• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Muralitharan a burglar,a thief and a dacoit : Bedi

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
I would not say no idea, I got it wrong though, just meant I did not remember it correctly, I am sure you make mistakes Jason8-)

We are not sending these people to gaol, just chatting on a forum, if I was in a court I would make sure I had my facts straight.

Sorry to Mr Dunn:)
Actually I have checked on Cricinfo- Apologies, It was Dunne who stood with Hair in the Second Test of that series in 95/96 when Murali was called.

But Peter Parker and Khizar Hyatt were the Umpires during the previous Test. And they did not call Murali either. So it was Darrell who singlehandedly decided to take up this Crusade.
 

archie mac

International Coach
lol, that example was to indicate that misplaced courage and stuff is not always good. Didn't really say it in reference to Hair, more of a general example. :)


No, I am not saying he was wrong in calling him, it is the fact that it looked so premeditated that troubles me.... Don't see how I can really explain it better here. I m at work, maybe will get back to this later. :)
No worries, I will claim a win :laugh:
 

archie mac

International Coach
Actually I have checked on Cricinfo- Apologies, It was Dunne who stood with Hair in the Second Test of that series in 95/96 when Murali was called.

But Peter Parker and Khizar Hyatt were the Umpires during the previous Test. And they did not call Murali either. So it was Darrell who singlehandedly decided to take up this Crusade.
I forgot the 'E'

I will have to re-check the book to get all of the facts, my memory is not working 100%. Have you read the book mate?:)
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
While others chose to write it in their reports such as SA's Steve Orchard as well I think .

Only Darrell wanted the Headlines and his own Drama to go with it.:laugh:
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
From the Archives of Cricinfo-
Dunne tells his side of Melbourne 1995

Lynn McConnell

August 4, 2003

Retired New Zealand umpire Steve Dunne has spilled the beans about his silence during the Muttiah Muralitharan throwing controversy at the Melbourne Cricket Ground in 1995.

Dunne, has written a book, 'Alone in the Middle: An Umpire's Story' with Otago Daily Times sportswriter Brent Edwards which is due to be published by Penguin New Zealand next week.

An extract was published in the newspaper today and contained Dunne's side of his controversial silence during the match. He recounted that he was standing at square leg when Muralitharan came on to bowl and was called for no-balls by Australian umpire Darrell Hair.

Hair walked across to Dunne and said to him: "Those no-balls were not for foot faults."

Dunne described the mounting tension and said in hindsight his view was: "Here was a cricket controversy of the first magnitude." Dunne said Sri Lankan captain Arjuna Ranatunga left the field and then came out and put Muralitharan on at Dunne's end.

"The atmosphere was electric. When spinners bowled, my method had always been to stand as close to the stumps as possible, because the closer you got the more likely you were to be able to pick up a bat-pad nick. I would have got a better view of Muralitharan's arm by standing back, but I elected not to change the habit I had formed - and which had served me well - during my umpiring career.

"There were many thoughts going through my mind. What do I do? Do I support Darrell Hair because he has called Muralitharan and do I call him as well? Or do I support what I believe, which was what we had discussed and decided at a conference in Coventry earlier this year?"

That conference had decided in the case of a suspect action that the matter would be reported to the match referee who would have the action filmed and sent to the International Cricket Council.

That had been the procedure followed during a tournament in Sharjah where Muralitharan had been playing and where he was the subject of a discussion between Hair, Dunne, English umpire Nigel Plews and match referee Raman Subba Row.

"Nigel, Darrell and I were unanimous in our belief that Muralitharan had a problem," Dunne wrote. "We told Dav Whatmore [coach] what we'd done and said that Sri Lanka should take remedial action because Muralitharan could have problems down the track.

"The short answer was that, during that dramatic day in Melbourne, I stuck to what had been agreed on and did not call him. The atmosphere between Darrell and me when we returned to the dressing room at stumps was, needless to say, cool. I have great respect for Darrell as an umpire and person. He is someone I've always got on very well with and still do."

Dunne continued by saying calling a player for throwing was virtually saying he couldn't play the game, and that was too "Godlike". He said he came under pressure from the media for not backing Hair up, but he countered by believing he had done the right thing.

