game needed to deal with that reality and the current regulations do just that”. As far as the world of cricket was concerned that was the end of the matter.

For anyone who wants to write a book on cricket there are two very juicy topics. First is Muralitharan’s bowling action and the other is Shane Warne’s womanizing. Through the grape wine we at this end have also learned that Martin also is contemplating writing his own book. If so to write his book he also must get into a topic that people would talk about. So during the second Test between Sri Lanka and New Zealand at the Basin reserve he rekindled the subject with West Indian Tony Cozier. He did not need Cozier’s prompting. For half an hour while they had their expert views on the game in progress the main topic was the legality of Muralitharan’s bowling action.

Once again the next day Crowe met his match – this time it was the much respected John Reid who berated Crowe

According to New Zealand writer Jonathan Millmow, Reid was on the high-powered ICC illegal action committee that cleared Muralitharan of chucking six years ago. He claims Crowe has scant knowledge of the subject and is inadvertently motivating the Lankans.

"He's upsetting the Sri Lankans against New Zealand, which side is he on?" Reid asked?

"He won't believe these so-called experts who are the ICC illegal delivery panel. Murali's also been passed by the biomechanists.
"Everyone thinks he has a bent elbow. He hasn't, he can't straighten his elbow. He's got a double-jointed wrist you wouldn't believe."

The nine-strong panel that cleared Murali also included Doug Insole (England), Ranjan Madugalle (Sri Lanka), Bob Simpson (Australia), Andy Pycroft (Zimbabwe), Michael Holding (West Indies), Imran Khan (Pakistan), Nigel Plews (umpires' representative) and Clyde Walcott (West Indies, chairman).

Reid dismissed Crowe's belief that the ICC should be running yearly warrant of fitness checks on bowlers such as Muralitharan to see if they are falling back on old habits.

Crowe had suggested that Murali - whose controversial action led to the authorities allowing a 15-degree flex in the elbow at the point of delivery - needed to be monitored more often to ensure his arm was not flexing more than permitted. "Once they are cleared, they are cleared. How often do you change your action?" Reid said.

When The Sunday Musings queried from the SLC if Crowe’s mutterings have any official bearing its Media Manager Samantha Algama said “As far as the SLC is concerned there is nothing official about the statements and we have not received any official statement from New Zealand cricket or the ICC authorities about it. As far as we are concerned the ICC will not hold inquiries on personal E-Mails from every Tom, Dick and Harry. There is a process by the ICC on illegal actions and Murali has gone through the Tests and cleared them. This is all just idle talk”. Which enhanced our theory that Crowe really has nothing to crow about.
At the same time every human being is entitled to his own opinion on any matter. However if he/she is making an attempt to make a quick buck in the midst of it, the whole thought turns negative and sour.
 

social

Hall of Fame Member
And Ranatunga's motives are pure as the driven snow are they?

BTW,

John Reid, Match Referee = much respected

Chris Broad, Match Referee = Lackey

Gives u an indication of the slant of this article
 

Francis

State Vice-Captain
"To straighten your arm from a bent position is a massive advantage. If the umpire believes he has seen a throw then he should, as part of the laws of cricket, be allowed to no ball it or at least report it.”
I actually tried that and it's true, you get so much, much more spin on the ball bending your arm. Of course when I did it, I went all eccentric with the bend in my arm... but I tried it and it worked.

Thing is, if someone who bowls pace straightens his arm from a bent position, he doesn't get more pace, that bend doesn't give him any extra pace. If you bowl leg-spin, you're hindering yourself with a bent arm. Finger spinners use the squeeze from their fingers. But if you bowl off breaks in a wrist spin format, you need to bend your arm to get any work on it.

It depends on the definition of bowling. I thought bowling meant using your arm, not your elbow to gain pace etc.

