Sri Lankan spinner Muttiah Muralitharan. AP Photo/Aman Sharma
Murali! A hero to his legion of fans in Sri Lanka and among the Sri Lankan Diaspora worldwide. He has announced that the First Test against India at Galle on the 18th of July will be his last.
Shane Warne was a wonderful bowler but his one weakness was his googly. He paid tribute to Murali and his comments revealed a surprising ill-concealed lack of grace. It was like giving your mother-in-law a box of chocolates you know she is going to hate.
Speaking with Andrew Miller of Cricinfo, Warne had this to say: “He’s always had a smile on his face, even when he’s had to live through the doubters, because there will always be those people who say ‘did he, didn’t he?’”
Perhaps Warne did not mean it to sound like this, but you would have thought he would be more diplomatic.
For millions, Warne was a magician.
His short walk to the crease, the tongue sticking out, the deadly flipper, the outrageous leg-break – all of these were the hallmark of the greatest spinner.
Warne was raw theatre: the incredulous look on his face when Tendulkar or Laxman slog-swept him for six. The manic exultation when he dismissed Hudson. The schoolboy glee at deceiving Cullinan once again.
You could not script such drama.
Further on in his tribute, he had this to say: “I suppose in Murali’s case, he had such an unusual action that there’s always going to be that doubt with some people. Others have no doubts. But that’s always been the case with Murali and it’s just a fact of life.”
“If he had a normal action, he wouldn’t have been talked about. That only happens when you’re different. People will make their own mind up, but I thought he was wonderful for the game.”
Murali has been criticized by many in his tumultuous career, notably Bishen Singh Bedi who called him a “javelin thrower”, and our erstwhile former PM, John Howard, who called him a “chucker.”
He has steadfastly refused to give in.
His longevity is testament to his will power. He has made batsmen fight for every run. He has given the art of off-spinning a credibility not seen since Laker and Prasanna.
Murali dared to be different. This was his abiding legacy. Having accepted his 15 degree legitimacy, there is no need to doubt his action.
Australian batsmen played Murali better than most and Hayden especially had his measure with the slog-sweep and the straight hit over the fence. Damien Martyn, too, was assured against Murali because he played late and with soft hands.
Brian Lara played some of his greatest innings against Murali and in 2001 scored 688 runs in six innings on tracks that were turning more than a Catherine wheel.
In spite of Lara, Murali spun Sri Lanka to a 3-0 series win.
To Sri Lankans, Murali was a hero and often their entire cricket team.
He gave a semblance of unity to a country racked by civil unrest. He was an uncomplaining man, modest and not given to hyperbole, unless it was the exaggerated deception of his doosra.
In the end, determining the legitimacy of Murali as a “great” comes down to intent, just like in a murder case, and it is determined by a jury, which is not always unanimous.
But knowing the personality of the man and speaking with respected cricketers, Murali was a gentle person and does not have a vicious bone in his body.
If I was a one-man jury, I would have no hesitation in accepting him as one of the greatest spinners in history.
Roentig
Guest
Warne was accused of cheating, an inquiry was held, and he was proven to be a cheat. Murali was accused of cheating, and the investigation into the allegations showed that if he was cheating, so was 99% of the bowling fraternity. The only bowler whos arm had negligible extension was Ramnaresh Sarwan. QED (your argument), everyone else is a cheat. But yes, it is a shame when the powers condone banned substance abuse and players like Warney and Akhtar get off with lesser censure and punishment than some players do for smashing the stumps in anger. And as for comparing Warne, i havent said that you mentioned him have i? I brought him up to let you how Murali compares with the next best bowler in the business when his swollen Bangladesh figures are removed. And to explain that insipid opposition to spin also includes England.
Rabbitz
Roar Guru
Actually I was referring to Hare not Bucknor. Bucknor was treated poorly, but his time had come - The ICC could have moved earlier and more professionally, but this is a little off topic. As for the less baggage, well yes, now that Murali is finishing up that baggage is weight off the games shoulders.
Rabbitz
Roar Guru
Who are you answering here? I have made no mention of any other bowler or their record. I have never commented on Warnes record, in fact it isn't even relevant in this context. I have problem with him cheating - Well I have a problem with any sportsman who cheats, but it is worse when the powers that be condone and protect the cheating. Warne cheated and was punished. Murali cheated and was rewarded. As for records, what I have said is that if he wasn't a cheat and didn't bowl against insipid opposition he would not be regarded as such a good bowler and as such I am glad to see him bowing out of the game. I don't really care about the numbers in Wisden.
