ICC accusations of suspect action declawing Ajmal and cricket’s top bowlers

Cricket is already heavily loaded in favour of batsmen, writes Osman Samiuddin

Hashim Amla, left, of South Africa backs up as Saeed Ajmal of Pakistan sends down a delivery during Day 4 of the second Test match at Newlands on February 17, 2013, in Cape Town, South Africa. Shaun Roy / Getty ImagesShow less

Since May 24, 2009, Saeed Ajmal has bowled 18,310 deliveries for Pakistan.

That does not include domestic matches and leagues he has played in across the world. At international level, only James Anderson (18,759) has bowled more in that period.

Since May 2011, when Ajmal established himself as an all-format player for Pakistan, nobody has bowled more than his 13,346 deliveries.

That day in May 2009 is not an arbitrary date. That was the day Ajmal was cleared by the International Cricket Council (ICC) of having a suspect action, having been called by umpires during a one-day international (ODI) against Australia in Dubai a month before.

That figure of 18,310 offers a key to him being cleared then and his suspension now, after he was called again by umpires last month.

It represents a monstrous workload for one bowler, and Pakistan’s reliance on him has been burdensome to the point of breaking him.

He has bowled about 50 overs per Test in that time – about 30 per cent of all Test overs Pakistan has bowled.

Spiritually, he has been their attack leader, arguably the first spinner to be so in a Pakistan attack for a prolonged period.

He is the one they turn to for wickets, for slowing down run rates, for calming the nerves of a side and a country.

It goes to his unending credit that he bore that burden in the manner that he has: smiling, not complaining, and successful.

The point is that, under such strains, actions change. They can fluctuate and deteriorate.

It must be considered that someone's body cannot deliver with the same forces and positions after five years of intense work.

In Ajmal’s case, the conclusions from his recent testing say his action has changed significantly since the last time he was tested.

In particular, his bowling arm this time was more bent, or flexed, at the elbow joint, with the arm in a horizontal position as he prepared to bring it over his shoulder than it was in 2009.

Naturally, when it straightens upon release, it does so to a greater angle than before and, vitally, a greater angle than the 15 degrees permitted.

The bottom line is that the action is significantly different and so, too, the results of the testing ­process.

The ICC said there are small variances in testing from what it was in 2009 in comparison to today, but not, they insist, to a degree that would be the difference in this case between his action being cleared or not.

Ajmal has not marginally gone over the accepted limits; in all his different types of deliveries, he has transgressed significantly enough for minimal differences in testing procedures not to matter.

In one sense, it is important to look at this picture without emotion. There is a law, and science has apparently proved that Ajmal’s action breaches that law.

It does not say Ajmal is a cheat or a villain. He is someone simply bowling with his body and muscle memory wired the way it is.

The ICC is not, ostensibly, carrying out the kind of moral crusade it was years ago, or its umpires have in the recent past. Or, if it is, it is at least couching it within science and legalities.

This is a law that has not been enforced well recently but now is being enforced more stringently. It is a bureaucratic clampdown: break the law, expect to be sanctioned. It is not specifically an ideological purge: cheat, and be banished forever.

But it is also never a bad time to argue about that law.

Given how keenly it employs biomechanics in this regard, it is imperative for cricket to learn more about how much help a kinked action gives to bowling generally, and a doosra specifically.

Are we sure that the doosra can be bowled only by flexing beyond accepted limits?

In the end, none of this addresses the root of the problem – that the game is so heavily loaded in favour of its batsmen that it has become deeply biased and flawed.

It is at that level where it stings the most. One of the world’s most dangerous and most watchable bowlers during the past five years, one who has strived to help level the balance between bat and ball, may not bowl again internationally.

Feast on, batsmen.

Follow us on Twitter at @SprtNationalUAE