After Grog Blog

STRINGS ATTACHED

"It's not what you do, it's how you do it."

With that in mind ... Skycam.

When Skycam was introduced into the NFL there was a collective intake of breath at this amazing new visual technology. The hovering pictures seemed to come from a mini helicopter zooming around over the heads of the players. All very flash. All very wow-wee.

However, it wasn't long before Skycam's main inadequacy became apparent. For all it's undoubted televisual wonderment -- and in all probability, the fun of the joystick jockey in the control booth -- the sudden shifts from the static old boring Grandstandcam, to super wizz-bang new Skycam were very disorienting.

The upshot was an operational decision that, in the main, dictated play action would still be covered by the camera in the grandstand -- sorry, "bleachers" -- and that Skycam would to be used primarily to cover stop play incidents such as touch-down replays, conversions, coaches challenges and other irregular oddments that weren't in the normal run of play. Things like the dickhead with the phone in the goalpost, the wanker with a pen in his pants, the awful Superbowl halftime extravaganza and the various idiots and their obligatory Gatorade stunts. Actually, I loved the first two.

In short, a solid and clear wide-angle shot from a hundred odd metres, suddenly changing to a slightly hazy, slightly wobbly close-up from ten metres above the ball is NOT an advantage to the viewer. In fact, it's bloody annoying.

As it happens, Channel Nine would appear to be onto the problem because Gary Lyon on the Sunday Footy Show admitted there was some tinkering necessary. And we all know Nine virtually never admit to any slackness in their coverage.

So here's hoping Nine decide to dump Skycam as a play-by-play camera, and instead use it as a back-up to the main footage, and more importantly, announce when it is going to be used and not suddenly jump to a close-up of a player's noggin.

I wonder how Channel Ten will use it.

Afterthought: It just occurred to me -- while I was out teaching important things -- that if Nine (or Ten) decide Skycam is only good for side issues, then they may just decide it's not worth the effort and scrap the idea. Wouldn't that be a post-hype hoot?

Anyhoo, that's what I think, here's Leaping Larry L's take.

Nine's eye in the sky

At Friday's Essendon-Fremantle game, SkyCam turned up for its first night of AFL duty, replete with its own sponsor (of course).

During last week's FA Cup coverage, the thing made its presence felt mostly by wandering into shot itself, as the director seemed to forget to use it entirely.

Nine's footy coverage was never going to be as circumspect, and jumped in from the opening shot at the Docklands.

A couple of dots in the distance were visible on the ground. As the technological marvel in question meandered in their direction, quivering a little around the edges, it became apparent that the dots were Eddie McGuire and Garry Lyon. From a somewhat greater distance and height than we're used to seeing them, admittedly, but it was them for sure, eventually.

For those who haven't seen it, SkyCam resembles a small ten-pin bowling trophy suspended on pieces of string. Basically it's a remote-controlled camera that can move in three dimensions, and sit above the play, offering perspectives that conventional "manned" and earthbound cameras can't. Well, that's the theory.

Nine's coverage mostly used SkyCam on centre bounces, and behind the kicker on set-shots at goal which gives a clear, if somewhat distant, view of exactly what score is registered, if any.

At the bounces it generally offers a better perspective on the teams' stoppage tactics and set-up, at least when it doesn't tilt at an odd angle, and frame some of the players out, which it did on occasion.

Dermott Brereton is fond of a bit of tactics and strategy and was the first in the booth to exploit these SkyCam shots as a tool for dissection of the play.

Some sparing use of it for replays of boundary stoppages (shot straight down the ground) also allowed Brereton an opportunity to present an illustrated explanation of Essendon's superior set-up, and by the second quarter Lyon was indulging in this practice with similar alacrity.

On the downside, most SkyCam shots picked up blue-ish glare from the stadium lights, and seemed grainy.

Nine's picture quality on the Friday night games routinely presents colour and clarity you could build a ship on, and the new pictures didn't integrate well this time around. Rare attempts to incorporate it into running coverage resulted in one near-perfect fit and one mistimed shot featuring a lot of blurry, violently green grass.

Also, promotional footage of SkyCam had captured it zipping and soaring all over the NFL gridiron like the Red Baron meets Martin Scorsese. Most of the shots on Friday night were static, and when they weren't, they were wobbly.

The good news is, SkyCam was mostly used as a helpful additional tool in an already tight visual coverage, rather than a sore-thumb end unto itself.

Also, Nine has three more plays with the new toy this season, and practice makes perfect.

However, regarding Dennis Cometti's summary, "A portent of the future", suffice it to say that the future apparently hasn't shown up just yet.

RECUSED & AMUSED

The Scotsman published the following P.J.O'Rouke -- How about that? I just noticed there's only ONE "R" in O'Rouke -- article on the 27th, but I arrived there via a six paragraph excerpt in Saturday's Age.

Naturally the piece reeks of rancid death beast sentiment and other vile evilness of the left -- yes, you read that ... err ... right -- but it also contained the word "recuse", which was left right out of the Age portion. Dunno why. Perhaps because they, like me, had to look up what it meant.

Imagine: the US pulls out of everywhere

JOHN Kerry says America shouldn't cut and run. George Bush says America mustn't. But we don't have to retreat ignominiously from the war on terrorism and from our other international responsibilities and commitments; we can recuse ourselves - ie disqualify ourselves from participation on the grounds of personal bias.

We can explain to the court of global public opinion that, because America possesses the largest economy, the widest network of business relationships, and the only effective military force on earth, we have too great a vested interest in world events to render fair and impartial judgment.

On every issue of geopolitical adjudication, from 9/11 to the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change, America is a jury of cops and crime victims. A change in venire has already been called for by noisy street protesters, France and suchlike. Let�s accede to the pre-emptory challenge and go home.

The benefits will be immediate. We can cut $300 billion from our defence budget. This will be almost enough to pay for the ageing baby boomers' prescription drug benefits, which can now include Levitra, Botox and medicinal cannabis.

America will enjoy cleaner air and less traffic congestion as oil goes to $200 a barrel due to chaos in the Middle East. A US withdrawal from the Middle East will cause chaos, of course. Then again, a US intervention in the Middle East has caused chaos already. And, during those periods of history when the US was neither intervening in nor withdrawing from the Middle East, there was ... chaos.

The situation is akin to the famous complaint women have against men: failure to acknowledge that not every problem can be fixed. Sometimes the best thing is just a little sympathy. America had everyone's sympathy after the World Trade towers were attacked. We can get that sympathy back if we limit our foreign-policy objectives to whining.

One thing I will say in praise of the Third World is that people who live in rougher infrastructure situations than we do also do better with doing without. Their water and electricity and food supplies dry up periodically for no apparent reason, not just in war. The Iraqis definitely have this capacity. Their ability to self-organise as a society is terrible, but their ability to get the water pump going again with some wire and some rubber bands and a used spark plug from somebody's old car, it's incredible. In the farm area around Safwan, there are amazing old vehicles hung together with Scotch Tape that were still putting around. These people are tough and resourceful, and they've been through all this crap before. So they deal with things a little bit better than New Yorkers during blackouts.

One thing to whine about will be the fate of Israel. Without American safeguards, that nation is certain to be militarily attacked. To judge by previous Israeli wars, in 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973 and 1982, the result will be serious headaches for Israelis as the Knesset furiously debates the status of Jewish settlements outside Damascus and on the west bank of the Euphrates.

Elsewhere, however, Islamic fundamentalists will likely triumph. Is this necessarily a bad thing? Our own country was founded by people who, today, would be considered religious extremists. Perhaps a bond of fellow-feeling will grow between puritanical Muslims and heirs to American Puritanism. Maybe cultural exchanges of the old US-Soviet type can build people-to-people-based peaceful coexistence such as we had during the Kissinger era of detente. Visiting America on fellowship programmes, even the most fanatical members of al-Qaeda will be moved by the story of the Salem witch trials and their pious outcome. And while Hester Prynne was not stoned to death, her crime may be said to have been treated with the letter, if not the spirit, of sharia law.

Meanwhile, various unpopular rulers who have held on to power with American support will be forced to submit to the will of their people. Tony Blair comes to mind.

Other positive effects are to be expected. The United Nations, freed from superpower interference, will assume its rightful role exercising peacemaking functions - and getting plenty of exercise at it. Scores of belligerents, freed from superpower interference, will create opportunities for UN peacemaking functions, such as sending numerous bureaucrats, functionaries, commissions and inspection teams to keep combatants too busy with meetings and paperwork to have time to fight.

A NATO alliance that does not include the US will acquire a new sense of mission and purpose, especially in Gdansk, Istanbul and maybe Hamburg, when Russia resumes its historic quest for warm-water ports.

The threat of nuclear proliferation will abate as dangerous stockpiles of atomic weapons are quickly used up. The loss of life will be regrettable. But this will be counterbalanced by the welcome disappearance of long-standing international flashpoints when the India-Pakistan border is vaporised, Tehran disappears in a mushroom cloud, and whatever is left of the Korean Peninsula becomes reunited.

China will assume its proper role in the world. A booming China can be expected to concentrate on economic issues. Look for Beijing to create a "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere", so to speak. And China won't have to bomb Pearl Harbor. There will be nothing there but cruise ships - all in mothballs as a result of $200-a-barrel oil.

America's protesters against globalisation will be able to relax. An inward-looking America is bound to link military and diplomatic disengagement with higher trade barriers. There will be domestic political pressure to create jobs for the hundreds of thousands of returning military personnel, State Department employees, Peace Corps volunteers, network foreign-correspondents, etc.

