Published: Oct 07, 2014, 03:45 AM (IST)
Edited: Oct 14, 2015, 03:23 PM (IST)
Saeed Ajmal has been barred from bowling. There have been reports against Sunil Narine and Mohammad Hafeez, among others. The last few months have witnessed several finger-spinners getting banned. Abhishek Mukherjee takes an alternate view.
Let us go back a couple of centuries in time. While bowling to her brother John, a Kent cricketer, Christina Willes found it difficult to bowl underarm due to her spacious skirts that were in vogue in the era. She rolled her arm over, unknowingly revolutionising the sport forever.
John Willes tried bowling overarm and became a terror around the country. This led to a ban on overarm bowling in 1816 — a decision which never went with John. Six years later (on July 15, 1822, to give the exact date), Willes turned up for Kent against Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) at Lord’s. He bowled overarm; the umpire called no-ball; a furious Willes threw the ball on the ground, mounted the horse he had already “parked” outside, and never returned to play competitive cricket.
[Note: Some sources mention that Hambledon’s Tom Walker was the first to bowl overarm between 1770 and 1790. However, the credit is usually given to Christina, mostly because her discovery (or rediscovery) had a longer-lasting effect on the sport and the fact that John Willes is usually considered the first man to bowl overarm in a First-Class match.]
[Trivia: Kent was offered a full substitute for the rest of the match. John Willes was replaced by Thomas Battersbee.]
What happened as a result? Overarm bowling, which had a telling effect on batsmen across England, was banned. However, news of overarm bowling had got out, and more and more practitioners of the art had to give in. Finally, overarm bowling was legalised in 1864. The year is generally considered by cricket historians as the beginning of modern cricket.
Underarm bowling became rare. Lob bowlers (usually referred to as “lobsters”) were nowhere to be found. George Simpson-Hayward of Worcestershire (23 wickets from five Tests at 18.26) was the last underarm bowler in Test cricket, but he usually bowled with a low trajectory. Lobs were as good as history after World War I.
Are we making the same mistake?
As mentioned above, MCC had banned overarm bowling in 1816; the decision had to be reversed in less than half a century. Two centuries after MCC’s ban it seems almost unbelievable that underarm bowling was the only form of cricket — but that was not something that had struck them. MCC obviously thought they were doing the right thing.
Are we committing the same error? The symptoms look similar: MCC had banned Willes after he wreaked havoc with his overarm bowling. The two top-rated One-Day International (ODI) bowlers at the time of writing of this article are Saeed Ajmal (banned) and Sunil Narine (called); Mohammad Hafeez, placed at six, has also been called. The International Cricket Council (ICC) means business.
Given the fact that too many bowlers (mostly finger-spinners) are being called, has the time come to legalise chucking, or for that matter, underarm bowling? Let us think of it this way: once the ball leaves the bowler’s arm the batsman is allowed to do anything: from the switch-hit (why does a bowler have to inform “right-arm over the wicket” if the batsman can change arms) to the Dilscoop (why is a batsman allowed to play it when underarm bowling is illegal?), the rules seem to be heavily stacked against bowlers: so why not give them a chance?
Of course, there need to be some restrictions:
– Overstepping, because bowling from a one-yard distance gives the bowler an unfair advantage.
– Beamers, because they can be life-threatening.
– Bowling too wide or high (or rolling the ball along the pitch), because they induce negativity.
What about chucking, then, or for that matter, bowling underarm? Bending the elbow adds another weapon to the bowler’s repertoire, as does underarm bowling unless it is rolled along the pitch. Michael Chang’s underarm service to fool Ivan Lendl at Roland Garros in 1989 (successfully, to boot) is still remembered.
Why, then, is cricket so reluctant to move forward? With rules being changed (timed out, the free hit, the Supersub, the Powerplay) on experimental basis, why not give throwing or underarm a chance? What is the harm in trying? This will certainly not be life-threatening to the batsman; if anything, it will make more cricket more aggressive and competitive.
Give it a chance, ICC. Let us add some colour and sheen to the sport. Let us get Ajmal and Narine back. Cricket will not gain anything by keeping them out of action. If anything, you will probably be lauded half a century from now for doing something to take the sport forward.
Do not let there be another Eddie Gilbert or Ian Meckiff. Please. Think of it. Faf du Plessis struggling to save a Test on a Galle dustbowl. South Africa are nine wickets down. Sri Lanka have tried everything out. Then, along comes Rangana Herath, and surprises everyone by bowling an underarm delivery that confuses du Plessis into submission.
Will that not make the sport more colourful, more interesting, more evolved?
(Abhishek Mukherjee is the Editor and Cricket Historian at CricketCountry. He blogs here and can be followed on Twitter here.)
