Murali: I will continue to bowl the doosra

[JASON]

So what does it imply then?

If this is a reply to my comment Re- How many times does this have to be repeated , then it's a good one.

 

[Sudeep]

I repeat, from the reports I have read, he has so far not implied or tried to make this a racial issue. He had only said "The pressure for the ban of the doosra is from Australia and England". He had said this was the result of an Anglo- Australian pressure to ban him. That is stating the status quo and not implying racism as far as I can see.

I watched an interview with my eyes, listened to it with my ears. Believe me his exact words were "The Western countries are trying to hold us down."

It might be a different one from what Cricinfo or other site have posted about. In the interview I watched, he didn't mention Australia or England, he specifically said the above.

 

[JASON]

I watched an interview with my eyes, listened to it with my ears. Believe me his exact words were "The Western countries are trying to hold us down."

It might be a different one from what Cricinfo or other site have posted about. In the interview I watched, he didn't mention Australia or England, he specifically said the above.

Even if he said western countries, I don't think that implies racism.

 

[Neil Pickup]

I don't know what you are on about, but it is his Doosra that has been found to be outside current threshold. He has been cleared with regard to his other deliveries over and over again.(in 96, 99 and 2004) . How many times does this need to be repeated before it gets registered?

If you are referring to the "Doosra" delivery in general, there are others who bowl it. The ICC plans to analyse all slow bowlers/spinners with regard to their deliveries and the 'Doosra' delivery of others who bowl it. This includes Harbhajan and Saqlain. So until they come with their analysis we cannot comment on whether they are all legal or illegal.

What Anzac's saying is that it's not that he's not allowed to bowl doosras, it's that the action he uses bowling it that is banned.

At least that's what I read into it..

 

[anzac]

What Anzac's saying is that it's not that he's not allowed to bowl doosras, it's that the action he uses bowling it that is banned.

At least that's what I read into it..

exactly.....

but it is banned BECAUSE it does NOT comply to the current LEGAL requirements re flex extension in regard to straightening of the arm during bowling delivery - NOT because of any on going attempt to get him banned..............and nothing to do with the type of delivery being bowled, other than to determine the aforementioned legal limits - i.e Spin....

 

[anzac]

I don't know what you are on about, but it is his Doosra that has been found to be outside current threshold. He has been cleared with regard to his other deliveries over and over again.(in 96, 99 and 2004) . How many times does this need to be repeated before it gets registered?

If you are referring to the "Doosra" delivery in general, there are others who bowl it. The ICC plans to analyse all slow bowlers/spinners with regard to their deliveries and the 'Doosra' delivery of others who bowl it. This includes Harbhajan and Saqlain. So until they come with their analysis we cannot comment on whether they are all legal or illegal.

ok lets go thru a little exercise here...........

phase 1 = my last post has just reiterated it is his bowling ACTION not his type of delivery - for covenience sake the term Doosra has been used by reporters etc as a point of reference NOT for the type of ball bowled, but for the action used when bowling the said ball.....so as to be able to distinguish the offending action..........

ok phase 2 = read my 2nd paragraph from the post you just referred this post 2 - re red herrings & using the term to mislead people etc..........

phase 3 = read you own post where you quote him regarding the banning of the Doosra & his comments as to who and why this has been done...........he implies that the Doosra has been banned as a result of pressure to ban him - does this not lend support to my earlier post?????

and straight from the horses mouth no less..........

 

[anzac]

by the way - apologies to all if I was not clear in my intent re the 2nd paragraph concerning the imagry / emotion of the term Doosra re Murali.......

 

[kasra]

So not only is he an arrogant cheat (continuing to bowl the banned doosra) but he is also a racist...

Ironic that the majority of these "white" countries champion schemes to get asians and people of other races involved in the game of cricket... Interesting that he has earnt a lot of money and had a great experience playing in a "white" countries competition (Lancashire)

This guy is really getting to me, a real one man walking crisis...