Unfortunately, the jobs will be mostly mowing lawns and taking care of the children of husband/wife lawyer couples, since a decreasing involvement with foreign affairs will lead to an increasing resentment of foreign immigrants. (At a theoretical level, there may be no reason why Isolationism, Protectionism and Nativism should be conjoined. But we can hardly have Larry and Curly without Moe.)

Yet in a sensitive, diverse 21st-century America, we probably will be spared past excesses. Perhaps we'll see the rise of an In-Klusive Klux Klan. Plus, an increase in the minimum wage will solve the problem of employment inequities.

And the best thing about Americans recusing ourselves from global entanglements is that we will be loved again. Imagine a world where American manners and mores set the standard almost everywhere, where American fashions, American ideas and American lifestyles are universally sought out and copied. A world where people avidly listen to American music, eagerly watch American TV and movies, and try to imitate Americans in every way. Imagine a world where the US is so admired that people by the millions want nothing more than to come to America and recuse themselves from global entanglements.

NO COUGARS THANKS

Last week while at the Melbourne versus North Melbourne game, an attractive, breastily enhanced, female type person of the contradictory gender bounced down the steps toting an armload of drinks.

Almost in unison, a chorus of cheeky chappies yelled out, "Five Cougars, thanks."

Considering the majority of those within earshot were hale-well-met gents, the funny fellas' gelastic ribaldry received a hearty chuckle. From the ladies too, I might add.

Not for much longer it appears, marvy mega minister, Mary Delahunty's poised to get things sorted.

Time, gents, please

FEMALE bar staff have had enough of hearing their customers ask for "five Cougars, thanks".

Bartenders said leering drunks were sexually harassing them by making the flirtatious request up to 50 times a night.

But they don't want the bourbon -- they are just mimicking a TV ad in which a man is dazzled by a busty blonde in a tight Cougar T-shirt into asking for five Cougars.

The Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union said it received a steady stream of complaints every time the ad was shown.

Bar worker Beck May said some men already thought female bar staff were fair game for sexual innuendo and the ad made the situation worse.

"We are trapped in the bar with these hungry eyes drooling over us, each pot making us more attractive," she said.

"You have to put a big smile on your face. It does get horrible, you are trapped on this little catwalk. You just want to throw a Cougar at them."

Another bar worker said she had resorted to serving the drunks five Cougars then forcing them to pay.

LHMU spokeswoman Jane Farrell said the image of hospitality workers had moved away from the "barmaid" but the Cougar ads were dragging it backwards.

The union registered two written complaints with the Advertising Standards Bureau but received no response.

ASB chairman Robert Koltai said the organisation had received 121 complaints about the Cougar ads. The Advertising Standards Board reviewed the ads and deemed it reasonable.

During the review the advertiser explained the ad was "intentionally light-hearted".

But Ms Farrell said the board was out of touch.

Women's Affairs Minister Mary Delahunty said people being harassed should complain to Job Watch or the Equal Opportunity Commission.

More likely, it's already too late and the fix is in. This saying's gonna stick no matter what kind of social engineering ... err ... overdue corrective action is undertaken.

Advertising company -- mission accomplished.

UPDATE. Advertisers think so too.

Advertising redefines its creative edge

The Age asked eight movers and shakers in the Melbourne advertising industry what their favourite moments were in 2003 and what we can look forward to in 2004.

QUESTION: What was your favourite advertising campaign of the year?

David Chalke: To my eye, the best ads were the ones that took a fresh look at life, didn't take themselves seriously and blew a raspberry at the purse-lipped and politically correct. My favourites were the Hahn Light "bomb in the spa" ad, the "Five Cougars, thanks" and the Qantas-Wallabies "No, the other left" campaigns.

John Sintras: Heineken's work for the Rugby World Cup - witty and well crafted.

Andrew Scott: That's easy - the Hahn Light ad where the guy jumps into the spa. It's so simple and reflects exactly how the target audience thinks and feels. That is, both men and women.

Russell Howcroft: Apart from our own stuff, my favourite campaigns were the Cougar Bourbon "Five Cougars, thanks" and the Carlton Stirling "beer-lovers light".

Harold Mitchell: The TXU ads for both gas and electricity.

Ben Welsh: The best individual commercial this year would have to be the Tooheys "Quest" spot, which features a tongue on a mission to find a bottle of Tooheys. It won Gold at this year's award advertising ceremony and, by all accounts, is earning gold at the tills.

THE BOOFRA

The standard offie goes one way, the doosra the other. That means unless someone develops a delivery that goes backwards there's only one other way to go, and it looks like Darren Lehmann's perfected it -- straight.

Lehmann stars in big cricket win

A big Australian win over Zimbabwe gave the second one-day cricket match a more familiar ring to it, but a remarkable all-round performance from Darren Lehmann provided the big surprise.

Lehmann made 67 in Australia's total of 8-323 and then took a career-best 4-7 from 27 balls to help skittle Zimbabwe for 184 as the world champions won by 139 runs to take a 2-0 lead in the best-of-three series.

For all the gloomster's predictions of disaster, the Zims have performed pretty reasonably so far.

EXTRRA EXTRRA

From today's Herrald Sun. One wonders what RRupert would say.

RIDING THE BALONEY TONY

First off, I don't particularly have a problem with the media, in particular Nine reporter Tony Jones, outing Nathan Thompson's depression.

TV, radio and the papers have their motives, not the least "getting in first" -- I've never fully accepted that one -- and operate on the basis of a complex array of priorities.

And apart from the Demons being robbed, I also know rock all about depression. Although I'm slightly dubious of the plaintive claim that Thompson would somehow be harmed by having his news released 24 hours prior to his press conference.

However, it's when media folk start with the edge-of-bullshit double talk that I get pissed off.

That happened yesterday on SEN when Hawk honcho, John Hook complained that Jones had shafted him. Seven's Craig Hutchison reported on an anonymous Hawthorn player, as agreed with Hook....

"I'd received a promise no names would be used. As far as I'm concerned, from now on, Nine can go jump."

Tony Jones -- as it happens, also an SEN announcer -- later defended his position....

"Well, hang on. There were a million ... sorry ... lots of things said in our meeting ... any of which could be ... construed as permission ... or not ... you know ... the opposite. There might have been ... a misunderstanding on his part ... there was nothing set in concrete."

I take it from the last bit that Hook did indeed have a verbal agreement which HAD, in fact, been breached, and that Jones felt the need to "politely" remind Hook, "Stiff shit. Prove it."

And this, getting hot under the collar....

"Now! Come on! It's not as if I shot the president."

No one's suggesting you did, Tone. They're just saying you're a low swine who'd rather play word games than keep your word. And your facetious, irrelevant and childish retort confirms it.

Jones' closer was the give away....

"Listen. If we hadn't revealed the name, the papers would have tomorrow."

Fine, Scoop-boy. Say it up front and save us the squirms.

SPANK YOU VERY MUCH

I agree with Peter Roebuck. From a purely cricketing perspective, so what if Australia play a weakened Zimbabwe. It's not as if there haven't been plenty soft runs and wickets in the past....

ICC wrong to let Zimbabwe cricket off the hook

Nothing has been resolved in Zimbabwean cricket. No progress has been made. By cancelling its meeting after the abandonment of the Test matches, the International Cricket Council indicated it was satisfied with the state of affairs prevailing in that country. Zimbabwean officials were let off the hook without having to make a promise of any sort.

Malcolm Speed has spoken with Heath Streak and the ICC is familiar with the issues involved. Accordingly, it ill-behoved the game's governing body to ease the pressure on the Zimbabwe Cricket Union at this critical moment in the history of the game in that land.

Evidently, the ICC's sole concern has been the integrity of Test cricket. Once again, cricket's obsession with statistics has led it up the garden path. The point of the dispute is not the legitimacy of the side fielded by Zimbabwe or the value of the runs scored in those matches. Nothing less than the bona fides of the ZCU is at stake.

Peter Chingoka and his cronies have won a great victory. Malign forces at the ZCU can continue their malpractices unchecked. About the only hope is that presented with its own mortality, the ZCU will come to its senses. A cleaning of the stables is required but who has the strength for that? Not the current time-servers, one suspects.

Only cricket works itself into such a lather about statistics. Of course it is ridiculous that shavers have been elevated to the status of Test cricketers. Of course it is demeaning that runs can be easier to score and wickets easier to take than in a park on a Saturday afternoon. A fortnight ago, Kris Sangakarra and Marvan Atapattu scored Test double-centuries with the ease of children plucking apples from a tree.

But does anyone really care? English batsmen have been filling their proverbial boots against university bowlers for decades. Donkey drops have been bowled in first-class cricket.

Test cricket also has a chequered past. Don Bradman scored runs against weakened Indian teams led by incompetent gentlemen. S. F. Barnes scythed down South African teams that could hardly hold a bat. Some odd fellows represented Australia during the Packer years. Cricket has always had its distortions. Moreover, we are living in an age of soporific pitches and huge scores. Brian Lara has just reached 400 against the cream of England.

Test cricket never has been as pure as traditionalists imagine. In recent times, matches have been fixed, yet no attempt has been made to remove them from the books. Mere figures are not the issue.

