So whose action is illegal then? Stuff reports:
Black Cap Kane Williamson has become the first New Zealand cricketer to be suspended from bowling in international cricket because of an illegal action.
It was announced today that Williamson, a part time off-spinner, would not be able to bowl in the international game until he had remedied his action, submitted it for reanalysis and satisfied assessors of its legality.
The suspension is a blow not only to Williamson but to the Black Caps team as a whole. While the 23-year-old is pre-eminently a batter, he is often used as a bowler.
Williamson has bowled in 34 tests and has 24 wickets at an average of 40.66 while in his 54 ODIs he has taken 23 wickets at 30.91. In T20 he has taken three wickets at 37.00.
He made his test debut and ODI debuts for the Black Caps in 2010 and his T20 debut in 2011.
A statement from New Zealand Cricket this afternoon said independent analysis of Williamson's action, conducted earlier this month at Cardiff Metropolitan University, had concluded his elbow extension exceeded the 15 degrees of tolerance permitted under International Cricket Council (ICC) regulations.
Williamson was reported by the umpires and the match referee during the second test between the West Indies and New Zealand at Port of Spain in June.
He last bowled for the Black Caps in the second T20 in Dominica on July 6.
You can take it as read that we don't have much faith in the ICC's ability to manage bowlers with suspect actions. And few bowlers have more suspect actions than former Sri Lankan spinner Muttiah Murialitharan.
Yes; Williamson's action is dodgy, and remedial work will hopefully help him conform to the rules. But it was an outrage that Murali was allowed to gain such a huge advantage as a bowler by the degree of flex he had, supposedly as a result of a childhood deformity.
The ICC changed its laws to accommodate Muralitharan. It was kow-towing of the worst kind, and his career statistics remain tainted in our view. The ICC's laws of illegal actions are an ass, especially when they are selectively enforced.
5 comments:
You perfectly voiced my own views on "chucking" especially in regards to Murali. The rules should not be adapted to fringe cases no matter how good and entertaining the bowler is. And even with the adaption it is clear from the photo that Murali still exceed the newer 15 degree limit more than Williamson. So even with the rule change he should not have got away with it.
The rules were not varied for a fringe case with regard to Murilitheran when he "chucked" he was virtually unplayable on a composition wicket.
The decision to make allowances made a line in the sand where the Power has moved to.
The ICC shat on Daryll Hair for calling what he saw with a naked eye from square leg.
it is not as if Williamson is much different to many other Spinners as long as the game has been played.
I have similar opinions around Slinger Malinga when he lowers his delivery arm a little the ball comes out of the Umps tie.
Nek minit your big toe explodes.
Murali is a chucker...always has been and always will be
Kyle Mills is another who should have been put through the `chucking' wringer.
Just to run against the grain a bit here but I suspect you might have a slightly flattering moment in Williamson's action as I've long suspected him of chucking the odd one, hence the long sleeves. But I agree that their decision on Murali has opened the barn door.
0deg is a lot easier to measure than 15deg and definitely satisfies the rules of cricket!
Post a Comment