"My argument was that he had played in about 30 Tests at the time, he had been watched by numerous umpires, and only one had called him. They were now telling me I was wrong by not supporting that one and disagreeing with the others."

Dunne recalled at the end of the match, the match referee, New Zealander Graham Dowling, had called him into his hotel room and asked why he hadn't called Muralitharan for throwing. Australian captain Mark Taylor had implied in his match report that Dunne was more concerned about standing in the next World Cup.


"That was absolute rubbish and made me very angry," Dunne said. "I still wouldn't call Muralitharan for throwing if I was umpiring him today. As I said before, I don't believe it's possible to do so with the naked eye and I wouldn't want to play God. But I would report him to the match referee on suspicion that his action might not be fair. He is a unique bowler, in more ways than one, and I suspect that problems he poses both to officialdom and opposition batsmen won't go away. They lie in the too-hard basket. It is not his fault, but he has caused more arguments than any player of the past decade. We don't seem to be any closer to a solution now than when Darrell Hair first called out 'no ball' in 1995."

Dunne also recalled the evening he stood in a one-day international in his home town Dunedin when Pakistan fast man Shoaib Akhtar unleashed a torrid display of fast bowling. Dunne, and his fellow umpire Doug Cowie, reported Akhtar to match referee Ranjan Madugalle because they weren't completely happy with his action.

"I might as well make my position clear about Akhtar. I don't believe he is a chucker, despite the fact that I, along with Doug, signed the report asking for his action to be investigated. I've seen the subsequent report produced by the University of Western Australia and it explains what he does with his arm, and that he doesn't throw," Dunne said.

© Cricinfo
 
Last edited:

adharcric

International Coach
Don't know (or care) if Hair's calling of Murali was right or wrong, but the umpire should technically ALWAYS be looking for the front-foot no-ball rather than the bowler's action.
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
The other umpire Dunn? had written a report to the ICC in which he claimed Murali was throwing the ball, not sure why he did not call him or support Hair, unless he thought Murali had suddenly changed his action?8-)

The word gutless comes to mind
Going by the above article Dunne came under pressure not just from Darrell Hair but also Graham Dowling from NZ who was match referree(who wanted him to call Murali) and Mark(Tubby) Taylor the Australian captain.

I would say it takes Guts for a man to stand his convictions despite pressure from those around him and I think you really owe Steve Dunne an apology for calling him 'Gut less' Just because he doesn't support your view.

Steve Dunne might sue you as well.:)
 

archie mac

International Coach
Going by the above article Dunne came under pressure not just from Darrell Hair but also Graham Dowling from NZ who was match referree(who wanted him to call Murali) and Mark(Tubby) Taylor the Australian captain.

I would say it takes Guts for a man to stand his convictions despite pressure from those around him and I think you really owe Steve Dunne an apology for calling him 'Gut less' Just because he doesn't support your view.

Steve Dunne might sue you as well.:)
I had not read that article, it seems that he also thought Murali had problems with his action. Yes on having read my first post I was out of line calling Dunne Gutless.

It was also his view to be fair (as well as mine), he chose to go a different way, but yes he may well have been braver then the rest
 
Last edited:

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Given what he has gone through because of Murali (allthough the fact that he went through it wasnt Murali's fault) you wouldnt expect Murali to be his favorite person wouold you:unsure:
Not sure how many books Hair has written but the only one I know of (in which he criticised Murali) was published long before any of the recent furore. And criticising Murali's action while still on the ICC Panel was, as David Frith said, "indiscreet".
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
The other umpire Dunn? had written a report to the ICC in which he claimed Murali was throwing the ball, not sure why he did not call him or support Hair, unless he thought Murali had suddenly changed his action?8-)

The word gutless comes to mind
I would not say no idea, I got it wrong though, just meant I did not remember it correctly, I am sure you make mistakes Jason8-)

We are not sending these people to gaol, just chatting on a forum, if I was in a court I would make sure I had my facts straight.

