Johan Botha throws up problems with ICC policy
Roar Pro
By Benjamin Conkey, 16 Apr 2009 Benjamin Conkey is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Cricket, Ian Meckif, Johan Botha, Proteas
South Africa's Johan Botha bowls a delivery while Australia's Ricky Ponting looks on during their One Day International series match at the MCG in Melbourne, Friday, Jan. 16, 2009. AAP Image/Joe Castro
If only Ian Meckiff was playing international cricket today. The man was effectively no-balled out of cricket by the human eyes of umpire Colin Egar.
Now the computer takes over to determine if a player goes beyond the new magical mark of 15-degrees.
But how effective is this process?
South African Johan Botha in 2006 was cited for throwing, and biomechanical testing confirmed he was a chucker. He was suspended.
But then further testing was done later in the year, and “hallelujah, praise the lord,” Johan was cured from the chucking disease.
Well, of course, he was.
He had time to work on straightening out his action for the testers, didn’t he? And you can bet your bottom dollar, as soon as he was cleared to play again, that arm was bent from ball one.
The ICC chucking policy needs to be changed.
If they really want to stamp out chucking, a player needs to be cited secretly, so they are unaware of being monitored – otherwise they’ll just change their actions for a in-house test.
Which is exactly what Botha will do when the ICC’s human movement specialists monitor him. He probably won’t even bowl his doosra, which is the problem ball.
Players have to be tested while bowling in a proper match. This is the only way you can know for sure whether a player is a chucker.
Instead of investing in hawk-eye technology for every single match where the umpire review system is in place, they could use that money to pay a geek to invent a computer program that can analyse a bowler’s action during a match.
Surely technology is up to the point where a computer-aided television replay could gauge if a player is a chucker. Or just go old school and get the protractor out.
If this technology can be sought, it will erase doubts from people’s minds.
Whatever Muttiah Muralitharan does for the rest of his career, he will always be a suspected chucker in the eyes of many, despite what bio-mechanical testing showed.
I think his main action is okay. But it changes for his doosra, and there IS a question mark on that.
I’m sure Murali would love to prove once and for all that he’s not a chucker. And if he could be secretly tested in a match situation, which proves he is under 15-degrees, most Australians would finally regard him as one of the greatest spin bowlers.
It will be interesting to see what they do about Botha, if they do prove that he has been chucking a second time.
Will they give him another chance? Or will they say: “Sorry Johan, that arm is too bent, go and play baseball.”
If he is found guilty in the bio-mechanical testing, I would suspend him for life from cricket. Yes, it’s a bit harsh, but you have to make a stand.
At least Botha has been given a second chance. Ian Meckiff didn’t get any chances, and he didn’t have a computer to defend him.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Cricket articles
- What we do and don’t know about our Baggy Greens (112)
- Success of Twenty20 spells trouble for ODI cricket (106)
- Channel 9 commentators an annoyance this summer (102)
- One Day Cricket is suffering from Middle Child Syndrome (89)
- Cricket Australia must take a stand against racist spectators (89)
- Dave’s Warner-ful switch-hit panned by precious critics (84)
- Khawaja shouldn’t have been Shaun from the Test side (71)
- Clarke stars as Australia beat Sri Lanka
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (197)
- Hall of Fame for Indian legend Gavaskar
- Sri Lanka to target ‘weak’ Aussie bowlers
- India backing Rohit Sharma to find form
- Game-by-game preview of round 19
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (6)
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (197)
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (6)
- Pakistan’s win over England a triumph of character (21)
- Steve Waugh is right about cricket’s succession plan (5)
- India vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (180)
- Let’s talk about selection, Test fans (28)
- Pakistan win shows what’s beautiful about the game (13)
- Explore:
- Cricket, Ian Meckif, Johan Botha, Proteas
Nird99 said | April 16th 2009 @ 8:23am | Report comment
I also find it intersting that they are reviewd in non match situations. Of course they are not going to be putting as much work on the ball when they are testing. In the heat of the game they are going to be doing everything possible to snare that wicket. I guess the only problem with in match testing is the clothing. it could be very difficult to measure precise angles with some piece of material over elbows.