The nine-strong panel that cleared Murali also included Doug Insole (England), Ranjan Madugalle (Sri Lanka), Bob Simpson (Australia), Andy Pycroft (Zimbabwe), Michael Holding (West Indies), Imran Khan (Pakistan), Nigel Plews (umpires' representative) and Clyde Walcott (West Indies, chairman).
That's interesting because didn't Bob Simpson say in his new autobiography that he is in disapproval of Murali's action?
 

Francis

State Vice-Captain
Thought I'd add that my previous post can be taken the wrong way. I'll accept what the ICC says, so long as they're consistent.
 

nexxus

U19 Debutant
The previous rule was a bit silly though. When is a spinner a spinner & a medium pacer a medium pacer. Were Shaun Pollock's little occasional offies counted as spin or is still as pace bowling? Is Kumble a medium pacer, the commentators often say he should be played like one. When Shane Warne bowled the occasional bouncer, what did that fall under?

Was there a committee who decided what class a player fell into?

All that happened was that the situation was made equal for everyone, I don't think that's a bad thing at all.

It was good active law making, the rule was exposed for the farce that it was, science had it's say and the rule was changed to take reality into account. An oasis of competence from the otherwise woeful ICC.
 

Fiery

Banned
nah im just like you, im only brave enough to slander someone's life and career over a message board and not in front of them.
No, you're nothing like me Lostman, except maybe we're both "****ers". You weren't man enough to apologise so keep your opinions on my ***ual preferences to yourself in future please.
 

legglancer12

School Boy/Girl Captain
And Ranatunga's motives are pure as the driven snow are they?

BTW,

John Reid, Match Referee = much respected

Chris Broad, Match Referee = Lackey

Gives u an indication of the slant of this article

Ranatunga was only responding to Crowe .... he did not instigate.
 

legglancer12

School Boy/Girl Captain
http://www.sundaytimes.lk/061224/Sports/sp414.html


ISSN: 1391 - 0531 Sunday, December 24, 2006 Vol. 41 - No 30
Sports

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nothing to Crowe about

From that infamous boxing day of 1995 when that now disgraced authoritarian Australian umpire Darrel Hair called Sri Lankan off spinner Muttiah Muralitharan for throwing, the world of cricket never has been the same. However so far the tale has been readng like Hair has been voted out or kicked out (you are free to choose the phrase you like to use) by the ICC’s cricket hierarchy while Muralitharan still continues to bamboozle the world’s leading batsmen now with an added weapon of the ‘doosra’ and claiming 674 wickets so far in his unfinished career.


Then from time to time cricket’s old cronies who are now sidelined and wants a little attention coming their way picks up a stone and casts it towards the huge Murali castle only to fall by the wayside once again and remain dormant.

Through the years lackey’s in the basket in the likes of Ross Emerson, Bishen Singh Bedi, Chris Broad etc have come out and tried their hand at stopping the Murali machine, but, thanks to the world of science and bio mechanism the so called pundits have been proven wrong over and over again. Ironically still Murali’s action remains to be a money making subject for those who are interested.

First it was the ‘burly’ Hair itself. First he calls Muralitharan and makes a huge ‘din’ about it and threatens to call him once again if he ever stands in a match that Murali is featured gets all the publicity and then comes out with his autobiography –“The Decision Maker” in the year 1999. Naturally Hair stood to make a lot of money at the end of it.

The latest to enter into the fray is another man with a blotchy past himself in former New Zealand captain Martin Crowe. Martin Crowe .was hounded by the media for reasons which are not a secret for those in the know how had a very shaky ending to his career as other activities took precedence to his skills in the field of cricket and had to ease out of the game gradually. However that is not our theme today.

He first came out with his doctrine on July 11 when he addressed the group who had converged to listen to him delivering MCC's Spirit of Cricket Cowdrey Lecture at Lord's. At this forum he clearly pointing his finger to Muralitharan said “Having been pinned in the head by chuckers over 15 years, having been bowled first ball in a Test by a certain Sri Lankan bowler, I've had more than enough of this aspect of the game.

"To straighten your arm from a bent position is a massive advantage. If the umpire believes he has seen a throw then he should, as part of the laws of cricket, be allowed to no ball it or at least report it.”

