Appropriately it is seen as a storm in a tea cup, and not a very large one at that as Muttiah Muralitharan has been banned from using the ‘doosra’. What is interesting though is that the decision was taken by the off-spinner’s own board, Sri Lanka Cricket. In a statement from London, the ICC has supported the ban but criticism from the island has so far been strangely muted. Just how much pressure the ICC had placed on SLC in implementing the ban no one is saying. But there is going to be an outcry from some sections of the media as well as those who do not understand the ramifications of the law under which the ban has been applied. It will be seen as an ‘unfair attack’ on a world-class player and Sri Lanka as a nation. They get very upset at what they see as interference in the progress of Murali as a wicket-taker. The ICC are going to be criticised and even censured in what is in reality a straightforward matter that has scientific support. None of the former captains under who he has served, from Rangatunga to Tillekeratne to Jayasuriya, have so far commented on the SLC report. While Murali’s eight wickets in the first Test in Harare last week took him past Courtney Walsh and sparked a celebration and patriotic outpouring on the tea islands, criticism of his action when delivering the ‘doosra’ continued to plague the bowler. It led to accusations that he was getting away with an illegal delivery. Despite this paper’s attempts to contact Ranatunga, the deputy minister in the government could not be reached. He has changed his mobile number and there is a suspicion that he has gone some of the way in agreeing to accept the findings of the University of Western Australia report which said the action violated the ICC’s code on the issue. The ICC allows for 10 per cent leeway but Murali’s action was measured at 14 per cent. It was after studying the report and in consultation with the ICC that SLC decided on their own recognisances to issue a banning order. ‘‘The report forwarded by SLC proves that the degree of straightening the arm falls outside the ICC’s specified levels of tolerance,’’ says a statement issued by the ICC after Malcolm Speed discussed the report with SLC. Former England opening batsman Chris Broad, now a member of the ICC referees panel, filed a report with the view that Murali’s action when bowling the ‘doosra’ did not comply with Law 24, notes two and three. Speed hoped that SLC’s decision to ban Murali from bowling the ‘doosra’ would end the matter and that he would not be reported over the action again. As it is there has long been an argument of whether Murali’s action with the ‘doosra’ was legal, although it was used most of last year and earlier this year. Murali said that it had taken him six to seven years to perfect the delivery and while there is now a noticeable change in the action of his normal deliveries, there are some thoughts that his bowling action still falls outside the law.
