The Hindu : Sport / Cricket : A complicated issue

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Jul 23, 2004

Sport

Sport - Cricket

A complicated issue

Senior Sri Lankan cricket officials must stop accusing western powers of harbouring a plan to eliminate Muttiah Muralitharan from international cricket. Apart from being arrant nonsense spread by unscrupulous opportunists, the campaign is dangerous in that it promotes a divide between colours and countries.

Sport is supposed to advance understanding yet it is often misused by populists seeking to climb the slippery pole. Whereas responsible leaders strive to instil values that reach beyond the narrow confines of ancient prejudice, these impostors pour oil on troubled waters. Inevitably the inflamed mob cheer but these cries come at a price. As passions rise, reason flies out the window.

Sri Lankan cricket has a wonderful history of toleration. Indeed, it is hard to think of another Test country that has fielded as diverse a bunch of players. Distant observers assume that the team includes only men from rich backgrounds who attended famous schools in the capital city. Closer scrutiny reveals players from a wide range of backgrounds and faiths. Patently Sri Lanka's heart is in the right place. Nevertheless the current hullabaloo is disturbing because it reveals the fragility of a game whose countries are not by instinct the best of friends.

Murali's defenders have a point. Several points as a matter of fact. Their man has been badly treated because he has been subjected to a process known amongst the legal fraternity as double jeopardy. In other words he has been tried for the same offence on several occasions. Cricket has refused to accept the acquittal verdict produced by scientists. Certainty is needed. No one can be kept dangling.

But Sri Lankans are partly to blame for the impasse. Cricket has doubted the ability of a young nation to accept an unfavourable verdict against its leading player and has accordingly tip-toed around the topic. Rather than accepting the opinion of duly appointed officials, locals have attacked their integrity.

Far from trying to sideline the spinner, cricket has bent over backwards to accommodate him. Under the old dispensation he would long since have been forced out of the game. No other bowler in the history of the game has long survived being called by a senior umpire in a public arena. A cursory glance through the history books confirms that the `chuckers' who emerged at the start of the 20th century and returned fifty years later were thrown out of the game. On each occasion administrators realised that matters were getting out of hand and instructed umpires to apply the rules with vigour. Once a man's action had been condemned, that was it, the verdict was final. Remember, too, that doubt was enough to provoke an umpire's call.

Had Murali been playing in those days he could not possibly have lasted as long. Rightly or wrongly he would long since have been dispatched. But here's the rub. He was playing in those days and could have been called at any moment. No one wanted to take responsibility for forcing him from the game because the Sri Lankans were fresh and popular besides which he was a hero and their champion. If a white conspiracy existed it was to keep mum about his action.

Fortunately for all concerned — especially those of us who have enjoyed his work and regard him as a borderline case — cricket has been trying to find a better way of dealing with curious actions than letting them pass for years and then condemning them in the middle of a Test match.

Clearly cricket realises that it cannot any longer act in a highhanded manner. Research into throwing has revealed that most pace bowlers bend their arms to some degree or other, a point exposed by slow motion replays that has forced authorities to rewrite the laws of the game. Latitude was needed or the game could not legitimately proceed. Those same replays have indicated that Murali has been more sinned against than sinning. To the astonishment of his severest critics the off-break has passed the test with flying colours, a verdict that legitimises his entire career. But a problem has been found with his extended `doosra' and that verdict must also be accepted because the umpire is always right or how can the game proceed?

Not that Murali was obliged meekly to accept the situation. Happily he has not sat back. Instead he has taken steps to prove his innocence. It is the best move he has made in a long time and akin to Daniel walking into the lion's den. He has been given a fair hearing and his work with his elbow in fixed position has surprised the critics. Taking the initiative was a superb strategy that indicated that he has nothing to fear.

Indeed Murali can go further, offering to wear a brace in matches. Cricket cannot turn him down. Meanwhile supporters and officials should ought not to be too precious about him. Nor should they rush to assume that it has all been part of a dastardly plot. Instead they could take a leaf out of India's book in its handling of the challenges confronting Harbhajan Singh. West Indies likewise dealt quietly with Jermaine Lawson. The search for the solution cannot begin until the problem has been acknowledged.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Sport