Indeed, cricket has been presented with an opportunity to break the tyranny of the statisticians. It is starting to happen. Everyone knows that Rahul Dravid produced the best batting of last summer. His innings were an unforgettable affirmation of mastery of self and game. Contrastingly, nobody sensible dwells on the previous matches against a full-strength Zimbabwean side.

The current dispute in Zimbabwe has been caused by the racist policies pursued by its governing body. Zimbabwe has no reserve strength because white players have been driven away. Dark deeds have been done in the name of transformation.

The ICC has ignored the causes of the dispute and concentrated upon the reputation of Test cricket. Otherwise, it could not have allowed matches to take place next week without extracting some promise about the future governance of the game in Zimbabwe. Doubtless, officials wanted to stay on the sidelines in the hope that a compromise might be found. But there are no sidelines in this game. The ZCU has been taken over by men with agendas. Streak and company might well return for a while but it will not last. No cure has been found for cancers of this sort.

Australia's willingness to stay behind for some one-day matches confirms that Cricket Australia is likewise reluctant to take sides. But this is an issue that goes to the core of the game, not a discussion around a dinner table.

Cricket cannot duck this issue. The ICC must keep the heat on the ZCU. Chingoka and company must be reminded that prejudice has no place in this game. Cricket has survived dictators, wars and terrorists but it cannot turn a blind eye to the traitor in its own ranks.

Yes, it's true. "Bradman scored soft runs". And doesn't Spanky just love to cane Aussie buttocks with that one? I'm only surprised he didn't raise his usual point about weak post-war Pommy sides.

Never the less, he's right. Bradman DID score plenty of soft runs, but he also scored plenty of tough ones.

And that's the whole point. Sometimes in sport the going's good, othertimes, bloody hard. If that wasn't the case, no one would watch.

And speaking of soft runs ... and ... ahem ... wickets. Shrill Lanka just played the self same Zimbabwe hacks that weren't up to a series against Australia. Does that mean they're going to have to annul the results and hand back their runs and wickets?

PS: "Shavers"?

HERE'S LOOKIN' AT YOU GID

Gideon Haigh's Sunday Age article echoes my own concerns with the compromises made to the (in)vested interests influencing world cricket.

A test of integrity

Cancellation of the Zimbabwe cricket Tests offers only a small fig-leaf to cover a large embarrassment, writes Gideon Haigh.

George Bernard Shaw once said that an Englishman thought he was moral when he was simply feeling uncomfortable. The same, increasingly, seems to apply to our sportsmen and sporting administrators. How else to explain how a team of Australian cricketers, queasily conscious of the dubiousness of the honour, are guests of Robert Mugabe.

Sport has hardly been declared morality-free. We have furious, foam-flecked debates about matters that it would be flattery to call trivial: whether James Hird should have dissed an umpire, whether Sam Newman should be permitted in public without taking his medication. We nonetheless stumbled into Zimbabwe claiming heavy hearts and admitting utter confusion, while still mouthing the piety that "it's only a game of cricket" - to quote Adam Gilchrist.

Gilchrist's baffled column in The Age last week is perhaps the most telling artefact of this sorry affair, having recourse in discussion of Zimbabwe's plight to phrases such as "alleged heartache" and "reported suffering"; one awaits references to "apparent bombings" in Iraq and "rumoured detention" of asylum seekers. Zimbabwe's 11th-hour cancellation of the two-Test series provides only a very small fig-leaf to cover a very large embarrassment.

It should be clear that our cricketers found themselves in Harare not because they particularly wanted to be, or to further cricket's good name, or even because they were expecting a good game - quite the contrary, because the internal exile of the country's (mainly white) first XI has left a ragged (mainly black) second XI in its place, a catchweight contest had been expected.

Instead, they were there because of the consequences of their not going. Swingeing fines and a costly suspension awaited those member countries of the International Cricket Council breaching contractual undertakings to tour others; time will tell how it deals with those who rescind invitations. Cricket Australia described the exercise as "a box we have to tick". Boxes are an important cricket accessory, but not usually in this respect. It was a dismal auspice for a cricket tour.

This being Australia, from where the rest of the world is viewed as through the wrong end of a telescope, there has been precious little information about Zimbabwe's benightedness as a nation.

Free speech and fair elections are things of the past there; dissent is ruthlessly crushed by means from expropriation to execution. By every conventional measure, the country is sliding backwards. Life expectancy is lower than in 1960. Two-thirds of its population is on the brink of famine or "food-insecure", despite three-quarters of the country's grain already coming from the World Food Program. About three million of its people have fled, mostly to South Africa. The economy has contracted for four consecutive years. Inflation runs into hundreds of per cent, unemployment is at about 50 per cent. Nor are these acts of God; they are acts of Mugabe's corrupt, despotic and increasingly desperate regime in no more than a handful of years.

It was reasonably pointed out that we play sport against countries that are not exactly democratic fashion plates. What made this tour farcical, however, was the way Mugabe's ZANU-PF party has so unceremoniously wrested control of the Zimbabwean Cricket Union in the past few years, populating it with cronies, politicising its management and selection processes, and turning it into a vehicle for propaganda and personal aggrandisement.

Zimbabwe cricket's travails have hardly been secret. Since 2000, 20 leading players have left Zimbabwe prematurely, including Neil Johnson, Murray Goodwin, Andy Flower and Henry Olonga. The rest, courageously, held their peace until their captain, Heath Streak, made a private protest about various recent selections that on April 2 earned him the sack; they were then sacked for supporting him.

This was depicted to the world as a matter of race, which has a way of making liberal consciences quail. But what ZANU-PF has wrought in Zimbabwe cricket has been only marginally about the empowerment of black countrymen, or toppling a final graven idol of colonialism.

As with so much of the Mugabe "revolution", it has been about party apparatchiks seeking stature and another exchequer to raid amid encircling chaos. Remarkably, 12 members of the Zimbabwe Cricket Union and their partners managed to visit Australia during Zimbabwe's tour last season, all expenses defrayed - remarkably because the union struggles to keep a viable first-class cricket structure going in Zimbabwe. We should not only never have set foot in Zimbabwe; we should never have come close.

Such debate as there was about the advisability of Australia's tour, alas, was crushingly disappointing. Apologists ran the tired line that politics and sport should not mix; like it or not, they do, time and again, and it is the cricket union that has in this instance done the mixing. A counter-argument was that cheap runs and easy wickets on offer endangered the sanctity of cricket statistics, as though recalcitrant scorers might ignite an auto-da-fe fuelled by Wisdens.

It is strange to recall that cricket was once supersaturated with morality - sometimes to the point of nausea. These days, professional athletes are not expected to think about anything more than their sport, or at a pinch distinguish between sunglass sponsors or choose which nightclub to patronise. "The bottom line for me is that we are cricketers," wrote Ricky Ponting in his most recent book. "Our job is to play cricket."

Curiously, when it suits them, athletes love cloaking themselves in the flag, proclaiming the patriotic pride they derive from representing their countries - and we love it when they do.

Hundreds of millions of Indians and Pakistanis who revelled in their countries' recent Test series did not think they were watching 22 men doing their jobs. If Zimbabwe cricket were merely a place of work, ZANU-PF would never have coveted its control. Professional athletes should be careful about drawing too much attention to that "bottom line", lest they be taken at their word.

For here lies, for sport, perhaps this fiasco's most troubling dimension: not merely that moral arguments no longer have traction, but that they seem to have been supplanted by commercial considerations.

For the past seven weeks, the International Cricket Council has kept an incriminating silence, save for one ill-aimed volley from president Ehsan Mani on 7 May: "If the rebels believe that walking out will result in other countries interfering in Zimbabwean cricket, I think that they have been very badly advised." A strange world this when players sacked and expelled become "rebels" who are "walking out".

Then, on 18 May, after the cricket union had refused to meet his chief executive, Mani foreshadowed the meeting of the International Cricket Council's executive board, whose threat to the tour's standing finally precipitated its cancellation.

"It's up to the directors to determine if these matches should have Test status or not and to exercise their judgement as to what course of action best protects the integrity of the international game," he said.

V.V.S. Laxman could not have executed a glide more effortless.

One moment the ICC could not be "interfering in Zimbabwean cricket"; the next it had to protect "the integrity of the international game". For "integrity", though, read "value of the franchise".

In June 2000, the council signed a seven-year, $US550 million ($785 million) deal for the broadcasting of international cricket withGlobal Cricket Corporation,now an arm of News Corporation.

But Test matches in which teams declare at 3-713 - as Sri Lanka recently did against the new Zimbabwe - and one-day matches in which teams are routed for 35 - as the new Zimbabwe was recently against Sri Lanka - scarcely enrich cricket's commercial cachet.

It's unlikely Rupert Murdoch himself has been on the phone; more probably - like so many editors - the ICC has simply uncannily anticipated his concerns.

This is what happens when it becomes too vexing to distinguish right from wrong, being moral from feeling uncomfortable: money makes the decision for you.

Slightly unfair to Adam Gilchrist who, afterall, is merely mouthing an administrator's script. Not forgetting that in all probability Gilly's an adherant of the Ian Hunter school of clich� -- "Once bitten, twice shy".

Never the less, Gilly's platitudes are an obvious sign of the unhealthy compromises gnawing away at the heart of world cricket.

PS: Just noting down "swinge" in the AGB glossary of odd looking words.

S & M

You probably think I'm lying. Or making with the stupid wordplay; something along the lines of "Now that I have your attention." No, that's just lame. This post really is about S & M.

