Well you heard it HERE first. One ball was all it took me. Jamie Jermaine Lawson's a chucker! Even the Spanker agrees! It was also the main topic of debate on each of the last two Fox Cricket Shows. And Patrick Smith on the radio on Monday morning. "He chucks. It's as simple as that. He can't be allowed to play!" He wrote the same Yesterday. And the District Firsts umpire I was talking to on Saturday. Now he's been officially CITED (Look at that arm!). The ump I talked to also said most of the umps he knows reckon Murali's a dead set javelin thrower. Personally I reckon he throws darts.
Anyhoo, it's becoming a habit but I again take issue with Spanky who contends the issue’s become an emotional one. "Unfortunately, emotion and politics take over when the matter of bowling actions is raised." He oughtta know! It was he who commented on the Boxing Day test in 1995 when Murali was no-balled. "A travesty. A disgrace. A black day. End of the world. Shattering. Etc." Not much emotion in that, is there? Cool your jets paddle-arse! It's also been Roebuck who's been at the forefront of the emotional push that maintains "Murali's a lovely boy. Nice smile. Wouldn't hurt a fly. Wouldn't throw. Sends his mother flowers. And things."
To my knowledge Roebuck's never come out and stated that he believes Murali throws. And Murali obviously throws. Spanker always hints at Aussie bias, cultural superiority or some scurrilous racist undertones. And that hoary old dud that says "What are you talking about! Brett Lee throws! No credibility teacher boy!"
Well, if he's prepared to concede calm and considered remedial action for Lawson; "No one need get upset about this suggestion" then it's on him to try to take the heat out of the situation. He still doesn't seem to want to acknowledge it though. "Several bowlers, most of them spinners, have been dealt with in this way and most have returned with the problems ironed out" No points for guessing who he's writing about. And Murali still chucks.
This all makes his comment that "If cricket buries its head in the sand, then the laws of the game might as well be torn up." seem all the more bizarre. Some of them HAVE been torn up. And primarily at the behest of pundits like Roebuck. The umps used to be able to call a throw. Not any more. They instigate a long-winded and flawed process that ultimately doesn't stop the bowler chucking in a match. Murali passing muster at a tainted international forum of Bowling Judges doesn't mean he can toss darts at the footmarks. If I pass my driving test it doesn't mean I can drive at 150kph down the wrong side of the road brandishing a beer can and running down cyclists. Much as I'd lik....Oops!....buy a bike of my own.
The umpires MUST be given back the right to call a throw a no-ball. The pundits must also treat it in the same light as overstepping the line. As just another bowling error. If you can't, or won't, bowl within the rules then you can't play. Simple as that. There's no point tearing up the rules to accommodate cheating. No matter how much it impinges on the ability of some sides to win.
By the way; I've always maintained that Courtney Walsh chucked his fast one. He chucked the one that got McDermott in Adelaide in Jan 1993. Coincidentally he's Lawson's mentor.
Comments