I repeat, he bowled the doosra during Phase 1 of the reporting rules and he was acting PERFECTLY WITHIN THE RULES. The official banning of the doosra by the ICC came AFTER the first test and before the second test. Again he acted according to the rules! He STOPPED bowling the doosra when he was officially asked to do so. That is the problem with his critics, facts don't seem to matter to them.

As for him being a racist, what a load of rubbish! You wouldn't know what racism is. Racism is for Sri Lankan cricketers to be called "black bastards" by fans (not drunken fans) and "Black monkeys" by opposition players when playing in Australia or the constant racist crap they have to read in the Murdoch press in Australia. That is racism!

Where's the evidence that he said "White countries"?? or is it another no-evidence attack on his character.

As for "white" countries as you put it (not Murali) championing people from other races being involved in the game, although that is very true, this issue has got nothing to do with that. It's about control, who remains in charge of the game. It's not that different from other international organisations like the IOC and UN.

 

[Sudeep]

Here's a QUOTE from the article I think Jason referred to:

"This ban is because of pressure from Australia and England. There is no problem in Asia. No one in Asia has complained about it."

Seems as if Murali still believes 'doosra' was legal.

And setting Australia/England and Asia apart specifically does mean something.

 

[kasra]

I repeat when he was officially told by the ICC to stop bowling the doosra after the first test but before the second test, he did so, in the second test. He is not responsible for the incompetence of the SLCB for releasing some of the results of the lab tests before the first Test thereby confusing the whole issue for everyone. But ICC's official position was made after the First Test. As for whether the SLCB told him to stop bowling the doosra, when he says they never did, I believe him. If you know anything about the SLCB, you would believe Murali over the SLCB anytime.

So he was NOT lying or has cheated in this whole matter.

As for Howard's comments, remember Howard responded to a question about whether Murali was a chucker and he responded yes, quoting the UWA tests. Only later did the doosra clarification come. So Murali was right in saying Howard did not know the facts. Remember back in March when Warne and Murali were racing towards the record, before the recent UWA tests were done, Howard implied Murali was a chucker. That confirms Howard's position on this matter was not based on facts as Murali quite clearly pointed out.

Murali's record as a tough competitor (including returning to bowl with serious injuries in ODI's just to help his team instead of staying in the comforts of the dressing room protecting his career) is ample evidence that he is NO coward.
As for his mouthing off to the press, do you blame someone who has been hounded for 8 years without any evidence to think that the recent banning of the doosra is part of the campaign by his critics. Shouldn't he be angry that only he has to undergo these tests given that the honesty and integrity of umpires and match referees cannot be trusted anymore (remember Ross Emerson no-balling Murali's leg spinners in 1996 and Chris Broad's comment about the three-year old doosra being a new one). Lets put all International bowlers to the lab test. Personally if I was in his position, I would have used lot stronger words than him.

As for my rose-coloured glasses, mate, they are clear glasses and will remain on until I see some real evidence from his critics.

 

[marc71178]

Shouldn't he be angry that only he has to undergo these tests given that the honesty and integrity of umpires and match referees cannot be trusted anymore

So for making the report, you're accusing Chris Broad of being dishonest?

It is not only he that has to undergo the tests, it is all bowlers with dubious actions.

 

[luckyeddie]

So for making the report, you're accusing Chris Broad of being dishonest?

It is not only he that has to undergo the tests, it is all bowlers with dubious actions.

I'll have to tell Murali my secret of sleeping at night.

Hey, Muttiah. Just because you ARE paranoid, it doesn't mean that they are NOT out to get you.

 

[anzac]

My understanding is that the ICC made a press release prior to the 2nd Test (in response to Murali's statement that he had not been told by anyone to stop using the Doosra), in which they said the relevant instruction had been given by the SLCB, who then came out & said that Murali was correct & that they had only ASKED him not to use it. The ICC then issued a 2nd statement saying that they had passed on the official testing results & relevant instructions re his illegal bowling action to both the SLCB & Murali, and that he was accordingly in Phase 1 of the process, which finished on the eve of the 2nd Test. Thus the notification must have come prior to the 1st Test for the completion date to end when it did. It is interesting to note that no further statements were subsequently issued to my knowledge by either the SLCB or Murali re the subject.