The very next day the ICC replied to these allegations in full detail about the 15 degree arm bending rule passed by the authority. It explained --“The regulations are based on the views of an expert panel of former players including Angus Fraser, Michael Holding and Tony Lewis - the current Chairman of the MCC's Cricket Committee," said David Richardson, the ICC's General Manager - Cricket. "This group studied the research of prominent bio-mechanists Professor Bruce Elliot, Dr Paul Hurrion and Mr Marc Portus and the scientific evidence they were presented with was overwhelming.

"The facts are that some bowlers, even those never suspected of having flawed actions, were found likely to be straightening their arms by 11 or 12 degrees. And at the same time, some bowlers that may appear to be throwing may be hyper-extending or bowling with permanently bent elbows.

"Under a strict interpretation of the Law they were breaking the rules but if we ruled out every bowler that did that then there would be no bowlers left. The game needed to deal with that reality and the current regulations do just that”. As far as the world of cricket was concerned that was the end of the matter.

For anyone who wants to write a book on cricket there are two very juicy topics. First is Muralitharan’s bowling action and the other is Shane Warne’s womanizing. Through the grape wine we at this end have also learned that Martin also is contemplating writing his own book. If so to write his book he also must get into a topic that people would talk about. So during the second Test between Sri Lanka and New Zealand at the Basin reserve he rekindled the subject with West Indian Tony Cozier. He did not need Cozier’s prompting. For half an hour while they had their expert views on the game in progress the main topic was the legality of Muralitharan’s bowling action.

Once again the next day Crowe met his match – this time it was the much respected John Reid who berated Crowe

According to New Zealand writer Jonathan Millmow, Reid was on the high-powered ICC illegal action committee that cleared Muralitharan of chucking six years ago. He claims Crowe has scant knowledge of the subject and is inadvertently motivating the Lankans.

"He's upsetting the Sri Lankans against New Zealand, which side is he on?" Reid asked?

"He won't believe these so-called experts who are the ICC illegal delivery panel. Murali's also been passed by the biomechanists.
"Everyone thinks he has a bent elbow. He hasn't, he can't straighten his elbow. He's got a double-jointed wrist you wouldn't believe."

The nine-strong panel that cleared Murali also included Doug Insole (England), Ranjan Madugalle (Sri Lanka), Bob Simpson (Australia), Andy Pycroft (Zimbabwe), Michael Holding (West Indies), Imran Khan (Pakistan), Nigel Plews (umpires' representative) and Clyde Walcott (West Indies, chairman).

Reid dismissed Crowe's belief that the ICC should be running yearly warrant of fitness checks on bowlers such as Muralitharan to see if they are falling back on old habits.

Crowe had suggested that Murali - whose controversial action led to the authorities allowing a 15-degree flex in the elbow at the point of delivery - needed to be monitored more often to ensure his arm was not flexing more than permitted. "Once they are cleared, they are cleared. How often do you change your action?" Reid said.

When The Sunday Musings queried from the SLC if Crowe’s mutterings have any official bearing its Media Manager Samantha Algama said “As far as the SLC is concerned there is nothing official about the statements and we have not received any official statement from New Zealand cricket or the ICC authorities about it. As far as we are concerned the ICC will not hold inquiries on personal E-Mails from every Tom, Dick and Harry. There is a process by the ICC on illegal actions and Murali has gone through the Tests and cleared them. This is all just idle talk”. Which enhanced our theory that Crowe really has nothing to crow about.
At the same time every human being is entitled to his own opinion on any matter. However if he/she is making an attempt to make a quick buck in the midst of it, the whole thought turns negative and sour.
Excellent Article !
 