ROO BOO HOO

Ever wonder how different a player's career might have turned out if, by some unlucky quirk of fate, they'd started their careers at a less successful club? Dermott Brereton at St Kilda? Glen Jakovich at the Brisbane Bears? Mick Martin at Fitzroy? Shane Fell at Fremantle?

Might be a very different story, you'd think.

A good full-back was Mick, but out of the four "star" players mentioned above, it's hardly conceivable he'd have been a premiership player at the Roys. Unlike the Roos.

So you'd think ungrateful Mick might sit back and have a good hard think about the two premierships the Kangaroos had given him -- which except for the yips, should have been three -- before taking potshots at them.

Stars leave a bitter taste

Mick Martyn will regret his ridiculous and selfish behaviour over Glenn Archer's testimonial, just as Doug Hawkins clearly became more and more uncomfortable as last week progressed with his revelation he was still at odds with the Western Bulldogs.

MISPRINT DENIED

Ed: "Shit happens."

DOG WITH A BONE-HEAD

Let's be honest here, former Bulldog great Doug Hawkins was a fantastic player, but since his retirement after a token stint at Fitzroy, has been nothing short of a total waste of space.

A bland and witless commentator long on bluster, and short on sense in his gigs on MMM and Channel 7. Now he "contributes" to the colour at K-Rock as their special comments voice. Hmmm, "Special" Doug. Add to that his embarrassing in-house idiot role on Seven's truly embarrassing Live and Kicking.

And at least once every year, he manages to stick the boots into someone at the Bulldogs....

Hawkins blasts Rohde tactics

Matthew Richardson's 10-goal blitz, which single-handedly sunk the Western Bulldogs at the MCG yesterday, seems to have resurrected his career and Richmond's season.

While Richardson's performance was a class act, former Bulldogs champion and club games record holder Doug Hawkins let fly at coach Peter Rohde over his tactics.

Doug Hawkins gives blast to Bulldogs

DOUG Hawkins, one of the Bulldogs' favourite sons, yesterday lashed out at his former club and current president David Smorgon.

Not surprisingly, I've just heard someone's wrapped gaffer tape around the mouth of his statue outside Whitten Oval. No doubt a Bullies fan sick of Hawkins' nonsense.

From a tactical standpoint, can I just add this.

Peter Rhode has copped a fair bit of criticism for not switching Ryan Hargrave off Richo, and instead moving either Chris Grant or Jade Rawlings onto the hot Tiger full-forward.

Now I'm sure Rhode won't admit it, but in much the same way as Grant Thomas last year took a bucketing for playing a variety of players at full-back in the absence of the under-rated Luke Penny, then leaving them there when they were copping a hiding, Rhode may just have conceded that the Bullies can't win this year's flag -- no great surprise -- and is therefore content to try out other players in the key defensive post.

Add to this the fact that Rawlings was promised a key offensive post at the Bullies when he crossed from Hawthorn, and Grant is nearing the end of his career and hardly constitutes a long term key defensive prospect.

Just a thought.

NORTHERN HORATORY

Saturday:

"I await the usual whines from the left -- "there goes Howard again, raving on about cricket."

Didn't have to wait long. Tuesday via Gareth via Crikey:

Northern Territory Treasurer Syd Stirling launched a colourful rave in Question Time on the day he delivered the massively subsidised Territory budget and talked up the government's tourism, infrastructure and lifestyle spending. Our favourite lines were as follows:

"The Territory's great lifestyle gets even better. We are supporting more major events than ever before. I talked this morning of the cricket to the BassInTheGrass. I wish Prime Minister Howard would get his head out of it, Madam Speaker. Now we have Muralitheran, the greatest wicket taker in the history of the game, saying he will not come because the Prime Minister has the insensitivity to call him a chucker, and he won't come. He is likely to deny Territorians the spectacle of witnessing the greatest ever bowler in the history of the game turning the ball out at Marrara. The Member for Nelson agrees. He knows that the Prime Minister should have shut his mouth when he doesn't know what he is talking about.

I spoke with the Sri Lankan Ambassador at a lunch here with the Foreign Minister a week and a bit ago and I said: 'Will you please ask Mr Muralitheran to come to Australia for this next test series because we in Darwin are looking forward to seeing the greatest bowler on our home turf' and he said: 'I speak to Murali on a regular basis and I will pass that on'. Now, that was prior to this turkey of a Prime Minister getting out there and calling him a chucker. I hope that damage can be undone, but that is what we are bringing to Darwin: test cricket in the form of Sri Lanka and the world's greatest ever wicket taker."

"Colourful rave"? "Our favourite lines"? Ridiculous! Syd's obviously a crank desperate to attract attention. How's it possible for his loudly slurped suck-job to be seen in a charitable light without any concomitant criticism? So much for Crikey being an independant watchdog. Sounds more like an undergrad ALP booster newsletter every day.

As for this....

'Will you please ask Mr Muralitheran to come to Australia for this next test series because we in Darwin are looking forward to seeing the greatest bowler on our home turf'

Good god! Given that Murali's presence will have rock all effect on local tourism, Syd's fawning sycophancy -- to a cheat and thief, mind you -- can only be explained by one reason, party-political opportunism.

I wonder, has anyone asked Mark Latham whether he thinks Murali chucks?

BEND IT LIKE CHUCK'EM

Thanks to Perth's finest cub reporter, comes this ripper from John Townsend in the West Australian:

Muralitharan bends it too far

World cricket may have faced greater crises in its past but it has never experienced a greater farce.

The Muttiah Muralitharan circus has a ringmaster, enough clowns to fill a big top and a disbelieving audience gaping at each extraordinary swing from low point to low point.

Bring on the dancing pandas.

APPALLING CALLING GALLING

Tonight on Talking Footy, diminutive guest provoca-pundit Steve Price is running through his Ten Worst Commentators. By and large I agreed with last week's Ten Best Commentators. Give or take the odd inclusion/exclusion. Sadly, it's not as if we have a great deal of depth.

Right now I don't intend to cover the crop, but as coincidence would have it, on Sundee arvo I was driving back -- yes Adam, early -- from Geelong (pronounced G. Long) and for the first time was forced to endure the dubious priviledge of MMM's second string commentary team. As a result I formally nominate Paul Salmon as one of the Ten Worst Commentators. If not the worst.

Salmon possesses a shockingly dull bogan monotone that he mysteriously tries to inflect with a staccato sing-song delivery that seems to have been crow-barred into his speech patterns by the world's most demented media tutor.

Painfully for the listener, it means Salmon sounds contrived and un-natural, lacks the descriptive resources to illustrate anything but the most humdrum of on-field incidents and comes across with a complete lack of fluency and/or continuity.

Couple with that the notion that as a long serving senior league footballer you'd think that he'd offer at least something along the lines of an occasional tactical insight instead of merely tendering a sparse selection of the most bland and moribund football clich�s.

Shmeer in the odd suburban hipster yoof references to satisfy MMM's target audience of Cougar swilling Pearl Jam hobbledehoys and you complete the delivery package.

I find it staggering that MMM's production team would consider Salmon to be a worthwhile contributor to it's football coverage. He must be working gratis.

In short, a listening disaster.

Update: In no particular order, Price's list included some of the following....

Terry Wallace
Daniel Southern
Tom Hafey
Kevin Bartlett
Paul Salmon
Mal Brown
John Barnes at No.1

Don't agree with Barnsey -- Price also said League Teams was rubbish, so that's his credibility blown -- KB's ok, but the rest are frightful. And as you'd imagine, with KB as a host, there's been plenty of comment on SEN this morning.

DION THE MONEY, STILL DOES DOUGH

Time some of the higher profile batsmen stood up:

'Doosra' is on ice, says ICC

Zimbabwe batsman Dion Ebrahim saw enough of Muralitharan's bowling on Friday to form a strong opinion about the controversial off spinner.

At the end of the first day's play in the second Test, Sri Lanka were 0-18 after dismissing Zimbabwe for 228. Ebrahim, who compiled 70, held Zimbabwe's innings together.

Asked if he had seen an example of Muralitharan's doosra while he was batting, Ebrahim said: "I don't think so, although he did bowl the top-spinner."

Ebrahim was, however, the recipient of a surprise orthodox leg break.

"That was the first legal delivery he bowled - that's my personal opinion," the Zimbabwean said.

The upshot is, although it's totally unsatisfactory -- wrong, in fact -- for a sportsman to be be censured for criticising an opponent's technique, that was never going to go un-punished:

Ban stirs up more trouble

Ebrahim was suspended when Sri Lanka complained to referee Mike Procter about a comment the batsman made on the opening day of the Test.

Shrill Lanka.

HUFF BOYCOTT

Who says they never print good news?

Murali upset by PM's comments

Muttiah Muralitharan has all but decided to boycott this winter's tour of Australia on the strength of Prime Minister John Howard's comments branding him a chucker.

A devastated Muralitharan described Howard's remarks as "very unnecessary", and told The Sunday Age they would probably cause him to change his mind about touring Australia for two Tests in Darwin and Cairns, potentially robbing crowds of an opportunity to witness another world-record shootout between him and Shane Warne.

"potentially robbing crowds"? I don't feel robbed. Malcolm Conn's dubious at best:

No surprise if Murali becomes accidental tourist

So far his words of defiance haven't been matched by deeds. He threatened retirement, then insisted he would continue to turn the ball away from right-handed batsmen despite the International Cricket Council ruling this new delivery illegal.

