Administrators' personal ambitions outweigh everything else

Daryll Hair, the daredevil Australian umpire created an uproar a few seasons ago, when he called the Sri Lankan off-spinner, Muthiah Muralidharan for chucking. The Sri Lankan team management, along with the support of its apex body, reacted very strongly and they almost suggested that there was a hint of bias on the part of Hair.

Unperturbed by the stream of statements emerging from the officials of BCCSL, Hair kept on vindicating his stand and maintained that Muralidharan's action was illegal as per the laws of the game. Gradually it came to a sort of a face-off situation between the Sri Lankan off-spinner and the umpire. The opinions were divided and one of the former Australian captains commentating on the TV mentioned that Hair was carrying the issue too far.

While it is debatable whether a naked eye can actually pinpoint the illegality of any bowler's action, the umpire officiating on the field does have the authority to no ball a bowler for chucking. After the fierce protests from the Sri Lankans authorities, the matter was referred to the ICC to pass a verdict. The ICC not surprisingly constituted a committee to decide on the future of any bowler suspected of chucking based on a report from the match referee. Furthermore, the ICC suggested that the respective cricket boards were advised to take steps to initiate the corrective measures. Fred Titmus, the former English off-spinner was given the job of rectifying and giving the ultimate certificate.

In the case of Muralidharan, the opinion of several medical experts was sought and it was established that Muralidharan's supposed handicap rendered him incapable of extending the arm. Eventually Muralidharan was given the clean chit and since then he has proved to the main strike bowler for Sri Lanka and he looks all set to end up as one of the leading wicket takers in the game. The Muralidharan-Hair controversy served as a precedent for a lot of referees to submit reports which were none too flattering about various bowlers from all over the world.

Rajesh Chauhan, Henry Olonga, Harbhajan Singh, Shoaib Akhtar, to name a few, were reported to the ICC. Chauhan and Harbhajan after getting dropped from the Indian team, were made to go to England and miraculously their actions were rectified overnight by Titmus. If this can be called as eyewash, one is left to wonder what term can be used to describe the ICC's decision with regard to Shoaib Akhtar. The young speedster's action came under scrutiny during the Test series against Australia.

The ICC initially imposed a temporary ban on Akhtar after the committee ruled his action illegal. Suddenly there was a volte-face when the then ICC President issued a sagacious statement that Akhtar can be allowed to play in the one-dayers as no bouncers are allowed in the limited version of the game! Obviously there must have some pressure applied by the PCB behind the scenes to effect this turn around. The Australians on their part raised no objections and felt Akhtar was too sensational a bowler to be kept away from the game. There were few snide remarks made to the effect the Aussies were not too keen to throw stones at others when they had Brett Lee in their ranks.

Lee has hit the headlines for the same reasons as Akhtar did some time ago. The statement from one of the bio-mechanic experts in Australia was a bit too ridiculous to be true. If one gets his drift right, then any and every bowler must have chucked. Considering the fact that the cricket world has seen some great fast bowlers from Australia like Lillee and Thomson thrill the spectators, the expert must think hard before he issues a statement the next time around.

With the ICC struggling to cope with the chucking issue, another issue has re-emerged with Waqar Younis being hauled up for evidently tampering with the ball. Typical of the PCB, they have responded with a threat to pull out from the triangular series currently being played in Sri Lanka. The ball tampering issue took a nasty turn sometime ago when a lot of big names were involved in it. Imran Khan won a legal battle against the larger than life characters like Botham and Lamb with regard to the same issue.

Now then the obvious question would be "What exactly is the ICC doing about all these issues?" Well "Sweet nothing" should be the apt answer. To make matters worse, the former ICC President went on record about being aware of some cricketers being involved in match fixing. It would have proved difficult to garner either the right information or clinching evidence but there is no excuse for not showing any inclination to even constitute an enquiry based on his knowledge. Obviously, all these administrators are consistent in ensuring that no muck is brought up during their tenure. On the other hand, these are the same people who start throwing hot water under the feet of the present management of the very same organisation they were a part off sometime ago.

Regardless of all the explanations that are there to be had, it will not be amiss to conclude that personal ambitions of some administrators outweigh everything else.