I also do not agree with the 15 degree angle for chucking. 1 degree does not make much of a difference, so in my mind if your arm is 14 degrees you are still a chucker.
sledgeross said | April 16th 2009 @ 8:24am | Report comment
Col Eagar made a good point. The human eye is a better judge about whether a ball is legitimate or not. Its plain that Botha is a chucker, but the ICC has allowed this to enter the game. I have no animosity towards Murali, Botha, Ahktar, Lee etc, because the ICC changes the rules to suit. We tend to get caught up in the “degrees”, but the real problem is when the arm is straightened after the bend.
If an umpire suspects a delivery is illegal because it has been thrown, then they should make the call. They are the ones out in the middle after all.
Mick of Newie said | April 16th 2009 @ 9:33am | Report comment
this article makes some good points. But lets be careful about how far we take this. If we insist upon everyone having an absolutely straight arm we might end up with fast bowlers with a top speed of about 120kph. Imagine how boring that would be. All quicks arms bend in the delivery action.
I am in 2 minds on the doosra. On one hand I accept the argument it is virtually impossible not to chuck it. On the other hand it has brought finger spin back into international cricket. Given cricket is a batsmen’s game it is fascinating to see bowlers redressing the balance a little. I would rather watch Murali of Harbajhan bowl than Ray Bright, Tim May or John Emburey).
Finally on Botha, the Sth African commentator Neil Malthorpe (I think that is right, sorry if not) recenlty advanced a theory that one of the reason Botha doesn’t play test cricket was that the selectors felt it was only a matter of time for him to be chucked out again. His theory was that the selectors figured that only playing one dayers and 20/20′s umpires would be less interested. This last bit has been proven incorrect but the first part of the theory is interesting.
eric said | April 16th 2009 @ 9:39am | Report comment
“The human eye is a better judge”!! Come off it Sledgeross. How much evidence do you need to see with cricket and tennis calls being overuled, showing the naked eye decision to be wrong. Admittedly that isn’t a cricket bowling action, but have you seen the super slo-mo shots from Channel 7′s tennis? If that camera was applied to a bowling action the argument would end.
Sure, the long sleeves dont help, and I doubt it is a coincidence that Botha wears them, but why not insist he wears short sleeves, and maybe even tell him the cameras may be on.
Spiro Zavos said | April 16th 2009 @ 10:11am | Report comment
This point about long sleeves and short sleeves is interesting. One of the first long-sleeved bowlers was Sonny Ramadhind, an off-spinner/flicker who looked as if the ball should be a leg-break but turned out to coming in from the off. Ramadhind bowled with a sort of flurry of arm-twirling that was reminscent of Murali.
He formed a terrific bowling partnership in the 1950s for the West Indies with Alfie Valentine, an orthodox left-arm spinner who really tweaked the ball. i watched Valentine in the nets once and the ball actually hummed with the spin the despectacled Valentine imparted on the ball. No Ray Bright rollers, here.
Thinking back on it and taking into account Eric’s point about the sleeves I’m inclined to think that Ramadhind might be have been a chucker, at least with some of his bowling.
As for Botha, the notion is probably right that if he doesn’t play Test cricket only an uneasy eye will be kept on him but nothing too severe.
sledgeross said | April 16th 2009 @ 10:52am | Report comment
Eric, Im talking specifically about throwing. You have to see things at full speed to make a decision. If you slow everything down to super slo-mo, everyone would have a bent arm!
eric said | April 16th 2009 @ 11:28am | Report comment
Sledgeross, with respect I can’t follow your point at all. Why do you have to see the delivery at full speed to make a decision? Surely slow motion analysis can help the process. And I beg to differ that everyone’s elbow is not fully extended in the critical last 50-90 degrees of rotation prior to release of the ball. I think most bowler’s elbows are fully extended from about the horizontal point through past delivery.
Spiro, interesting spelling of Ramadin?. To me, the action of elbow straightening, or throwing, for an offie, allows him to impart more spin, because of the whiplash effect. It also enables the wrist and index finger to be flexed around the ball, thereby allowing toppies and leggies to emerge. That can be done with a straight elbow, but only with a great loss of pace and spin and disguise.
