After what was certainly an exciting ODI World Cup held in Australia and New Zealand, some supporters of the game may well have regained their interest and were actually awaiting plans for the series coming up for the balance of the year.
Low and behold, the president of the ICC, Mr Kumar, announced that he had resigned from the position which he held for the past few years.
Under normal conditions, resignations like these tend to take place for too much work, illness, or sometimes when performance levels are not satisfactory.
However, the reason handed out for his resignation stems from the choice of someone else being given the honour of handing the winning trophy to the Australian team. This should make us all wonder why people fight so hard to be elected into high profile offices such as the President of the ICC.
I can think of other things which the president can focus on in order to improve the image of Cricket.
Then rumours indicating that the ICC president took an umpiring decision to task because of a decision made against his country, Bangladesh, in their game against India.
Rumour-mongers claimed the outrageous criticism by the ICC boss was not in keeping with moral ethics expected from someone in his position. These changes brought to the game at the highest level is tantamount to frivolous childlike behavior, bearing little relevance to the game. But before I was able to shrug off that professional diatribe, Sunil Narine has been brought into focus from many angles, such as the ICC, the IPL, and surely the player himself.
I find myself not understanding the reasons for this simple problem which relates to a player using a special type of delivery, considered illegal by the umpires.
This problem is reminiscent of the good old days when many Caribbean players, such as SM Ali and Jamil Ali, were accused of throwing. Even the legendary Sir Curtly Ambrose was called for throwing in a match when the Islands played against Trinidad and Tobago at Guaracara Park.
There are many others as well, guilty of throwing the odd ball, yet never called but they carried on with their careers.
Why is Sunil Narine the scapegoat? Is it because there was previously an issue with the Sri Lankan spinner Muttiah Muralitharan during his successful career? My simple question: what is the responsibility of umpires when they detect a no ball whether it is done consistently or not?
I’ll answer the umpires call a no ball and the game continues with a penalty for the bowlers having to bowl a free delivery, which cannot earn the bowler a wicket.
Having said that, why does the board or anyone else have to take the rule any further? If Narine is seen throwing his “doosra,” then the umpire already has the right to call “no ball.”
If the bowler continues to bowl similar deliveries, then the problem does not lie with the IPL or the ICC. The bowler has to be dealt with by his skipper and subsequently his club. If he needs help to correct his problem, surely there are experts to assist.
Remember these are professional cricketers and there must be technical issues which coaches or institutions located in bigger countries of England and Australia, where measures can be sought.
This is why I am of the belief that the person to correct the problem is the bowler himself, as it is for his own good.
What if Narine has decided to exclude the delivery from his repertoire? Will he not make his best effort to repair the action in due course?
For the ICC or any other organisation to instruct a player to stay out of the game until he gets “special” corrective methods from a particular institute is truly an unfair move, seeing that he makes a living from the game and has often been seen as bowling legitimate deliveries amidst the odd few “doosra.”
In days past, the West Indies tended to attract international opponents when their successful deliveries started to destroy their batting strength. Remember Charlie Griffith with his snorting yorkers, which caused some changes in the foot rules prior to delivering the ball?
I recall the deceptive India spinner Srinivas Chandrasekar being challenged, simply because they could not read his spin.
The ICC needs to address many more matters and leave the umpires to do their jobs, in the same way that they use technology to attempt appeals by the bowlers and the batsmen to challenge the umpires on the field.
The WICB should not accept any decision by the ICC to remove a bowler from the game for reasons over which the umpires have jurisdiction.
And finally, the absence of any Test matches being played at the Queens Park Oval in Trinidad is confusing.
Many years ago in a five test series at home, the Queens Park Oval was scheduled with two matches, plus pre-test matches against the T&T national team. Has this matter gone political or has this ground become unsuitable for playing a test match?
The present day crowd support has dwindled in the Caribbean as a whole, except for Barbados, Jamaica and possibly Guyana.
No one can challenge our people on the business of supporting cricket. We can afford to pay the price of tickets requested. For tourists, we have the hotel accommodation, the shopping centres, a wide variety of meals.
Did someone claim that the Queens Park Oval is second only to the MCG in Australia? I have heard it expressed many times.
