After Pakistan’s bowling
spearhead Saeed Ajmal became the latest bowler to be banned after undergoing
biomechanical tests at one of the new ‘ICC preferred’ labs, it is clear now ICC is cracking down on ‘bent
arms’ and means business. Up to date five international bowlers have been
called for suspect action: Shillingford(WI), Williamson(NZ), Senanayake(SL) , Gazi(BAN),
Utseya(ZIM) and Ajmal(PAK), (in an interesting coincidence a certain match
official was part of reporting of 4 of those bowlers).
None of the above bowlers can be
termed as new comers in the cricket scene, as they’ve been playing cricket at
international level for some time now, some even were reported earlier in their
careers and cleared. So what changed? The Big 3 happened. It’s obvious now, that
after the shift of powers at ICC, they have taken firm decisions on ‘bent arms’.
While England and Australia were never fans of ‘doosras’ or mystery spin, India
did allow some liberty. So did India get ‘out-voted’ within the power group; 2
to 1? Or did India agree to it as long as their ‘best interests’ kept
untouched?
And ‘best interests’ are not
confined to monetary assets, but extends right up to their ‘contractual
obligations’ in other words ‘cricketers’.
While acknowledging
the fact that all six recently reported bowlers do have jerks in their elbows;
curiously ICC’s ‘detecting mechanism’ has failed to get its scope adjusted on
two star bowlers namely; Sunil Narine(WI) and Ravi Ashwin(IND). Both are new-breed
bowlers who rely on mystery to get their scalps and both are highly successful at
top level as well. What’s more I fail to
see any aspect in their bowling actions different from their reported counterparts;
Shillingford, Williamson, Senanayake, Gazi
In fact Ravi Ashwin was even brave enough to acknowledge and
go on record saying that he is actually trying to gain advantage by making full
use of ‘allowance of flex’ by ICC: |
| Ashwin bowling in Asia Cup 2014 |
“…..I'd never bowled in
full-sleeves before. So I wanted to see how it would feel. And I just wanted to
see if you can get more revs on the ball, if you can do a little bit with your
elbow, as much as, that is. That's what it was all about. You can get a lot of
advantage with these things. So why should I lag behind if someone else is
getting a competitive edge?......"
-espncricinfo: www.espncricinfo.com/india/content/story/732475.html
So what’s stopping ICC’s watchdog
from making a move on these two top level ‘mystery bowlers’? This brings us
back to India’s ‘best interests’. Both Ashwin and Narine are considered as
highly integral parts of respective IPL franchises Chennai Super Kings and Kolkata
Knight Riders. In other words ‘IPL darlings’
So does a lucrative IPL deal now guarantee
‘chucking immunity’ among many other perks? making a bowler feel so safe, that he comes out openly saying that he s going to push the limits??
University of Western Australia
Another interesting fact that got
lost in the recent ‘suspect action’ saga is the curious case of University of
Western Australia. Once the centre for biomechanical testing for suspect action
bowlers, now being methodically shunned by ICC completely. Another change of
heart after the power shift of Big 3? University of Western Australia was
involved in testing and clearing both Muralitharan and Ajmal(when he was first
reported). Now ICC prefers or ‘recommends’ the labs at Cardiff and Brisbane,
and the latest one will be located in India. So what made ICC move on from
University of WA? Were they not satisfied with their testing methods? Were they
too lenient?
Interestingly Professor
Jacqueline Alderson of University of Western Australia had this to say about
current testing methods used by labs at Cardiff and Brisbane:
“………Any scientific procedure that can impact on the ability
of a player to play the game has to be an independent process and the
procedures by which those decisions are made must be open to peer review, and
must be available to bowlers and their boards to ensure that process is open
and fair. I don’t think it’s in the best interests of cricket……..”
According to Prof. Alderson, the
current testing procedures are not as transparent as it used to be in
University of WA. As smaller the differences may be(according to ICC) between
testing methods of new ICC labs and University of WA, we as fans and outsiders
are left with questions like: What of the bowlers who were tested and cleared
at University of WA? And crusaders against chucking such as Martin Crowe
believing and insisting that likes of Murali was ‘lucky’ to avoid the new ICC
testing labs….. Or is this all part of a freak-child as a result of an illegitimate
power-grab?
No comments:
Post a Comment