Nird99 said | April 16th 2009 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
sledgeross I agree about umpires making the calls, the problem with this is that then countries would think umpires were picking on their bowlers, such as the Darrell Hair and Murali issue.
I also know that many bowlers, fast and spin bowlers alike bend their arms at some point. Mick of newie I dont think eliminating any bent arm would stop fast bowlers being fast. All we have to do is point to Lillee and Thompson, McGrath, McDermott etc etc just from an Australian perspective to show we can still have good quality quicks without bent arm actions.
We can also point to some hugely successful finger spinners with no question around their actions, Daniel Vittori, Ashley Mallett, Harbhajan and as far back as Jim laker.
I too think umpires need to make calls on the field. Like the Botha issue now, he is still allowed to play in the rest of the series until he has the analysis done. That does not hurt the team he is playing against. It would be like a runner who is on steroids being allowed to race until sunsequent tests.
Greg Russell said | April 16th 2009 @ 1:02pm | Report comment
This has been a highly educated discussion that I have enjoyed. I wish to add only two points:
1. The ICC has made a rod for its own back with its handling of Murali. We all know that is it primarily for sociopolitical reasons that his bowling has been allowed (remember, even Bishen Bedi said that he was appalled by Murali’s action, so it’s not just fat, white men who say this!). Given this it will be very hard for the ICC to ban bowlers like Botha who really do nothing more than what Murali is allowed to do.
2. Murali, Harbhajan, now Botha: the common theme here is that they are right-handed off-spin bowlers whose actions have been impugned on account of their doosra. I am no spin bowler, but it is indeed hard to escape the conclusion that when it comes to bowling the doosra well, “it is virtually impossible not to chuck it” (to quote Mick of Newie). The significance here is that without the doosra, Johan Botha just becomes Nathan Hauritz, i.e., much less effective and not very interesting to watch.
Which brings me to Mick of Newie’s follow-up point: “On the other hand it has brought finger spin back into international cricket. Given cricket is a batsmen’s game it is fascinating to see bowlers redressing the balance a little.”
I had never thought of this and I am inclined to agree. Therefore I find it difficult to see a way forward here in which cricket can be the winner. My only suggestion would be that in the ICC regulations on throwing, right-hand finger-spin bowlers might be allowed a few extra degrees of flexion. But it would be hard to argue that such a dispensation is equitable.
Hoy said | April 16th 2009 @ 2:04pm | Report comment
I have read several articles and the responses really get me riled up. Such things like “only when Australia lose do the chucking calls come out” etc. I don’t care that Australia lost. It was going to happen. Let’s not protect a chucker by saying it is just sour grapes. Particularly when the umpires were the ones who reported the action.
Botha was done before for throwing, I said on this sight when he was here last year, that he looked very suspect and was told then that he had been done before for it. Murali had the rules changed for him, so in effect he was throwing it, and then was made legal, and the other dickhead Singh looks no good throwing down the Doosra either.
I would suggest the only way for an offspinner to create legspin is (effetively) throwing. I actually thought that Murali was told not to bowl his doosra or else, and then he started taking wickets with the damn ball anyway.
On one hand it is seemingly terrible for a player to be no balled out of the game. It is almost the worst thing to happen to a cricketer isn’t it? Umpires want to make sure they have it right. On the other hand, people here saying human eyes are all that is needed, however with the 15 degree ruling it has made it awfully technical to call. Perhaps if it looks like a throw to the naked eye, maybe it should be called a throw. I would no ball Murali out of the game quite happily because every ball he bowls to me, looks like a bent elbow straightening.
I read that Botha has only taken three wickets at 59 or something this series. But lets look at it like this: if he has been done for chucking now, how long has it gone on, and how many games has he actually affected? You can bet your bottom dollar nothing has changed in his action since he started back after suspension for throwing, and yet years later, they have called him again. He didn’t change his action for that one recent game did he? Too bad for all the games and series his bowling did affect up til now.
As you may be able to tell, I feel pretty strongly on this. I don’t like rules being changed to accommodate people, and I don’t like Murali, because I think he still throws and flouts the law. The original law.