James

Cricket Web Owner
Let it go guys, if you can't discuss the topic at hand in a mature fashion, move onto another thread.
 

chipmonk

U19 Debutant
http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/3785

The Murali Controversy: Or Is It A Conspiracy?
Fri, 2006-12-22 05:56
By Raj Gonsalkorale

The "Asia Tribune" is usually dedicated mostly to political matters, and not sports. However, when politics, especially dirty politics and blatant racism enters sports, it is time to air one’s views in this forum.Muttiah Muralitharan during the opening Test against New Zealand in Christchurch. The controversy surrounding Muttiah Muralitharan's bizarre run out which hastened Sri Lanka's downfall in the first cricket Test against New Zealand, flared again on the eve of the second Test
The latest issue confronting cricket and Muttiah Muralitheran is the action taken by former New Zealand cricket captain Martin Crowe to report Murali to the International Cricket Conference or ICC for possible violation of the arm bending rule when bowling.

Mahela Jayawaredena, the Sri Lankan cricket captain has stoutly defended Murali and what he has said has been reported in the Sri Lankan news papers and some New Zealand news papers.

Crowe has stated that Murali’s and other bowlers actions that have been reviewed and given the green light by the ICC should be subject to an annual review thereafter. On the face of it, it does not appear that this is too much to ask as some bowlers who have had problems with their actions and have had them corrected, could very well, at least occasionally, revert to their suspect actions deliberately or otherwise and bowl illegal balls (illegal by ICC rules). The difference in Murali’s case is that he does not bend his arm, and that it is permanently bent from birth and the appearance of bending is an illusion depending on the angle one looks at his arm movement. This has been concluded unequivocally by the ICC, not once, several times.

So why is that someone somewhere is always taking a sniper shot at Murali? Why is that this greatest of all off spin bowlers of all time and certainly one of the top two spin bowlers of all time (along with Shane Warne), and one of the best bowlers in the world today is constantly being hounded by some vulture somewhere even after crickets highest body, the ICC, has tested the man fully, sent him to all known medical specialists, and ruled, via panels of top class international cricketers, that he has an arm different to you and I from birth, that the appearance of arm bending beyond how much it is bent by birth is an illusion and that he “Does Not Throw.”

Most readers interested in cricket would know that the ICC law in regard to the extent a bowler is permitted to “bend” his arm has been extended so as to allow most of the worlds top bowlers from all cricketing nations to occasionally bend their arms, as the ICC found that most of these bowlers were occasionally bending them anyway, not just Muralitharan. This was established by the ICC after filming the bowling actions of these bowlers and it was not done to accommodate Murali as some of these vultures might be whispering in pubs and other places. Murali’s congenital defect and the resultant permanent bent is also now within the ICC law. When this ruling was made by the ICC, everyone thought that Murali would be free of sniper fire. We were wrong. Another ugly head has risen from amongst cricketers whom most thought were some of the fairest cricketers in the world.

One can only wonder whether this cricketer was induced in some way or the other to report Murali once again to the ICC. One can also only wonder whether this cricketer would have made his complaint should Murali been playing for New Zealand and not Sri Lanka and had skittled out Sri Lanka instead of New Zealand in Wellington during the last test match played there.

It may or may not be a co incidence, but nearly all the cricketers who have complained about Murali’s action have been white. It is strange that perhaps except for Bishen Bedi from India, to my knowledge, no non white cricketer has made any complaints against Murali. It is also strange that no white bowlers actions have even been as scrutinized as have been that of Murali and some other non white cricketers. This is as if to say that all white bowlers bowl with perfect actions and that only non white bowlers have problems with theirs. Bringing a racist under tone to the Murali controversy is not a pleasant thing, but it has to be said considering how isolated white bowlers have been from controversy and how involved non white bowlers have been in controversy. It simply cannot be logical to say the colour of the skin has something to do with a legal and an illegal bowling action, But that’s what is evident considering the fact that white bowlers have been immune from any other cricketer accusing them of bowling illegal balls and being constantly scrutinized as have been non white bowlers. Surely all these cricketers are human beings with red blood aren’t they?

