On Throw Bowling

Sunil Narine, the West Indies spin bowler, is again in the news. Yet again for all the wrong reasons. He bowling action has been found to be unfair. He was ‘called’ by umpires earlier, went to various coaches to have the action rectified, and once again has been found to be bowling with a bent-arm action.

The current trend among cricket administrators is to rectify the actions of bowlers who have been ‘called’ by umpires of having thrown the ball while bowling. Indeed, it is always praiseworthy if one can help another, especially when the latter is in trouble.

Established bowlers of recent times like Saeed Ajmal and Sunil Narine have had to undergo rectification programmes for having been ‘called’ for throwing. They went to the most renowned of coaches and cricket academies. Nothing fruitful is  apparent as yet, except for the fact that both have lost their effectiveness with their new bowling actions. They have consequently lost their places in their respective national teams.

These rectification programmes are carried out in fancy-named cricket academies. The coaches who try to rectify their actions are all former cricketers of various levels of eminence. These coaches are also holders of coaching certificates acknowledging their potential as teachers. Here the issue being highlighted is that no senior “throw- ball” bowler can alter his action and still maintain his earlier effectiveness. It is impossible for any coach, whoever he may be, to assist an established cricketer to improve his bowling after altering his ‘unfair’ delivery action. No coach has yet been able to do so over the last hundred years.

In the history of international cricket, there have been numerous cases of bowlers who were ‘called’ for their unfair action. They tried by various means to rectify their actions but could not regain their earlier effectiveness. Not one ‘throw-ball’ bowler has been able to make a worthwhile comeback in the annals of this sport.

Readers would surely remember the name of Ian Meckiff. The left-arm fast bowler from Australia was highly successful in the series against Peter May’s England (then MCC) in 1958-59 with his whiplash action. On the hard Australian pitches, Meckiff had the ball rearing at the throat with his deceptive slow run-up to the wicket. Men of the calibre of Graveney, May and Cowdrey gasped as the ball darted in and out without any apparent help from the dry, sun-baked, hard Australian pitches. The pace, bounce and movement of Meckiff were appreciably more than what the magnificent fast bowler Alan Davidson was able to achieve from the other end.

The Australian umpires –no ‘neutral-country’ umpires at the time – did not ‘call’ Meckiff at all. Nor did they pay any heed to the glowering glances of the English batsmen. When the criticisms in the media began, Don Bradman (selector) and Richie Benaud (captain) took notice of the situation and realized that the game was not being played in the true spirit of cricket. As the umpires had not ‘called’ Meckiff for throwing, Bradman and Benaud technically could not blame him for unfair action.

Following season when Australia, again under Benaud, toured India to play 5 Tests, Meckiff was in the team. But the sharpness in his bowling was no longer visible. It transpired that he was bowling with a changed action as the Australian cricket authorities did not want any controversy to unfold on account of his original bowling action. He played against West Indies at Brisbane in the famous ‘tied test’ in 1961 but his lethal penetrative power had vanished. The changed action, despite the supposedly best guidance, could not achieve what the unfair action had. Finally he was ‘called’ at Brisbane in 1963-64 by an Australian umpire, Col Egar. He was ‘called’ thrice in his first over, left the ground and never played cricket again.

It transpired that Ian Meckiff was finally ‘called’ for throwing because Sir Don had apparently instructed the umpires to follow Law 24 very strictly. This law deals with unfair bowling action. This kind of strict enforcement is the need of the hour today. Until and unless the umpires are given the authority to follow the laws strictly right from the junior levels, bowlers with unfair actions will proliferate.

Another point to note is that Richie Benaud, the Australian captain, did not start a long argument with umpires about the legality of Meckiff’s action. He accepted the judgment of the umpires who are stationed precisely for that reason.

This rational approach is exactly the opposite of what happened in Australia in 1995-96 when umpires Ross Emerson and Daryl Hair had ‘called’ Muthiah Muralidharan for unfair action. The Sri Lankan captain Arjuna Ranatunga raised a hue and cry and refused to continue the match. Subsequently the cricket authorities bowed down to ‘player power’. Since then no umpire had the courage to ‘call’ him till he retired after a career lasting a decade and a half. Muralidharan went on capture more than 800 wickets in test cricket with an action, which even from beyond the boundary, appeared to be in gross violation of Law 24.

Over the last decade eyebrows have been raised about the actions of Shoiab Akhtar, Shahid Afridi, Harbhajan Singh, Johan Botha and some others. But these bowlers were fortunate that no umpire decided to rock the boat by ‘calling’ them even once. The umpiring fraternity realized that the cricket administration would not support them and, on the contrary, they would favour the players.

Another interesting incident relates to Geoff Griffen of South Africa. He toured England in 1960 and at Lord’s in the 2^nd test achieved a hat-trick. His action was grossly awkward and the English umpire Frank Lee ‘called’ him 11 times in the test match. As the Lord’s test had ended early, the two teams decided to play an exhibition match in the late afternoon for the benefit of the spectators.

In that exhibition match, too, Griffen was ‘called’ for throwing by umpire Sid Buller. Griffen had to finish his over bowling under-arm (allowed those days)! Never again was Griffen seen to bowl again on a cricket ground.

Cricket history has revealed time and again that the bent-arm bowler loses his effectiveness the moment he bowls with a proper action. Even CB Fry, the master strategist, was ‘called’ for throwing and could not rectify his own problem. Later, over a period, a whole plethora of bowlers underwent scrutiny and controversy.

Some were ‘called’; others were lucky to escape. Names that feature readily in the post War period are of Tony Lock, Peter Loader, Harold Rhodes, Jim Burke, Peter Slater, Charlie Griffith and a few others. Recently the ‘bent-arm’ masters come primarily from Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. It seems that they simply refuse to believe in bowling with a fair action!

Most unfortunately today the cricket officials are prone to thinking that they have the expertise to eradicate the problem of throw bowling from cricket at the international level. They are still wasting time, effort and money to solve a problem that cannot be solved by mere patch-work at the highest level.

 Not a single international bowler has been able to rectify his action and become a better bowler. No one, any where in the world. No cricket academy, no bio-mechanic (or whatever they are called), no ‘eminent’ coach has achieved even 1% success.

The lesson for all cricket administrators is that they need not waste precious time, effort and money to help to rectify the actions of established ‘throw-ball’ bowlers. These bowlers have to be preened out of cricket by persistent ‘calling’ by umpires. And the selectors must be conscientious enough not to consider them. And the associations need to support the umpires and the selectors.      

The only solution is that the coaches at the primary level must very seriously concentrate on rectifying the action when the young trainee is just learning the craft of bowling.

 It is of paramount importance for cricket officialdom to learn from the lessons of the past so that they do not repeat the earlier mistakes.