Jump to content

Ajmal says ICC has allowed him to bend his arm by 23.5 degrees


ganeshran

Recommended Posts

Posted

Never heard of such relaxation before :hmmm:

Saeed Ajmal, Man of the Series as Pakistan whitewashed England 3-0 in the UAE, has sparked confusion over his bowling action by giving an interview in which he appeared to claim that he has special dispensation to exceed the 15-degree tolerance limit currently permitted by the ICC. In an interview with the BBC, Ajmal volunteered the belief that the ICC has allowed him 23.5 degrees of flexion to compensate for an accident in which he injured his arm. The ICC, however, were quick to reject the suggestion. Ajmal said: "Someone is telling me my action is bad because the ICC allowed me as a bowler 23.5 degrees, because my arm is not good. A few years ago I had an accident. Otherwise, no problem, the action was cleared by ICC." An ICC spokeman denied that was the case. "There is no dispensation for anyone," he said. "It is worth remembering that his first language is not English and this may have been a slip of the tongue." It may be that Ajmal, having bamboozled England's batsmen all series, was simply leaving his best trick until last. Renowned for his sense of humour, it could be that Ajmal, who started the series talking of a teesra delivery that never materialised, was simply joking. Ajmal tormented the England batsmen in all three Tests, claiming 24 wickets in the series at an average of just 14.7. Their inability to distinguish between his off-break and doosra caused particular confusion and vastly reduced the effectiveness of England's much-vaunted middle order. Ian Bell, Eoin Morgan and Kevin Pietersen all failed to average more than 13. While Bob Willis, the former England captain turned pundit, had raised concerns about Ajmal's action at the start of the series, the England team have been reluctant to be dragged into any controversy. Consequently, they have stuck to the line that it is job of the umpires and the ICC to scrutinise bowlers' actions. However, Andy Flower, the England coach, expressed his surprise after being told of Ajmal's remarks. "If that's the degree, then there's a problem," Flower said. "That's ridiculous. "That is an ICC issue, though. They are there to police the game, and make sure that it is played within the rules, so they've got to scrutinise his action. We've all got our own views, but our job is to combat whoever is put against us, and part of it is also to play the game in the right spirit."
Posted

Ajmal says ICC has allowed him to bend his arm by 23.5 degrees

Saeed Ajmal has reopened the controversy about his bowling action, by claiming special International Cricket Council dispensation to straighten his arm beyond 15 degrees. The Pakistan spinner, who took 24 wickets in the 3-0 Test series whitewash of England, insists that - because of an old accident which means he cannot straighten his arm properly - extra leniency, up to 23.5 degrees, has been granted. An ICC spokesman has denied any special case has been made for Ajmal, confirming there are no exceptions to the world governing body's 15-degree rule. Ajmal's doosra caused particular alarm with some pundits - including former England captain Bob Willis - questioning its legitimacy. The off-spinner had his action reviewed by the ICC in 2009 - and following Pakistan's 71-run victory in the final Test in Dubai yesterday, he told the BBC Sport website: "Someone is telling me my action is bad, but the ICC allow me to bowl 23.5 degrees because my arm is not good - but that's my problem. England coach Andy Flower, equivocal on the subject when the controversy first broke over Ajmal's action during the first Test last month, was today astounded at the suggestion he might receive extra leniency from the ICC. One explanation for the confusion, however, may lie in the fact that Ajmal can no longer straighten his arm to the perpendicular - only to within 8.5 degrees, which would mean the permitted 15 degrees would end at the 23.5 he quotes. Clarification on the matter would clearly nonetheless be helpful, because mention of a 23.5 limit did not find favour with Flower. "If that's the degree, then there's a problem," he said. "That's ridiculous. "That is an ICC issue, though. They are there to police the game, and make sure that it is played within the rules - so they've got to scrutinise his action. "We've all got our own views, but our job is to combat whoever is put against us."http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/international/pakistan/9066169/Pakistan-spinner-Saeed-Ajmal-claims-ICC-issued-special-dispensation-for-his-controversial-bowling-action.html Ridiculous if true. ICC needs to get his action checked again to clear these doubts. Should not be allowed to bowl the doosra till he is cleared.
Posted

I still think that Ajmal may be misinterpreted by some sources. That's why I wanted to know in which language has he given his interview. IIRC, Murali did get such a leeway because of whatever abnormality he had.

Posted

I heard that he has an inherent 8.5 degree bend so they allowed him 23.5 degree, hence it is within the 15 degree limit. But some of his balls look much higher than that. There should be a system in place to check players in match situation. Lab testing is just hogwash.

Posted

England trying to divert attention away from their dreadful batting, even if Ajmal has bowled underarm he would have gotten them out. If his arm did bend that much the ICC would have already banned him.

Posted

So Akhtar was born with a "defect" in his arm and Ajmal had an "accident" so he could bend the arm and throw :haha: Well it's not surprising as anyone who has seen Ajmal bowl can clearly see he chucks. By the way he wears the long sleeves for a reason. It's up to ICC to get their house in order as they created this chucking and "bending 15 degrees" monster by giving Murali a free run.

Posted

All these guys (Shoaib, Murali, Ajmal) with these peculiar arm defects taking heaps of wickets in international cricket. Charles Darwin must be pleased.

Posted

Why should some leeway be given for someone if he is handicapped. Either play by the rules or don't play at all. So Tiger Pataudi had one eye only, he should have been allowed to bat with a very wide bat.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...