Saeed Ajmal, the number one ODI bowler in the world, has now been deemed an official chucker by the ICC. This is the same man who was reported in 2009 and later cleared.
Did he change his action for the testing back then, but got so used to bowling outside the 15 degrees that he couldn’t do it this time around?
This is now a legitimate question because of the nature of in-house testing. As I wrote back in 2009, there are major issues with the ICC policy.
If you look at the players that have been cited in recent times some of the results showed throwing for some deliveries and not others. For example Marlon Samuels’ off-break is legal but his fast-deliveries are illegal.
Similarly, Johan Botha was suspended in February 2006 but was able to return to bowling in November of that year. In 2009 he was cited again and his doosra was found to be illegal.
These players are politely told they can continue bowling in international cricket but to “please refrain from bowling said illegal delivery”. Easier said than done.
Prosper Utseya, who picked up a hat trick against South Africa last month, was cited for a suspect action but had 21 days under the ICC rules before he had to undertake a test. So was able to play in the rest of the series.
Zimbabwe famously beat Australia and were an outside chance of making the final. If Utseya is suspended like Ajmal then how do we feel about his hat trick and heroics in that series? Likewise how do Pakistan fans feel knowing the cricketing world now has a large asterisk next to Ajmal’s career?
The ICC is determined not to end players’ careers and will give Ajmal every chance to rectify his action to bring it back to magical 15 degrees mark. The problem is the chance of relapse, which is developing a growing list of case studies.
The ICC says it’s keen to take a proactive approach and implement more testing for promising domestic players before they reach the international level.
However, testing someone in-house under controlled conditions at places such as Brisbane’s National Cricket Centre is no indication on how that player will bowl in a pressurised environment.
In 2004 the ICC used high-speed cameras at Champions Trophy matches to develop its own findings on what constitutes a throw. These cameras were able to develop 3D images on all bowlers and found almost every one had elbow bend of at least eight to 10 degrees.
This led to the now uniform stance of 15 degrees being defined as a throw. If these cameras were successful in redefining what a throw is, then why can’t they be used more often to weed out chuckers on the spot?
Like drug testing, high-speed cameras could be used randomly or in secret at matches a suspected player is involved in.
It’s unfair for fans, the player in question and opponents having a suspected chucker taking wickets in the 21 days before he has to front testing. Worse still, when a player is under suspicion from other players and commentators well before they are officially cited, allowing controversy to fester.
The fact one of the world’s best spinners in all formats is now out of the game, effectively cheating for who knows how long, makes this another dark moment for the sport.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
The figures on Ajmal being over 15 degrees are monsters. Makes you wonder 1) what was the testing like this time and 2) wtf was the testing like in 2009?
Riccardo
Guest
I feel sorry for Williamson. He is one of the small fry you allude to, a batsman, who is a part-timer. They made him test in Cardiff where no-one gets a reprieve. But it's being addressed and if it leads to the real protaganists being held to account, I guess it's positive.
Riccardo
Guest
Gold mate, gold...
Riccardo
Guest
Well, if Murali's involved he's fine. He'll be able to bowl the bamboosra and no-one will bat an eye-lid...
Riccardo
Guest
Like Tait you mean?
carnivean
Roar Rookie
The new testing centres require the bowler to achieve the same speeds and revolutions on the ball as are recorded during matches. This means that is is much harder to bowl with a different action in the testing than it used to be.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
It may not be quite this simple, but I've thought for ages that if they can use hawkeye technology to track the ball without having to have something special about the ball (like putting a chip in it that the system can read or something like that), then surely it's just a bit of an extension to this to be able to use the hawkeye type technology to monitor the bowling arm also.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
in fact, I think Aussies are pretty much harder on Chuckers than anywhere else in the world which is why you don't tend to see any bowlers with suspect actions reach international level in Australia.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Agreed. Unless you have some sort of deformity, it's almost impossible to bowl a genuine Doosra without throwing. Some things like the Carom ball or whatever they call it where it's flicked out of the fingers in a funny way that causes it to spin the other way could work, but the the Doosra, not so much.
Rellum
Roar Guru
Wearable solution is the obvious one, and to be honest it should not be that hard to set up a mocap style system. The big stumbling block for these guys will be getting a reading from the field as traditional mocap(reflective markers) will not work. I have always imagined a 3 "marker" setup but the team in that article are looking at a two marker rig. I will be intrigued as to how they get that to work will.
AlanKC
Guest
A good article on the subject here: http://www.economist.com/blogs/gametheory/2014/09/illegal-bowling-actions-cricket and there's a link to an article about how close "in game" monitoring may be. The problem with the current testing regime is that a bowler can generally modify their action during testing only to revert out on the paddock.
Nudge
Guest
Spot on DT
carnivean
Roar Rookie
Sri Lankan Cricket has started with a nation wide campaign to ensure that "chuckers" don't make it to the top without having remedied their actions. I think the Pakistan board recently announced something similar.
carnivean
Roar Rookie
Yes, but Simone forgave him.
carnivean
Roar Rookie
Botha was reviewed and cleared last year.
Julian King
Roar Guru
Hammy is a bit tight. Take some time to stretch. Slow over rates are punishable by fines and potential suspensions of captains.
Will Sinclair
Roar Guru
Yep. Also - pretending you have a problem with your shoes to try and waste time.
Will Sinclair
Roar Guru
I'm not saying this is how things are NOW. I'm saying this is how things SHOULD be.
Tom from Perth
Roar Rookie
Yep. Hit the nail on the head there DT.
Nick Inatey
Guest
Now slow overrates is an example of cheating. Cheating on the match, the TV viewer and the paying customer. These days the latter group of people are known as victims.