So far as the question of cheating is concerned I refer to my original post in light of the above.

Murali was reacting to Howard's latest comments re the current testing results - any prior comments have nothing to do with his reaction and are another smoke screen...........the prior comments may have been his opinion, but his latest are based upon the fact of the test results as he referred to. So what if he didn't refer to the Doosra at the time - as I said the Doosra is only the delivery he bowls which has the illegal action.

When will you people get it into your heads that it's the delivery ACTION that was reported, tested & found to be illegal - NOT the bloody delivery!!!! I'd prefer it to be referred to for what it is - a wrong-un. To say that anyone else bowls a Doosra is wrong - Doosra is Murali's nickname for his wrong-un, just as Warne has nicknames for his deliveries - it's all part of their mind games v opponent batsmen. As I said in an earlier post to continue to refer to the illegal action as the Doosra is deliberately misleading.

If he can mouth off in the press as he has re the Doosra & basically say he would use it regardless of who says what & is a man of his convictions, then IMO he should have put his money where his mouth is and continued to bowl the delivery, especially in light of his recent comments re it being part of the 'conspiracy' against him. The fact that he did not means that he did an about face in the space of about 24 hours of his original statement. IMO that makes him either a coward as he does not stand up for his convictions (unlike MacGill), a cheat as per my previous post, or it means that you can not take him at his word - take your pick but me I'm begining to wonder if he can lay straight in bed!!!!.

He is not the only bowler who undergoes testing re a suspect action.

You can use what ever words you like - you'd just end up looking even more of a d***head IMO. Rightly or wrongly (morally speaking) Murali was reported for a suspect action. As a consequence he WAS tested and his delivery ACTION WAS found to be ILLEGAL under the current laws of the game - nothing he or anyone else bleats on about any wrong doing is going to make the slightest bit of difference to either the results or the arrogance, disrespect, and sheer unsportsmanlike behavious he has exhibited during Phase 1 - end of story. What's the point to continuosly bring up the past or claim victimisation when he IS in the wrong - he has no legal defence!!!

And in reference to your last - you either need stronger glasses, a guide dog and / or lessons in Braille (sp?)!!!!

 

[chicane]

To say that anyone else bowls a Doosra is wrong - Doosra is Murali's nickname for his wrong-un, just as Warne has nicknames for his deliveries - it's all part of their mind games v opponent batsmen. As I said in an earlier post to continue to refer to the illegal action as the Doosra is deliberately misleading.

Wrong. The offie wrong-un was innovated by Saqlain Mushtaq and he called it the doosra(an urdu/hindi word for the other one). Later Murali and Harbhajan picked it up.

 

[luckyeddie]

Like Chicane says.

Incidentally, Ashley Giles calls his wrong un 'straight'. This is very confusing because his ripper and his arm-ball have the same name.

 

[anzac]

Wrong. The offie wrong-un was innovated by Saqlain Mushtaq and he called it the doosra(an urdu/hindi word for the other one). Later Murali and Harbhajan picked it up.

my bad - sort of proves my point tho' about it becoming synonymous with Murali as 'his' delivery...

and thanx for the history lesson...

 

[anzac]

Like Chicane says.

Incidentally, Ashley Giles calls his wrong un 'straight'. This is very confusing because his ripper and his arm-ball have the same name.

 

[kasra]

Mate, first of all, despite you descending to name calling, I'm gonna keep this exchange civil.

Second, ofcourse I know it's his delivery action for the doosra (worng un , whatever) that we re talking about and not the doosra itself.