Sorry to Mr Dunn:)
well, misplaced courage is hardly worth congratulations, esp. when it involves ruining people's careers and lives. If not, we should congratulate HItler too for being able to stand up for his convictions and beliefts about the Jews.... 8-)


The thing is, it is an admirable quality when your convictions are right but when it isn't, you just end up looking like an ass. Murali did chuck under the old rules and I suppose in a way, Hair calling him made ICC look up at the whole issue with some ground-breaking results... But it could have so easily gone the other way and Murali could have been absolutely destroyed and the world would have never known that he wasn't doing anything that every other bowler wasn't doing. We would have lost one of the greatest bowlers of all time, heck one of the greatest cricketers of all time..... So, I am sorry, but I don't really have too many sympathies with Hair on this issue. And the way he came out in his book gets me to think that he did seem to have a personal agenda vis-a-vis Murali.
Well mate you know I thought he was correct, can never remember him saying anything personal against Murali just his action. You would think he is calling him a killer. He thought his action wrong and called him. I am sure he figured he would have some remedal work and would come back.

As for the thing about Hitler, lets not go right over the top, Hair did not chop off Murali's arm8-) 8-) 8-)
Hadn't read Jason's posts yet.
Dono about you, but I'm somewhat uncomfortable with the number of Rolleyes in the space of those 20 posts or so. The fact that most of them were reproduced by quote, sometimes twice, made it worse still.
 

archie mac

International Coach
Dono about you, but I'm somewhat uncomfortable with the number of Rolleyes in the space of those 20 posts or so. The fact that most of them were reproduced by quote, sometimes twice, made it worse still.
I don't know why? I thought it pretty clear that I was joking8-) 8-) 8-) :laugh:
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Eeek, Sean using the Rolleyes on me, never thought I'd see the day...













(Yes, I got the jest)
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
Am still looking for links to the news item re Clive Lloyd winning damages against "The Age" newspaper in Melbourne . This is all I have come up with so far from Wikipedia -

1981-82 - Australia won match 15 against the West Indies at Sydney on faster scoring rate in a rain shortened match. The Melbourne Age newspaper alleged that the West Indies threw the match to ensure the Australians got to the finals series. WI captain Clive Lloyd won a libel action against the newspaper and was awarded damages plus costs.
Any one who has links to that story please post in this thread for every one's benefit.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
The thing about defamation law is that you must be able to prove your reputation was damaged by the false claims.

You can't really compare Clive Lloyd's claim with Murali's, which I think is likely to fail.
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
The thing about defamation law is that you must be able to prove your reputation was damaged by the false claims.

You can't really compare Clive Lloyd's claim with Murali's, which I think is likely to fail.
On the contrary I believe Murali has a bloody good case to knock the daylights out of Bedi for good . It was real defamation of character not just of his bowling alone , we shall see.

Let the Judges decide.
 

Engle

State Vice-Captain
Intent is important. Is it Bedi's intent to deliberately defame Murali ? What motive would he have to do this ?
Or is it his passion for the game (and particularly the spinners art) that is the reason for his utterances.
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
Intent is important. Is it Bedi's intent to deliberately defame Murali ? What motive would he have to do this ?
Or is it his passion for the game (and particularly the spinners art) that is the reason for his utterances.
Bedi is well known for his jealousy. In India everyone knows he is a lunatic dementer. He holds a lot of grievance in his old dementing head because he thinks he played in an Era when players were not adequately rewarded (by remuneration or sponsorship etc.). He is well known to be envious of current day players and the income they earn.

He also has a lot of envy with regard to Murali as he thinks he was (in his own mind) a better spinner than Murali. In fact he anointed Harbhajan as the next great thing not too long ago and despises Murali for obvious reasons.

To call a guy a thief a dacoit and various other names is defamation of character and has nothing to do with upholding the game. Its pretty mean spirited and nothing else.

IMHO , Let the Judges decide whatever they see as appropriate. I hope the case gets filed in the UK and only if not possible then India.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Intent is important. Is it Bedi's intent to deliberately defame Murali ? What motive would he have to do this ?
Or is it his passion for the game (and particularly the spinners art) that is the reason for his utterances.
I don't think Bedi cares too much about the game, mate... He just wants to dish out whatever comes out of his mouth and see how much money he can make out of it...
 

Top