Murali's firm though:

Murali expected to boycott July Test series

THE storm around Muttiah Muralitharan's suspect bowling action grew yesterday when the Sri Lankan insisted he would boycott Australia this winter because of Prime Minister John Howard.

"I won't be going because of the Australian Prime Minister," 

Shamelessly linking sport and politics ... yet another reason to vote for Howard.

A LITTLE DAB'LL DOOSRA

Suggesting there may have been the occasional upside to the Nazi party's twelve year Thousand Year Reich is enough to cause your common and garden anti-fascist to foam at the mouth.

But to be fair, the Nazis had the odd nice road. The Airfix Tiger tank craps all over those wussy Churchills and Shermans. And let's cut right to the chase -- I mean, right to it -- they had by far the coolest uniforms.

Just as provocative -- well, it is... a bit ... sort of ... shut up -- even though I agree with what he's on about, in much the same way the mostly nasty Nazis could whip up some very high class clobber indeed, I fear Damien Fleming may be sailing rather close to the wind....

We need a doosra

THE banning of Muthiah Muralidaran's dodgy doosra will not stop Australia from trying to arm its next generation of spinners with a legalised version of cricket's deadly weapon.

Certainly I approve of the experimentation in pursuit of excellence, but I'd want to see some extremely conclusive proof that it wasn't a sly chuck before it was approved for match usage.

SHEED ALL ABOUT IT

In yesterday's Herald Sun, unlinked and unarchived, Kevin Sheedy lays into Murali. There's plenty in the article that would be robustly argued, the two tiers, deducting wickets, copy-cat juniors -- no doubt Sheeds would say he's merely  floating ideas -- but the guy's got eyes and he obviously knows what he sees:

As a fan and a cricket lover, Murali turns me off the game

This week Muttiah Muralidaran broke the world record for Test wickets, but did as much harm to the sport of cricket so many of us love.

I only played district cricket as a leg spinner but, as a fan and a cricket lover, Murali turns me off the game.

He should be playing baseball or some other sport because he chucks his off spinners and now he throws the "doosra" even more.

Sheeds is right about Murali chucking, but elsewhere:

1) What with the comp Kenya, Holland and even the USA play in, we've already got two tiers. The problem is Bangladesh were promoted too early, and Zimbabwe are a basket case. Perhaps they could be sent back.

2) Deducting wickets is stupid. Do the ICC next deduct bunny wickets? Jim Higgs, Courtney Walsh, Bagwat Chrandrashekar?

3) The ICC are already dealing with flawed actions in the junior ranks. Chances are that dodgy offies won't ever again get through the system.

His core point though, that umpires should be allowed -- I maintain encouraged -- to call throws is an absolute must.

BIN A NUTSHELL

Up to date as usual. Here are a couple things from Patrick Smith on Friday....

One, time to put out the rubbish:

Muralitharan action should see him in spin bin

THE ICC has ruled that Muttiah Muralitharan is not allowed to bowl his doosra delivery. Therefore Muralitharan should not be allowed to bowl at all. The scientists have deemed him a thrower.

Too right. I, for one, wouldn't have a problem if Murali was tossed -- boom, tish -- out of the game for good.

And two, come on ICC, come on, come on:

And the fact that Muralitharan's rise to world champion bowler entered the record books in a match against Zimbabwe when the performances of champion cricketers in the intense and brilliant World Series Cricket continue to be ignored by Wisden and the ICC is obscene. Utterly.

I hadn't thought of the WSC conundrum in a while. Smith's right of course. The wickets and runs scored in the summers of 1977/78 and 1978/79 were infinitely harder won than the recent playground figures achieved against hopeless minnows.

HOWARD: THE CHUCK

I await the usual whines from the left -- "there goes Howard again, raving on about cricket" -- because via Simon comes notification of some very very high level support indeed.

A word of warning though, brace yourself for a disturbing last paragraph:

Murali chucks, claims Howard

MUTTIAH Muralitharan could boycott Australia this winter after Prime Minister John Howard added to the pressure on Test cricket's greatest wicket-taker yesterday by claiming he bowled with an illegal action.

The view won't be received well by Murali, who had already told friends he may quit the sport because of the controversy raging over his suspect doosra delivery.

Howard entered the Murali debate with a doosra of his own - going public with his belief that Murali is a chucker.

The PM - who former Test spinner Kerry O'Keeffe once described as the most biomechanically correct off-spinner in politics - believes it has been proven beyond doubt that the master Sri Lankan tweaker has an illegal action.

Asked at a lunchtime meeting of party faithful on the NSW South Coast if Muralitharan chucked the ball, Howard said: "Yes. They proved it in Perth too [with biomechanical tests]."

After being reported to the ICC over a suspect action, Muralitharan has been ordered to stop bowling his fearsome delivery or face being suspended for up to a year.

But he has vowed to continue bowling it.

A leaked report into the testing of Muralitharan's action has called for other off-spin bowlers to have their doosra tested.

The extensive document, e-mailed to The Daily Telegraph from the sub-continent yesterday, says the likes of India's Harbhajan Singh and Pakistan's Saqlain Mushtaq and Shoaib Malik should undergo the same tests as Muralitharan in the name of fairness.

Written by former West Australian coach Daryl Foster, who helped test Muralitharan, the document states that it is too early to ban the controversial delivery.

The report also confirms the rubber-wristed Muralitharan has a quicker arm rotation than many fast bowlers and that a case could be made for him to be allowed an arm flex of 14 degrees - nine more than the legal limit.

And I say test Harby. I've been suss of him since 2001, but I'm not convinced Saqlain has a case to answer.

PS: Hardly a flattering headline from Sarth Efrica: "Howard joins in Murali bashing". "Bashing"? What bashing? Guess it's more colourful than: "Howard is right".

I DARES YA! DOOSYA WORST!

Sadly, Murali just doesn't get it. Surely he realises "all those new rules about how many degrees a bowler's arm is allowed to bend" have been introduced to advantage him.

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you....

I'll bowl my doosra: Murali

FURIOUS Sri Lankan spinner Muttiah Muralitharan is contemplating risking a year's ban from the game today by bowling his banned doosra in the second Test against Zimbabwe.

Muralitharan told The Daily Telegraph last night he was consulting with his lawyers over his right to bowl the delivery which the International Cricket Council has declared illegal following scientific tests by the University of Western Australia in Perth.

If Muralitharan bowls the delivery and gets reported today he could face a year suspension under newly introduced ICC legislation.

"I just want a fair deal," Muralitharan said from Bulawayo in his first public comment since the ban was handed down.

"I want to bowl it [today] but I will have to talk to my lawyers. I feel I have been harassed unfairly.

"I will fight for my rights. I don't think it is right to bring in all those new rules about how many degrees a bowler's arm is allowed to bend and then test only one spinner.

"Why are they not testing other spinners around the world? Why is it just me?

"I have read about a study in Australia where every fast bowler tested is said to have an action where their arm straightens. Only by testing other spinners can they make a judgment on me. Yet I am the only one officially tested.

"How can you ban the doosra? I want to bowl it for the team and for the coach. I want to bowl it [today] but I will have to see whether it will put my career at risk."

Scientific tests have ruled that Muralitharan's arm bends up to 14 degrees in delivering the mystical delivery, which turns from leg to off. Under new legislation, spinners are allowed a five-degree level of tolerance, medium pacers 7.5 degrees and fast bowlers 10 degrees.

Sri Lanka coach John Dyson said he would not instruct Muralitharan, who is battling a finger injury and must pass a fitness test before play, not to bowl the doosra.

"I won't be instructing Murali to do anything," Dyson said. "I have had no official contact with the ICC. Murali is Murali. We haven't even talked about this."

Muralitharan was instructed by the Sri Lankan Board not to bowl the delivery in the first Test against a woeful Zimbabwe side missing a group of senior players who have been sacked after a contract dispute.

But as a gesture of defiance, he bowled it regularly and took several wickets with it on the way to eclipsing West Indies' Courtney Walsh (519) as the game's highest wicket-taker.

Muralitharan was reported by match referee Chris Broad following the three-Test series against Australia in March.

Under ICC laws, he could not be reported again for a six-week period, which ended at midnight last night.

Match referee Mike Procter faces the most important match of his career as he casts an eye over the wily champion and decides what course of action should be taken if the spinner bowls cricket's most controversial ball.

My bet is the wily champion won't risk it, but one wonders with what sort of intensity the TV cameras will now focus on his action. The cricket world -- those that can see the match, anyway -- will be watching intently.

HEAL BE RIGHT

Please excuse the moth-eaten nature of recent posts, you wouldn't believe it, lately I've been working too hard. Three sick teachers have meant four fill in classes in the last week alone. Rest assured I'll soon have my rigorous work schedule back -- waaaaay back -- to it's regular pace. Can you class "inertia" as pace?

It's got it's upside, at least with different students I've been forced to listen to a whole new brand of conversation...

"Hey Fuckface? Am I driving your fuckin' bitch-arse home tonight?"

I'm pretty sure that was an inquiry as to Fuckface's mode of evening transportation.

As far as blogging's concerned though, I've been forced to read the papers one day, gather the relevant links later that day, and put 'em all together the next day ... or later. Commenting's been restricted as well.

However, just to prove that some things never change .... here's something on cricket.

Straya's best TV commentator tells it as it is. Although you have to feel sorry for Adam Gilchrist who's on the record as far as the Chucker's concerned, yet he keeps getting wheeled out to toe the party line....