Below is the link to the second statement issued by the ICC on the 14th of May, read it! (Remember the first test ended on the 8th of May)

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2004/MAY/145937_ICC_14MAY2004.html

Nowhere in it do they say that the ICC itself told Murali to stop bowling the "doosra". All they say is that Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) had provided them with copies of the advice they had provided to Murali. So you were wrong when you said Murali was told by the ICC to stop bowling the doosra. He is no liar or cheat! Proved! I will accept your apology in advance mate. Unless ofcourse you are just another Murali critic to whom facts don't matter.

Also nowhere does it say when SLC told Murali to stop bowling doosra if at all. Like I said ij my previous post, knowing the incompetence of the SLC, if I had to choose to believe between Murali and SLC, I will pick Murali anytime.

Yes, he mouthed off about continuing bowling the doosra and who knows why he changed his mind and I am not going to speculate. But given the concerted effort of many Australians (including ACB members now in the ICC) attempting to ban him from the game without any evidence, do you blame him for thinking this is anything but part of that campaign. He probably does not want to give them (the dishonest lot) the pleasure of success. That is my view anyway.

 

[JBH001]

Regarding Murali and unsportmanlike behaviour: I think a little perspective, and perhaps even a little understanding, is required.

Murali has been playing Tests for 13 years ever since his debut in 1991. In all that time when I have watched him bowl and bat and field he has radiated a sheer enjoyment and joy in the game. He usually has a big smile on his face and seems to be relishing every moment he spends on the cricket pitch. In all this time I have never seen him consciously do anything to despoil the great game.

It is true that recently he has been behaving like a prissy girl - whinging and complaining at the drop of a hat. But look at it from 2 perspectives.
One, how long must he be persecuted? And persecution it can be seen as. Leaving the doosra alone, the delivery action of the ball - according to the current rules - being deemed illegal, all other deliveries have been passed as OK. These from 1996 at the Uni of WA and the tests in 1999 also at the Uni of WA. He was also tested at the Uni of Hong Kong. Its worthwhile reminding people that Murali subjecting himself to tests was voluntary - apart from the first tests in 1996. He wanted it cleared up himself - that he had a unique biomechanical delivery action which gives the illusion of throwing, thus you have Ross Emerson calling him for 'throwing' leg spinners in 1998.
How long must he keep defending himself? Ideally the issue should have been settled in 1996, or even in 1999, but people (especially and predominantly a pathetically and shamefully biased Australian media and public) refused to accept it. With the result that even though only the Doosra delivery has been deemed illegal - he is suddenly branded a chucker all over again? This from the same Murali who has taken it all over most of his career and behaved impeccably? I didnt know Cricketers also had to be Saints.

The second is that Murali is a Tamil and the man who carries his Countries hopes with him wherever he goes. For those of you who dont know, the Tamils are a racial minority in Sri Lanka who have undergone a certain degree of persecution from the Sinhalese majority in years past. Murali was the first Tamil to play for Sri Lanka - and in his early years would have had people looking for him to fail because of who and what he is. Later, as he succeeded and the hope of peace began to dawn after years of civil war, he would become a symbol of reconciliation. He has handled all this while virtually carrying the Sri Lankan attack on his shoulders as primary strike and stock bowler for years. And all this without any complaint and usually a big smile or a cheeky grin on his face.

If now, he starts venting some steam, and starts behaving petulantly and angrily, can you honestly and reasonably blame him? This chucking issue has been done to death - as Peter Roebuck noted in an article, it is time for some respect. Murali is not just the finest Off Spinner of all time he is one the finest Cricketers to play the game and deserves the respect and accolade that is his due.

It is ironic, though, that he picks the doosra as the issue which sees him behaving in an 'unsportmanlike' or 'cheating' or 'cowardly' manner - as you describe him Anzac. As here he really may contravene the current rules - the rules may be amended in time, but as they stand he should abide by the decision of the ICC.

But this has ignited the whole chucking issue again - which rightly has been and ought to have been settled a long time ago. If Murali is behaving as he does - it is less an indictment on him than an indictment on the cricket loving
public who still beat up on this issue.

 

[luckyeddie]

Oh, I'm going back to bed.