Roentig
Guest
youre lucky they changed the rules - because this means brett lee (whose faster 'un sometimes bends it to 14, compared with muralis 12 degree doosra) can keep bowling!
Roentig
Guest
i really cant see why you have issues with him being a cheat, when you are comparing his bowling record with that of a man who failed a drug test. if the ICC ran on athletic rules warne wouldnt even be the second highest wicket taker, but a mere 'cheat and a sook'. more to the point, check out a very good article that cricinfo brought out last week. it re-analyzes the bowling figures of warney and murali without balngadesh and zimbabwe games. and guess what, they're still neck and neck. not bad for a guy who didnt use banned substances to keep up, eh? plus warney bowled 6 times as much to the poms, who're spin bunnies.
Roentig
Guest
"all that's wrong with cricket today" can be kinda summed up with that comment. The ICC changed the laws to allow 99% of currently playing bowlers to continue to do so, not to assist murali. examining murali simply opened a can of worms. no umpire - let alone a bigot with a 2 dimensional TV - can detect sub 15-degree flexion. hence the limit. brett lee has been measured at 14+ degrees. murali's doosra goes at 12. only ramnaresh sarwan had sub 2-degree extension. what IS wrong with cricket today is taking the sheer joy of the game away from it. sledging a player when his sister died in a train accident is one example of this. bowlers failing drug tests is another. and promiscous sex lives and obscene smses pasted over tabloid covers qualifies too. murali - and sri lankan cricket - has been a bit above such rot.
Roentig
Guest
The ICC changed the law to allow 99% of current bowlers to play, Brett Lee included. Not that he worries about the 15 degree limit toomuch when he sends down that faster ball..
Roentig
Guest
Yes, he also no-balled the leg break that Murali sent along. how's that for calling it as you see it?
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Oracle, I did not think it had anything to do with your opionion. I should not have been so lazy as to lump my reply with that to Midfielder.. I have spoken with Darrell on the forfeited Test and agree he was within his rights.
Oracle
Guest
Sorry Vinay, but race had nothing to do with my comment. It was based on Hair being treated terribly for doing the right thing, of which being right in calling Murali was one of them.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Kersi,as usual spoken with honesty and the conviction that goes with it. I am intrigued by your "clumsy" tag...I can see that in his batting but bowling there is a rythm in his runup and a "madman's" whirring of arms and wrists but not clumsy in my opinion...manic maybe? He changed the conventional mould of the offspinner.
Kersi Meher-Homji
Guest
I refrained from joining this debate because I myself am not sure whether Murali "chucks" or not. He certainly does not do it on purpose as he was born with a physical defect. It appears that he chucks and by the old rules (prior to the 15 degree allowance) an umpire was justified in no-balling him. Now with the new rule, he is legitimate and that is all to it. I would give Murali not only the benefit of doubt but also a bouquet for overachieving despite a birth defect and howls of protests and criticisms. I would not place him in the Laker - Prasanna class as an off-spinner because he appears clumsy and not exactly "poetry in motion". Well done, Murali. You will be remembered, not only for your record but for your courage.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Rabbitz..you won't get a race card from me. Yes, there are always two parties to a conflict and your sentiments are not that different to many of the comments above,including from some Indians. Sport,like religion and politics,evokes strong feelings. I understand what you mean when you say the umpires were sacrificed but in the end it is for the greater good. Bucknor was sacrificed at the insistence of the Indians..that was wrong...but in hindsight he was getting old and perhaps relying on guesswork rather than eyesight. We all have to move on and the less baggage we carry the lighter we will feel. Me included.