Healy calls for total overhaul as Muralitharan is warned of ban

THE entire bowling action of Sri Lankan world record-breaker Muttiah Muralitharan should be comprehensively re-analysed, former Australian wicketkeeper Ian Healy said yesterday.

Speaking after the International Cricket Council ruled that Murali's new delivery, the doosra, was illegal and threatened the spinner with a 12-month ban, Healy said it was not enough to examine just one type of ball from the controversial bowler.

If Muralitharan bowls the doosra in Sri Lanka's second Test against Zimbabwe in Bulawayo, beginning tomorrow, and is reported by the match referee, he can be suspended for a year.

Sri Lanka Cricket has officially instructed him not to bowl the delivery, which turns the opposite way to his normal off-break.

Healy claimed that analysing any bowler in laboratory conditions was a waste of time.

"It should all be done from live action in the pressure of a game," Healy told The Australian.

He described the recent examination of Muralitharan's action at the University of Western Australia as "a bit thin".

"It's a bit of a shame," Healy said. "The public wants to know how the rest of his action stands up.

"Let's get the whole thing analysed. If I was Murali, I would want that."

Australia captain Ricky Ponting believes that Murali's action may have deteriorated recently.

"It might have got worse over the last couple of months," Ponting said at a training camp in Brisbane yesterday.

"He certainly hasn't taken all his Test wickets with that delivery."

Vice-captain Adam Gilchrist, who was reprimanded by Cricket Australia last year for suggesting that Muralitharan had a questionable action, claimed that the Sri Lankan's world record of 521 wickets should stand because his bowling had been considered legal up to that point.

"I don't think we should get too precious about this. I think he is a great exponent of what he does," Gilchrist said.

"I think he is talented enough and resilient enough to refine the delivery or develop something else."

During the six-week first phase of the ICC's complicated bowling action review procedure, Muralitharan has been allowed to continue bowling, doosra and all. However, that stage ends today and ICC chief executive executive Malcolm Speed warned that under ICC regulations, Muralitharan could face a 12-month ban if he persisted with the doosra.

"Should the bowler go against the wishes of his board, bowl this delivery and subsequently be reported within 12 months of the initial report, the issue would progress to stage two of the ICC's process for dealing with bowlers with suspected illegal bowling actions," Speed said.

"This would result in this delivery being scrutinised by the ICC's own bowling review group, which has the power to impose a ban of 12 months on the bowler if his action is deemed illegal."

Muralitharan broke the previous record of 519 wickets held by retired West Indies fast bowler Courtney Walsh against a below-strength Zimbabwe side in Harare last week.

The Sri Lankan has been no-balled for "throwing" in the past by three Australian umpires.

Match referee Chris Broad reported him to the ICC after the spinner used the doosra during Sri Lanka's home Test series against Australia in March.

He was then sent to Australia to work on his bowling action with a biomechanical expert.

The report showed an initial straightening of the arm of around 14 degrees which after some remedial work was reduced to 10 degrees.

This compares with an allowable level of tolerance for spinners of five degrees under ICC regulations.

"The degree of straightening is well outside the ICC's specified levels of tolerance," Speed said.

"In light of this finding, Sri Lanka Cricket has now advised the ICC that it has instructed Mr Muralitharan not to bowl this delivery in international cricket. The ICC supports this action."

ACCOMMODATION BOOKED

Some people never give up. Despite the Doosra being banned by the ICC, Daryl Foster -- booking in some steady work -- is determined to accommodate Murali.

Unfortunately, unlinked in today's Herald Sun , Dazza damns himself with his own words -- "I don't think you can have arbitrary figures of five, 7.5 and 10 -- I think you are making a mockery of it".

Precisely. A mockery. The only non-arbitrary figure is 0 degrees.

Foster: Doosra will be back

MUTHIAH Muralidaran may not have long to wait before bowling his doosra again, despite being ordered to shelve the controversial delivery.

After weeks of conjecture, the International Cricket Council has finally made official what many have long known -- that the Sri Lankan off-spinner bowls his ungainly leg-spinning delivery with an illegal arm flex.

But Australian captain Ricky Ponting and deputy Adam Gilchrist have dismissed suggestions that Muralidaran, who took his 520th Test scalp on Sunday to become the game's all-time leading wicket-taker, should be stripped of the record.

"It might have got worse over the last couple of months, but he certainly hasn't taken all of his Test wickets with that delivery," Ponting said.

"I would be surprised if he took many wickets with that delivery at all."

Gilchrist said Muralidaran, the world's No. 1 ranked bowler, would remain a potent force.

"He is talented enough and showed he is resilient enough to develop something else, or maybe refine that ball so it does meet the standards, or the rules may change," he said.

"To take that one ball out of his repertoire does not mean he is an ordinary bowler."

The ICC said yesterday it supported the decision by the Sri Lankan Cricket Board to order its master tweaker not to bowl the delivery.

Muralidaran has been told that he could face a year-long ban if he persists with it.

But with the ICC set to begin a major review into spin bowling in September, Daryl Foster -- who helped conduct the recent tests on Muralidaran at the University of Western Australia -- says the doosra isn't dead yet.

"I have no doubt that he will be able to bowl it again down the track," the former Western Australian coach said.

"It may be in six months, it may be in nine months. He might have to do a bit more work to get that 10 degrees down a bit.

"Let's see what the tolerance level is we end up with from the ICC in regards to all sorts of bowling.''

Spin bowlers are allowed an arm flex of five degrees, medium-pacers 7.5 and fast bowlers 10.

Tests originally showed Muralidaran had an arm flex of 14 degrees when bowling the doosra. But he reduced it to 10 after five days of remedial work with Foster.

There's a feeling that fast bowlers may eventually be allowed an arm flex of 15 degrees and spin bowlers 10.

"I don't think you can have arbitrary figures of five, 7.5 and 10 -- I think you are making a mockery of it," Foster said.

Muralidaran was reported by match referee Chris Broad after the third Test against Australia in Colombo six weeks ago.

As he could not be reported for chucking again in this stage-one period, he ignored the wishes of the Sri Lankan board and continued to bowl the doosra in the on-going series against Zimbabwe.

But that six-week stage expires at midnight tonight.

If he opts to bowl the doosra and is reported in the second Test in Bulawayo beginning tomorrow, he could be suspended for a year.

There are two questions that never seem to get asked.:

1) How much did Murali spin the ball when he chucked at 14 degrees?

2) How much did Murali spin the ball when he chucked at 10 degrees?

Surely if the doosra spins more for a 14 degree chuck than for a 10 degree chuck, then that would clearly reveal there's an advantage to be gained by bent-arm spinning -- something often decried by the chuckanistas -- because it would clearly reveal that the amount of spin gained is dependant on how much the arm is bent.

SPIN DOCTORS HEAL THYSELVES

NB: This post was being composed as the DW went down two Fridays ago. Therefore, much like Fox Footy Live and ABC rayjo broadcasts, there may be a small delay between what you see, and what you read. It's also been updated to reflect today's ICC outcome.

The UWA spin doctors, Bruce Elliott and Daryl Foster, need a slick spin doctor themselves.

Bruce Elliott recently said this....

"Because of these leaks, public perception would be that our findings were about accommodating Murali. But that's not the case."

A fine line given this paragraph in the Guardian article below....

Remedial work with Muralitharan at the University of Western Australia reduced his arm-straightening to 10 degrees [Ed: from 14], which is the maximum allowed for non-spinners.

Accommodating = Remedial in my book.

Then there's Daryl Foster's take on the matter which appears to me, at least, both accommodating AND remedial:

Allow 'unique' Murali to bowl doosra: experts

Sri Lankan spinner Muttiah Muralitharan should be allowed to bowl his controversial doosra as he does not gain "unfair advantage" with his bowling action, University of Western Australia experts have recommended in their official report to international cricket chiefs.

"It would be unrealistic to ban Murali's 'doosra' delivery without the benefit of proper research having been undertaken into normal spin bowlers," former Western Australian coach Daryl Foster said in the report, which was obtained by India's Hindu newspaper.

Foster was part of a four-member University team which tested Muralitharan's bowling action earlier this month after the Sri Lankan was reported for his doosra delivery, which spins away from right-handers instead of coming into them.

The University initially sent its report to Sri Lankan cricket bosses, who have since forwarded it to the International Cricket Council (ICC).

"Murali, who has been tested more than any other bowler in the history of the game - 1995, 1999 and now - possesses different physical characteristics which make him a unique bowler," the report added.

Muralitharan is now just seven victims short of breaking retired West Indies paceman Courtney Walsh's world record of 519 Test wickets.

He is set to pass the record in next month's two-Test series in Zimbabwe.

"A straightening of 10 degrees when he (Murali) bowls his 'doosra' is not excessive and that should not therefore be deemed advantagous," Foster said in the report.

The experts said Muralitharan initially straightened his arm by 14 degrees while bowling the 'doosra' during tests.

Spinners are only allowed to straighten their arms by five degrees under existing ICC guidelines.

Medium pacers are allowed seven-and-a-half degrees while pacemen are allowed 10 degrees.

Muralitharan straightened his arm by 10.2 degrees when he was tested for a second time after going through a remediation process.

The report recommended that Muralitharan's level of acceptability should be set at the 10-degree mark because of the speed of his upper arm rotation, which was not believed to give the Sri Lankan an "unfair advantage over batsmen or other bowlers".

"We contend that because the speed of his upper arm rotation is as fast, and in some cases quicker than fast bowlers, his level of acceptability for elbow extension should also be set at the 10-degree mark," it said.