Shane Warne, most definitely the world’s greatest leg spinner ever and along with Murali, the greatest spin bowlers of all time, has just announced his retirement from international and domestic cricket after the 5th test against England in Sydney. Shane Warne has taken 699 test wickets and is the highest all time wicket taker in test cricket. He is bound to break the 700 wicket test wicket haul before Sydney. Shane Warne’s retirement announcement was headline news in many cricketing nations, deservedly so.

His record however will be short lived as Murali is only 24 wickets behind Warne. It is not the record that matters. What matters is Shane Warne’s bowling ability and what he has brought to Australian cricket and to world cricket in general. He will be surpassed by Murali, and who knows, Murali might be surpassed by some other great bowler in time. That however should not take away the fact that like Warne, Murali is a great bowler and he has, like Warne, made a difference to the sport in Sri Lanka and in the world. Unlike Warne however, who has not been unlucky to have had a birth deformity and therefore no controversy regarding his bowling action, Murali will have to live with the controversy created by his detractors, snipers and vultures simply because he was born with a deformity and he happens to be playing for poor Sri Lanka and not New Zealand or Australia or England. If he was playing for any of these countries, he would have been a greater hero than Shane Warne and there would have been none of this controversy about his action.

The conspiracy is therefore to deprive Murali his due place in history as the greatest spin bowler of all time
 

social

Hall of Fame Member
These conspiracy theories are too ridiculous for words

People have obviously forgotten that previous record holders include Lance Gibbs, Kapil Dev, Courtney Walsh and Richard Hadlee (a Kiwi ffs!)

Aside from card carrying members of the KKK, no-one cares what colour the guy is

Martin Crowe simply thinks he chucks and whilst that is an unpopular view amongst many, it's supported by thousands of others including current and past test cricketers
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/3785

The Murali Controversy: Or Is It A Conspiracy?
Fri, 2006-12-22 05:56
By Raj Gonsalkorale

The "Asia Tribune" is usually dedicated mostly to political matters, and not sports. However, when politics, especially dirty politics and blatant racism enters sports, it is time to air one’s views in this forum.Muttiah Muralitharan during the opening Test against New Zealand in Christchurch. The controversy surrounding Muttiah Muralitharan's bizarre run out which hastened Sri Lanka's downfall in the first cricket Test against New Zealand, flared again on the eve of the second Test
The latest issue confronting cricket and Muttiah Muralitheran is the action taken by former New Zealand cricket captain Martin Crowe to report Murali to the International Cricket Conference or ICC for possible violation of the arm bending rule when bowling.

Mahela Jayawaredena, the Sri Lankan cricket captain has stoutly defended Murali and what he has said has been reported in the Sri Lankan news papers and some New Zealand news papers.

Crowe has stated that Murali’s and other bowlers actions that have been reviewed and given the green light by the ICC should be subject to an annual review thereafter. On the face of it, it does not appear that this is too much to ask as some bowlers who have had problems with their actions and have had them corrected, could very well, at least occasionally, revert to their suspect actions deliberately or otherwise and bowl illegal balls (illegal by ICC rules). The difference in Murali’s case is that he does not bend his arm, and that it is permanently bent from birth and the appearance of bending is an illusion depending on the angle one looks at his arm movement. This has been concluded unequivocally by the ICC, not once, several times.

So why is that someone somewhere is always taking a sniper shot at Murali? Why is that this greatest of all off spin bowlers of all time and certainly one of the top two spin bowlers of all time (along with Shane Warne), and one of the best bowlers in the world today is constantly being hounded by some vulture somewhere even after crickets highest body, the ICC, has tested the man fully, sent him to all known medical specialists, and ruled, via panels of top class international cricketers, that he has an arm different to you and I from birth, that the appearance of arm bending beyond how much it is bent by birth is an illusion and that he “Does Not Throw.”