Rabbitz
Roar Guru
For me, he was a cheat and a sook, thats the bottom line - and when the ICC changed the rules rather than enforcing them they lost all respect. The fact that they would rather spare the feelings of a cheating player by destroying the career of one of their umpires than to back the laws of the game is deplorable. Murali's record against Bangladesh is outstanding, but I suspect any A grade bowler would claim as many wickets, the Wallabies would look good if they were playing in the Pacific Cup, but they don't, so they don't look so good with real opposition. I am afraid that I am not alone in my opinion and a lot of us (despite the race card about to be played against me) are pleased that he is on the way out. I honestly believe the game is better off without him.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
WallyJ,Thank you for the kind words and your tempered civility I accept your sentiments and the obvious passion of your conviction. I cannot argue against the actual calling because I believe the umpires called it like they saw it. They were not bound to consider the wider ramifications of calling just as the ongoing debate about JH's suitablity. I also believe CA were not aware of the sensitivity of the situation when Murali was called. There was an outraged morality then, which with the wisdom of hindsight was provocative and divisve. A lot of my sentiments about Murali are also coloured ( I use the word advisedly) by his being a rallying focus for the plight of the Tamil people in Sri Lanka. I watch sport because apart from the individual striving, sport is also a reflection of the wider society we are all a part of. I would not deign to compare Benaud with Ranatunga because Ranatunga,in my opinion was, making a statement more for himself than Murali and from a position of entitlement rather than railing against misplaced justice. Benaud for me was the rennaisence man. An in.clusive captain and leader. A man who gave cricket the sense of entertainment and revived a moribund game. I trust I have given a rational explanation for my viewpoint. In closing to disagree is to care and sometimes in blind agreement there is no vindication.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Dan,sometimes I think the same of my photo,too.
Wally James
Roar Guru
Vinay I enjoyed this your article as I do all of yours regardless of whether I agree with you. However .... "His longevity is testament to his will power" is a sentiment with which I cannot agree. Certainly he had extraordinary will power. But his longevity seems to me to be due to a mixture of: (i) lack of support for umpires who correctly called him (ii) a weak ICC who changed the laws to allow him to continue to play There seems little doubt he was a decent man with great character and determination. Unfortunately, despite his apologists, he was a chucker. Benaud had the decency not to bowl Mekciff after he was called. The same can't be said of any Sri Lankan, great cricketers though they are.
Dan
Guest
Vinay, You've got to pick a better photo for the article next time. When I first glanced at it I thought it was going to be a piece on the ugliest people in sport lol.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Oracle, I think I have covered the Hair incident with Murali in my reply to Midfielder. And as far as the "forfeited" test I agree entirely with Darrell. And so did Michael Holding. Michael Holding actually resigned from the ICC technical committee because of this. And race had nothing to do with it. For those that may not know the skine tones of Holding and Hair are markedly different.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Midfielder,you raise a very important question ,that of Race and it is one that engenders a lot of vitroil and misconception. Race should not matter if we truly wish to be a global society. Race and immigration issues are seized by politicians for their own ends..largely to win votes and stay in power. We do not have statesmen in politics anymore. Sarkozy in France is legislating against the veil. Gillard is scare mongering in the Western suburbs. Abbott is point scoring and John Faulkner,the quiet one, has decided to draw stumps and in a way this is like you "simply gave up" America should be celebrating Obama but instead there are some calling him a "witch doctor" because of his Health reform. And what about India and Sri Lanka. Shasi above sums up the Indian viewpoint quite succinctly as "not enjoyable" But the Sri Lankans venerate Murali and while a part of me agrees with Shashi I can see the SL viewpoint. I can also view Murali as being "different" and in the context of the subsequent slow mos start to question if Ian Meckiff was badly done by. I am convinced Hair acted because he genuinely believed Murali chucked. But it soon degenerated into a race war. The media had a lot to do with this. Howard the politician should have been more circumspect..like yesterday he said " I have made my peace with him" Had their been a global world view back then in 1996 then this could have been handled differently. But with the advent of 24/7 news and the appetite of viewers for everchanging news, this has driven media(tv and print) to forget the power they really have in shaping perception. There has to be more responsibility all around...I blame politicians for a lot of our ills because they are mostly self serving.Stop and ask yourself, how will this be perceived? It comes back to changing values. Ranatunga was wrong to walk off. But he was standing up for a mate who had been humiliated in public. And the sea of white faces baying for Murali's blood raised his hackles. Gavaskar walking off in Melbourne in the 80's was not a good look and thankfully the manager persuaded him to go back. But sometimes a sportsman snaps and in battle you do what you think is necessary to survive.It can seem the whole world is against you. But in saying the above I believe we are making progress because we are willing to discuss the angst and try to move forward. Bitterness is a slow poison and has no room in the human spirit. I am therefore genuinely pleased that Murali has been able to survive all these years and wish him well.