"A case can certainly be made for some spin bowlers such as Muralitharan to have the same range of acceptability in elbow angle to that of fast bowlers.

"With no spin bowling data base to make a comparison, this would seem both a wise and prudent recommendation."

The ICC, however, has already said it will not relax its stipulated tolerance levels.

The report also questioned the ICC's tolerance figures, querying why 10 degrees of extension was acceptable for pacemen and only five for a spinner whose arm speed was similar.

"Without knowing what the situation is with other spin bowlers, it would seem unrealistic to ban Murali's 'doosra' without the benefit of proper research having been undertaken into 'normal' spin bowlers.

"Other off-spin bowlers, in particular Harbhajan Singh (India), Saqlain Mushtaq and Shoaib Malik (both Pakistan), all bowl the 'doosra' delivery which suggests for comparison purposes their 'other one' should also be analysed."

Foster was all praise for Muralitharan, saying the Sri Lankan knew his "body and technique" very well and was able to adjust to the technical changes easily.

Those UWA boys definitely need someone to help them sort out their stories. With their inconsistent utterings, they more than anyone have contributed to the "public perception" of accomodation.

However, the ICC, who have been waiting for a favourable outcome based on due process, get the last word:

ICC confirms Test ban on Muralitharan's doosra

The International Cricket Council emphasised last night that it expects Sri Lanka Cricket to continue to instruct Muttiah Muralitharan not to bowl his controversial "doosra."

Mal Speed, the ICC's chief executive, confirmed cricket's worst-kept secret that the Test wicket record-holder's doosra was measured at 14 degrees of arm-straightening in official tests carried out by the University of Western Australia.

That is well outside the five-degree maximum permitted for spin bowlers under emergency ICC regulations introduced in the wake of technological proof that nearly all international bowlers straighten their arms during delivery.

Speed said: "In the light of the report, Sri Lanka Cricket has now advised the ICC that it has instructed Mr Muralitharan not to bowl this delivery in international cricket. The ICC supports this action."

Remedial work with Muralitharan at the University of Western Australia reduced his arm-straightening to 10 degrees, which is the maximum allowed for non-spinners. Sri Lanka are campaigning for all bowlers to be judged under the 10-degree limit and Speed, for the first time last night, indicated that the ICC might be flexible.

"The levels were introduced after consultation with well-qualified experts and are based on research into the actions of all types of bowlers," he said. "The regulations reflect the current levels of understanding. The ICC is well aware that the existing body of scientific knowledge would benefit from additional research and has previously announced that it will undertake this work.

"It will only be after this research is completed that the ICC will know if there is a sufficiently strong fact-based argument to alter the levels of tolerance currently in place."

If Murali bowls his doosra, or wrong 'un, a further reporting by umpires or match referee could lead to a year's ban.

The Zimbabwe Cricket Union yesterday held the door open for its sacked players by offering them the chance to play against Sri Lanka in the final Test which starts on Friday and to play against Australia, who arrive tomorrow. But the 15 rebels revealed they were planning to sue the governing body for "destroying their livelihoods".

The union's chief executive Vincent Hogg said: "All they have to do is to notify us of their willingness to practise and be available for selection."

Now, all that remains is that Murali is made to refund all wickets taken with the Doosra. Starting with ... well ... you know who.

DOOSYA KNOW WHAT'S MISSING?

The following patronising article employs the Kelly Defence. "The man's a notorious bandit and killed coppers, but that's OK, he's loves his mum".

Also, see if you can guess which word is missing. I'll give you a hint ... refreshingly it's none of I, spank or boys:

Dissenters can now agree Murali is a champion

Muttiah Muralitharan's career has been a tale of astonishing achievement and unending controversy. No one has watched him with a cold heart. Spectators have enjoyed his prodigious deliveries. Captains have protected their matchwinner or complained about the architect of their downfall. Supporters have sung his praises and critics have gnashed their teeth. All have seen something different.

Now Murali stands at once as a champion and an outcast. His record-breaking performance will provoke a mixture of congratulation and resentment. Even in triumph, Murali cannot command the respect sought by every man and craved by every performer. His head must be spinning as much as his sharpest off break. He has deserved better from the game than a mixture of hysterical support and abject condemnation.

Cricket has not known what to do with him. Batsmen have prodded and padded, swept and swiped. Umpires have been inconsistent. Crowds have cheered and catcalled. Commentators have raged. Officialdom has searched in vain for a satisfactory resolution. Everything and nothing has happened. Murali has kept bowling. Indeed, the laws of the game have been changed to accommodate him. His career has been a confusion. Years have passed and he remains in limbo. But it has not all been bad. The game has bent over backwards to save him. After all, he is still playing.

Murali has been an extreme instance of a long-standing trauma. Cricket has never been at ease with bent-arm bowling. Over the years, the issue has been a test the game has failed. Not that Murali has been an easy case. No one had considered the possibility of sending the ball down with a back rather than forward jerk. All the regulations had been produced to eliminate the sort of actions seen in coconut shys. Now and then, bad habits crept in, whereupon governing bodies were obliged to intervene. Mostly, the situation was under control. Then came Murali.

Murali was exonerated years ago and that should have been the end of it.At first, little attention was paid to him. After all, the charming Tamil from a Catholic school had inspired a nation. Moreover, Sri Lanka was a new force and few had the stomach to deny them their main weapon. Officials hoped it might pass. Paul Adams had not lasted long. Once batsmen became accustomed to his contortions, they realised that he did not turn or bounce the ball enough to trouble the trained.

But Murali did not fade away. Eventually, cricket realised that there was more to him than met the eye. Batsmen were mesmerised by his action but the element of surprise was merely part of the effect. Murali turned the ball more than anyone else. His deliveries seemed to spin at right angles. His control was unerring and he could bowl long spells. In other words, he was a handful. And he was not going to go away.

Not that the Lankan has been alone in his unorthodoxy. Indeed, the focus upon him has been overdone. Harbhajan Singh, Saqlain Mushtaq and others have also explored the outer limits of their craft. Spin was on its knees until these fellows came along. It is odd that these operators have provoked such debate. Over the years, fast bowlers have thrown their quicker balls, rubbed in creams, raised the seam, applied bottle tops and much else without attracting undue interest. And they can hurt people. Inevitably, spinners also sought an edge as a means of survival. Accordingly, they tried to add to their repertoire by experimenting with arm, wrist and finger actions.

Murali was blessed with features that allowed him to perform feats with a cricket ball previously considered impossible. His flexibility of limb allows him to twist his bowling arm and flick his wrist at a pace and to a degree that stretches the concept of bowling. Beyond effective imitation, he was not so much leading the charge of the spinners as heading in the same direction.

Now he holds the world record for wickets taken in Tests. It is a well deserved honour. He has been examined, tested, exposed, taunted and demeaned for long enough. In criminal matters, a man cannot be tried twice for the same offence. Murali was exonerated years ago and that should have been the end of it. Unfortunately, the verdict was not universally accepted and the controversy rages on.

It is time for a little respect. Murali has been through enough. He has taken his place in the record books where he sits alongside some extraordinary characters whose weak points have been forgotten and whose stirring performances will be remembered until the last ball has been bowled.

That's right, if you guessed "doosra" is missing you'd be correct  -- possibly you read the headline.

And not only is doosra the missing word, but it's virtually ignored:

Murali was exonerated years ago and that should have been the end of it.

But it's not "the end of it". Everyman and his guide dog now knows the Doosra is a rank chuck, even Spankles, who recently wrote:

Undoubtedly the delivery is to be declared illegal, and rightly so, because it is ugly and the elbow does straighten.

Granted remedial action is on the go, but for the Spankmeister to ignore the Doosra, which happens to be the hot topic du jour, smacks -- oops -- of wanton selectivity.

BT: FONE HOME

Given this writer's obsession -- as firmly and sensibly grounded as any obsession can be -- with Murali Murali Murali Murali, is it any wonder a Taylor played a part in the chucker's record breaking ... err ... game. I hesitate to use the word "test", lacking as it does, the requisite number of qualified teams.

Incidentally, the match is being reported by banned Sarth Efrican journalist Telford Vice (yes, that's his real name). Not sure whether he's there at the game or if he's filing his copy from in front of the shiny side of his television.

Anyhoo, whilst I agree with what he writes, the Vice Man gives us a hint as to why he was -- or wasn't (?) -- banned when he barely bothers to conceal his derision at the record breaking feats of the Sri Lankan spin "bowler" Murali, self-aggrandizing Aussie "commentator" Bruce Yardley and the slapstick stylings of Zimbawean "batsman" Brendan Taylor.

Most pressing though, forgetting the vindictive Zimbabwean government, incompetent Zimbabwean cricket team or even Murali's record breaking theft ... what the hell's "Fone Day"?

Murali he rolls along to Courtney's record

Murali's doosra is a doosie, but Zimbabwe are decidedly woosie.

FONE day, in a Zimbabwe far different from the present, Brendan Taylor will gather about him his grandchildren and tell them about his finest day as a Test cricketer - the day he didn't get out to Muttiah Muralitharan.

He will tell them about his team-mates who, verily, did fall to the great man, about how they flailed and faffed and fumed their way back to the pavilion.

About how they helped Murali, freely bowling his doosra which has been scientifically proven to be a "chuck", take 6-45 to join Courtney Walsh as the only other bowler to take 519 Test wickets.