Most readers interested in cricket would know that the ICC law in regard to the extent a bowler is permitted to “bend” his arm has been extended so as to allow most of the worlds top bowlers from all cricketing nations to occasionally bend their arms, as the ICC found that most of these bowlers were occasionally bending them anyway, not just Muralitharan. This was established by the ICC after filming the bowling actions of these bowlers and it was not done to accommodate Murali as some of these vultures might be whispering in pubs and other places. Murali’s congenital defect and the resultant permanent bent is also now within the ICC law. When this ruling was made by the ICC, everyone thought that Murali would be free of sniper fire. We were wrong. Another ugly head has risen from amongst cricketers whom most thought were some of the fairest cricketers in the world.

One can only wonder whether this cricketer was induced in some way or the other to report Murali once again to the ICC. One can also only wonder whether this cricketer would have made his complaint should Murali been playing for New Zealand and not Sri Lanka and had skittled out Sri Lanka instead of New Zealand in Wellington during the last test match played there.

It may or may not be a co incidence, but nearly all the cricketers who have complained about Murali’s action have been white. It is strange that perhaps except for Bishen Bedi from India, to my knowledge, no non white cricketer has made any complaints against Murali. It is also strange that no white bowlers actions have even been as scrutinized as have been that of Murali and some other non white cricketers. This is as if to say that all white bowlers bowl with perfect actions and that only non white bowlers have problems with theirs. Bringing a racist under tone to the Murali controversy is not a pleasant thing, but it has to be said considering how isolated white bowlers have been from controversy and how involved non white bowlers have been in controversy. It simply cannot be logical to say the colour of the skin has something to do with a legal and an illegal bowling action, But that’s what is evident considering the fact that white bowlers have been immune from any other cricketer accusing them of bowling illegal balls and being constantly scrutinized as have been non white bowlers. Surely all these cricketers are human beings with red blood aren’t they?

Shane Warne, most definitely the world’s greatest leg spinner ever and along with Murali, the greatest spin bowlers of all time, has just announced his retirement from international and domestic cricket after the 5th test against England in Sydney. Shane Warne has taken 699 test wickets and is the highest all time wicket taker in test cricket. He is bound to break the 700 wicket test wicket haul before Sydney. Shane Warne’s retirement announcement was headline news in many cricketing nations, deservedly so.

His record however will be short lived as Murali is only 24 wickets behind Warne. It is not the record that matters. What matters is Shane Warne’s bowling ability and what he has brought to Australian cricket and to world cricket in general. He will be surpassed by Murali, and who knows, Murali might be surpassed by some other great bowler in time. That however should not take away the fact that like Warne, Murali is a great bowler and he has, like Warne, made a difference to the sport in Sri Lanka and in the world. Unlike Warne however, who has not been unlucky to have had a birth deformity and therefore no controversy regarding his bowling action, Murali will have to live with the controversy created by his detractors, snipers and vultures simply because he was born with a deformity and he happens to be playing for poor Sri Lanka and not New Zealand or Australia or England. If he was playing for any of these countries, he would have been a greater hero than Shane Warne and there would have been none of this controversy about his action.

The conspiracy is therefore to deprive Murali his due place in history as the greatest spin bowler of all time
Where do they keep getting these people from...and what are they offered to hand in their common sense?

- You can't pass someone for life.

- Murali's arm can still bend, it can't straighten fully.

- why is a person's opinion on Murali the yardstick for whether said person is 'fair' or not?

- birth deformity or not - the doosra was a problem.

- the rule wasn't changed to 'occasionally allow bowlers to bend their arms'.

- white bowlers vs coloured bowlers? I wasn't aware Brett Lee and Botha were coloured...Meckiff anyone? I think the main difference here would be resources and availability of a good level of coaching in certain areas, and as we've seen, in some areas it makes no difference.

No wonder all this crap flies around with people like this allowed to be called journalists. He doesn't appear on a subcontinental version of the 'Today' show does he? :happy: Why can't Murali being reported end as it does with most other bowlers...a test and then everyone getting on with it. He's unfortunate to have an action that looks wierd...I can't believe anyone would be surprised that he was initially called. He's been tested, but that doesn't mean he may occasionally lapse (as with any other bowler who sails relatively close to the line). If there's concern, test him again and lets get on with it.
 

Top