& 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

'Cricket losing its charm'

CRICINFO, undated
Last week, thousands of miles away from his teammates, who were limbering up for the second Test against Australia, Muttiah Muralitharan, a temporary Test outcast, continued his battle to prove the fairness of his controversial doosra at Shenley Cricket Club in the United Kingdom.
Murali was taking part in an experiment designed to show that the flexion in his elbow, when bowling his orthodox off breaks and the magical doosra, was minimal and, contrary to the opinions of some vocal critics, did not offer him any unfair advantage.
The experiment perhaps lacked the high-tech science of his testing at the University of Western Australia -- although it remained far more scientific than Barry Jarman's ludicrous protractor measurements -- but it nevertheless illustrated that Murali does not rely upon flexion to generate his prodigious spin.
The experiment started with
Murali bowling normally at a club cricketer in a turf net. His bowling arm was then strapped into a 1lb steel and nylon brace, a device designed by a cricket-loving Indian doctor. The brace rendered his elbow joint immobile.
Initially, as one would expect considering the weight (a lighter brace is being manufactured in Sri Lanka made from moulded resin),
he found it awkward but gradually settled into his customary groove and started to impart that habitual prodigious turn. Significantly, according to onlookers, his doosra deviated significantly who says the doosra is impossible without a bend?
Murali is utterly convinced that his doosra is a fair delivery, like the rest of his armoury, and he is determined to prove that to the world.
Speaking afterwards to The Independent, an English daily, he once again voiced his frustration and displeasure with the manner in which the delivery had been blackballed.
"The doosra is my weapon," he explained "I feel angry that they have taken it away. It is like telling a fast bowler he cannot bowl a bouncer. When a batsman does not fear the bouncer he has an advantage."
"People say I have an unfair advantage which has brought me
SEE PAGE 14 COL 6 FROM PAGE 13
success," Murali said.
"I was born like this. People are born with all sorts of physical differences which allow them to do things that other people cannot. That is how it is for me, so I am gifted in a way; people cannot copy me or bowl like me. And there are other bowlers around whose physical attributes mean they cannot be imitated. Paul Adams of South Africa is one. And there will be more players with 'abnormal' physical attributes in the future.
"Cricket should accommodate everyone, all physical types and variations, rather than keeping it a game for 'normal people' and making everyone conform to what they perceive as 'normal'. If everyone who plays the game is physically the same or has to conform to rigid ways of playing it then it will become a very boring game."
The problems started when Chris Broad, an ICC match referee, who is also standing in the current series between Sri Lanka and Australia (an important reason why Murali is in Shenley rather than Cairns), reported his action when bowling the doosra as suspect. Biomechanical tests revealed that there was some elbow-flexing and that this exceeded the ICC's current tolerance levels.
But the studies of the University of Western Australia and Marc Portus, a leading sports scientist in this field, have thrown into doubt the fairness of the current tolerance levels, which currently allow fast bowlers twice the amount of flexion that spinners are permitted without obvious scientific justification.
Murali feels that justice needs to be done: "If other spin bowlers were tested in laboratory conditions, they would be found to have a similar flex to mine, or possibly greater. It seems to me there is one rule for Murali and another rule for everyone else. We should all play by the same rules in cricket. Every bowler should be granted the same tolerance level."
Murali added: "They talk of tolerances, 10 degrees for fast bowlers and so on, but what happens when a fast bowler sends down a slower ball with the same action, that is to say with 10 degrees of flexion? It has been proved scientifically that my arm speed is quicker than that of Shabbir Ahmed, who bowls at about 84-85 mph on average [Murali's speed ranges from 47 mph and 54 mph], and they say Shane Warne's arm speed is quicker than Glenn McGrath's."
Murali went on to cite the example of Bhagwat Chandrasekhar, the Indian right-arm leg spinner, who
bowled with a famously brisk arm: "Sometimes he bowled at 80 to 90 miles an hour. It has to be accepted that different people bowl differently."
"I would like to see every bowler tested in the same way that I have been, in 3D, in a scientific environment, then the authorities should collate all the results and decide on a standard tolerance level that would apply evenly across the board and encompass every bowler, fast, medium and slow."
In fact, the ICC had nearly introduced flat-rate 15-degree limits last year, on the advice of their cricket operations manager, former South Africa wicket-keeper Dave Richardson. It's likely that changes will be made after the completion of further research into spin bowling during the ICC Champions Trophy.
In the meantime, though, Murali is left to kick his heels on the sidelines. He will return to international cricket during the Asia Cup starting next week, but he will be forced to refrain from employing his doosra. This leaves him feeling understandably aggrieved: "People say cricket is a gentleman's game, but I think at the moment it is not a gentleman's game at all."