"But not me, oh no," Brendan Taylor will cackle smugly. "I got out before he came on to bowl, that's what I did.

"Slapped a ball from that bloke Farveez Maharoof straight back at him, and was caught and bowled. That's how to deal with Muralitharan!"

The fact is that, as much as Muralitharan is one of the finest cricketers ever to throw a ball, so Taylor is destined to go down as one of the worst to hold a bat.

Feet are wasted on him, he de-selects his shots more than selects them, and he is a sluggish runner. On top of all that, he sticks out like a pregnant woman in a strip joint as the sole, token, white member of this racially-reformed Zimbabwe team.

But, in the afterglow of his record-equalling haul, Murali was grateful for players of Taylor's sorry ilk.

"I think I bowled well, because the wicket was not turning very much," the wild-eyed Sri Lankan began diplomatically.

"But the inexperience of the batsmen helped me take wickets. I didn't think I would get more than a few overs when they were 3-35."

Muralitharan was granted 24.2 overs, and from the first ball he bowled, shortly before lunch, it was plain that none of those who faced him would know the doosra from a dog.

In fact, some of them would have had trouble hitting a dog. Even a dead one.

Which is perhaps the most telling difference between this Zimbabwe team and the one that would have included some of the 15 white stalwarts who have gone on strike -- the latter lot would also have struggled against Murali, but they know a dog when they see one.

The doosra has, we gathered, been around almost as long as some of Zimbabwe's newest Test players.

It also has been deemed to be illegal and Murali is bowling it on a six-week stay of execution after which he faces a two-year ban if he continues to send them down.

"I started working on it (doosra) about seven years ago, and I haven't bowled it in matches until the last three years because it takes a long time to mature something like that," Murali said.

"You have to be perfect when you bowl at batsmen because spinners bowl so slowly that each loose ball is likely to go for four runs. Also, wickets are very flat and firm, and made for batsmen. So bowlers need variety to take wickets."

Not against this lot. Alester Maregwede knew little of the quicker ball that trapped him in front as Murali began his march to greatness shortly after lunch. Mluleki Nkala was just as clueless, and suffered the same fate.

Then Tatenda Taibu stuck a straight bat at a not entirely straight delivery -- hello, Mr Doosra -- and was caught at silly mid-off. Three balls later Blessing Mahwire, bless him, stuck every bit of body and kit he owned in the path of another flummoxing delivery, and was duly bowled.

So was Proser Utseya, but not before scoring a doughty 45, as well as Douglas Hondo, around his legs with another doosra.

All the while, Bruce Yardley's moustache fairly glowed with misplaced pride. Yardley is the "Man who Made Murali". Of course he is. Or so he keeps implying to his unfortunate television audience.

"I told Murali this, I told the world that about Murali ..."

What Yardley really is is a confused former cricketer -- off-spin, military medium, fastish, make up yer mind, mate -- who once coached Sri Lanka.

He was so excited at the thought of "His Bowler" claiming a world record that he forgot to ask Marvan Atapattu, who won the toss, whether he would bat or bowl first.

"So, Marvan, any changes?" was Yardley's opening gambit. "Err, it's the first Test, Bruce."

That set the scene for the surreal scenes that followed in the afternoon as Muralitharan went a wicket-picking.

Wizened white Zimabweans blinked hard as they staggered towards the boundary from the Red Lion, the most local pub in the world, to watch history unfolding.

Wide-eyed black Zimbabweans took it all in with a mixture of wonder and disappointment.

Muralitharan himself knew it couldn't last. "I think Shane Warne will pass me when Australia come to Zimbabwe," he said.

Warne and the Australians are due to begin their tour to Zimbabwe this month, and the leg-spinner, who has 517 wickets, has every chance of adding handsomely to that total.

Which brings us back to Taylor. Will he be able to avoid Warne as well, or is he set for bigger things?

"Never mind all that, grandpa, tell us about how you got your name on two world records - Muralitharan's, and Warne's."

Good that The Vice Man stuck it to Chuckanista, Bruce Yardley.

"I'm not yet sold on Roo".

He continually got under my skin during the recent Sri Lanka tour, and not just for his continual praise for the wicket thief and his own part in the crime, but also for his habit of compounding a commentary error by ridiculing whichever commentator happened to be in the box with him.

At one point he flatly refused to accept Thommo's version of an El Bee and then proceded to make it worse by insinuating -- in his strident whiny drawl -- that Thommo was seeing things, when plainly Thommo was right.

On chucking principle alone, I hope he never gets a commentary gig here. Combine that with his appalling calling, and I hope the government does a Burnside, and refuses him a re-entry visa.

TWO MINUTE TIGER

Yesterday in The Age, "Two Minute" Tim Lane talked to my favourite sports writer, Brent "Tiger" Crosswell....

Ahhh, the good old days

Former Carlton champion Brent Crosswell reflects on battles with the arch-enemy, the handling of umpires and drugs.

TL: Does the rheumatism flare up in the old war wounds on Carlton-Collingwood match days?

BC: I don't know about the rheumatism flaring up. I used to remember them fondly. They were great games. You got nearly 50,000 people crammed into Princes Park, and they were always pretty fiery affairs.

TL: And you played pretty well in many of them, notably the 1970 grand final. Is it time for a campaign for retrospective Norm Smith Medals?

BC: I'd make a big case for it.

TL: Was that one of your best?

BC: I played pretty well. I played better games, though. I don't suffer from modesty.

TL: You put the Blues in front in time-on in the last quarter after Tuddy got you in that high tackle.

BC: Yes. Jones tapped the ball down, like in slow motion as only Perc could do, and I simply waited hours for the ball to reach me as it left his hand; it came down like a balloon, and I could see Tuddenham coming at me and I thought, at least Jonesy could have hit it down with some force. By the time it got to me, Tuddenham was on me and of course he got me a bit around the neck. I helped him a bit, of course.

TL: A worrying sight, seeing Tuddy coming at you in those days?

BC: I played on Tuddy in my second game and he never really knocked me around. He didn't need to: he was best on the ground, got 25 kicks. It was a bit worrying at that point of time. I thought I might cop something here, and I was fortunate to get away with just a roughish tackle around the neck.

TL: Were the Carlton-Collingwood games particularly vicious within the culture of the time?

BC: They were pretty rough affairs, actually. Collingwood had a pretty tough side in those days and I remember at Carlton we used to play Ricky McLean and no sooner a fight would start than Ricky would come in. There were a few brawls at Carlton one day, I remember. Big Len Thompson punched Vin Waite in the eye, Ricky McLean punched three or four players simultaneously, and Adamson - who was on me - ran about 40 metres and hit someone. They were pretty rugged affairs, actually.

TL: Since when have we become concerned about umpires? It's not a part of our bloody culture, is it?Has the game lost some of its old colour?

BC: I think it has a bit. I like the occasional brawl. I said recently that with a lot of those brawls there was a fair bit of theatre, and I think it's become a bit too sanitised. There's also a lot of interference today that you never got then. You see today a full-forward and a full-back wrestling, and they're just interfering with each other. It's just absurd. They're pulling at each other, they're impeding each other in all kinds of ways. They can push each other away from the ball with both arms and that's OK!

TL: You'd like to see the umpires be a bit more interventionist?

BC: In some respects, but I think it's outrageous that you can't swear at an umpire. For cripes sake, that's an absolute joke. I don't know whether I could have coped under that sort of regime, to be honest with you.

TL: You were reasonably verbose?

BC: I abused umpires to pieces. And half the time they deserved it. I just think that today, the idea that you can't say anything to the umpires, it doesn't make sense. These guys are playing a physical contact game, they're all steamed up. Since when have we become concerned about umpires? It's not a part of our bloody culture, is it? We like to get into umpires, it's part of the fun.

TL: Did they ever come back at you?

BC: In our day, we had some good umpires, like Crouchy and Don Jolley, and they used to defuse situations. But some umpires would confront you, call you an idiot, when you were angry enough as it was. I actually hit an umpire once but it took on the euphemism "an aggravated form of abuse". I got four weeks but I should have got about three years. I was coming off against Richmond at half-time, there'd been an altercation, and I was abusing the umpire. Big Nick used to jump in between me and the umpires to stop me getting reported; he'd jump in and say: "I'll look after him, it's OK, I'll settle him down." That was Big Nick, he's a great bloke. Anyway, this umpire rushed up and called me a bloody idiot, or something like that, and it was the last thing I needed. I was ready to murder someone. I gave him half a back-hander across his chest and he fell to the ground, he was so shocked. On Tuesday, he changed his report to hitting the umpire; it became quite a serious charge. I don't think an umpire should have called me a bloody idiot at that point.

TL: Are you shocked at recent revelations about players, booze, and drugs?

BC: I'm not shocked at all. It happened a long time ago, it's just that the culture's different now. Those sorts of things have always gone on in sporting culture.

TL: Everyone laughed in David Williamson's play, The Club, when Geoff Hayward, the Tassie recruit, saw a strange apparition coming at him one day at Glenferrie. It's much more serious now.

BC: It is, and that's the point, isn't it, the way we might react to that particular character and what that character was doing might be very different today. I don't know. I haven't gone to the play for 20 years or longer. It would be interesting to see the reaction to Geoff Hayward. I think people would perceive him a little differently from how they did in the '70s.

TL: Were you Geoff Hayward?

BC: The character might have been loosely based on certain things that I did.

DOWNTIME UPDATE

Back.