& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Ruchira reported

AFP, London
Sri Lanka's Ruchira Perera was formally reported Tuesday to the International Cricket Council (ICC) for a suspect bowling action during the First Test against England.
The report was made by umpires Srinivasaraghavan Venkataraghavan and Daryl Harper to ICC match referee Gundappa Viswanath after the final day at Lord's on Monday.
Video footage of 25-year-old left-armer Perera's action during the match was studied by the umpires before announcing their decision.
However, the pace bowler is permitted to continue bowling while working with a specialist advisor and will be available for selection for the Second Test which begins on May 30 at Edgbaston.
Sri Lanka tour manager Chandra Schaffter said: "As far as we are concerned there is a procedure in place for dealing with a report by the umpires on a player with a suspect action.
"We will follow the procedure scrupulously and will co-operate with the ICC fully," he added.
"With regard to selection, the ICC rules permit a bowler who has been reported at stage one of the process to continue playing and we will consider Ruchira Perera for selection for the next Test Match," Schaffter insisted. "The reporting of any bowler at the highest level of the game is a serious matter which has to be handled with fairness and consideration to the player, his team and the opposing team," said former India batsman Viswanath.
"Both umpires took the opportunity to satisfy themselves fully that there was a concern with Ruchira Perera's bowling action. Their detailed report has been passed to the ICC and the Sri Lankan team
management."
There is a three-stage process in the reporting procedure of bowlers. Perera is at the first stage, where he may continue to bowl under supervision with a specialist advisor.
If he is reported again within 12 months of the first report to the ICC, they will appoint their own advisor to work with Perera. The delegate will then report back to the ICC within three months.
A third report would bring the ICC bowling review group together. They are empowered to ban a player for 12 months from the date of the hearing if they find his action suspect.
Under the Laws of Cricket a bowler is not allowed to straighten his arm in the final phase of a delivery.
ICC general cricket manager and former South Africa wicket-keeper Dave Richardson admitted: "We have got a pretty lengthy procedure. We are looking at reviewing it to make it quicker.
Perera was Sri Lanka's most successful bowler at Lord's finishing with match figures of five for 138
He is the fourth Sri Lankan whose action has been reported to the ICC.
In 1996 Muttiah Muralitharan was cited after being no-balled for throwing in Australia.
Muralitharan, who missed the first Test because of a shoulder injury, is the most successful slow bowler in world cricket today, his unorthodox action helping him take 412 Test wickets.
He was called for throwing in Australia during the 1995-96 and 1998-99 tours.
The off-spinner's case led to a fundamental change in the way ICC deals with throwing claims after medical experts concluded that the 30-year-old only appeared to throw because his bowling arm had been permanently bent since birth.
In 1998 Kumar Dharmasena was also cited. Both were subsequently cleared. Last August, Suresh Perera (no relation) was reported but cleared by a Sri Lankan panel.
But bowlers from other countries including England's James Kirtley and Australia's Brett Lee have had their actions called into questions.
Apart from Muralitharan, the highest profile case of recent times has involved Pakistan fast bowler Shoaib Akhtar.
He was reported twice within the space of a year and underwent remedial work with former West Indies paceman Michael Holding.
He too was cleared after medical evidence that his action was the result of an abnormally flexible elbow.