Michael Holding's Criticism Of Murali's Bowling Action Rather Puny And Biased.
Mr.Sunny Spin The Seeing Eye For Sightscreens Unlimited Howzatt!
Another critic of Muttiah Muralitharan's bowling action has surfaced in the form of former West Indian 'pacey' and present ICC Official Michael Holding with his rather puny and biased inferences apparently intended to undermine one of the world's greatest exponents of Spin Bowling which has left the Nation Of Sri Lanka bristling with anger at the callous nature of his comments. It is learned that a prompt response by the Governing Body of Sri Lankan Cricket the BCCSL has already been dispatched to the ICC in protest.
Many who knew Michael Holding during his playing career knew him to be a rather sarcastic Carribean Islander whose expressions at times, undecipherable could be cut with a knife, someone who made a name for the West Indies during their glory days but sadly never seemed to have acquired the dignity , decorum or grace of the Evergreen Sir Gary Sobers, Sir Frank Worrel, George Headley or a Learie Constantine amongst a host of other wonderful Carribean Gentlemen Cricketers and it amazes those appreciative of decorum and dignity that individuals such as Holding are granted responsible positions in the ICC as after all the middle C in ICC stands for Cricket and what Holding has done through his verbosity in criticizing Muttiah Muralitharan's bowling actions in his attempts to further undermine the career of a brilliant player is certainly not Cricket and totally irresponsible with his reprehensible remarks.It also should be mentioned that a greater proportion of the internal problems of the West Indian Cricket Board which almost drove Brain Lara to very nearly quit the game in disgust is being attributed to Holding who seems to have the mentality of a rabble rouser much to the chagrin of many of his critics who seem to think that he needs to curb his attitude towards matters beyond his comprehension.
Holding has joined the ranks of other tiny minded critcs of Muralitharan such as the obstreperous Bishen Bedi almost out of envy in trying to contain Muralitharan's brilliance at a time when all the analyses required to clear his action have been completed and evaluated as being completely legitimate within all norms of the ICC requirements and even go as far as attempting to dissect and set in place his own interpretation of the dynamics of arm delivery when at times during his career as opening bowler for the West Indies there were many who watched him bowl and inclined to believe that he himself chucked whenever he attempted to increase the speed of his normal delivery although never questioned at the time as there were no stringent engines of investigation nor restrictions other than an odd umpires "No Ball " yell! and albeit unconfirmed reports that Holding has been the recipient of many such at various levels of the game!!
Are such actions by such individuals who represented giants of the game in the past,based upon a resentment they show incredible as it seems, that a geographically dimunitive Nation such as Sri Lanka is on the verge of making an indelible mark as Cricketing Giants or does it have anything to do with the envy and apprehension of some already in the record books that their statistics may be changed to the status of 'also rans' and represented by the likes of Holding whether for monetary gain in the publishing industry or cheap publicity?
In the case of Bedi it has come to light that he was by nature a rebel, a dissenter and open mouthed critic of the Indian Cricketing Establishment during all of his career and was an embarrasment to Indian Cricket during the latter part of his career so much so that despite his brilliance as a spinner he was unconditionally excluded from selection as the story goes.
In the case of Holding and similar to many others from the Carribean who eventually represented their National Team rising from grass roots level and upon retirement accepted into areas of International Cricketing Representation whether as match referees, umpires, commentators and the like, he appears to be a member of a rather colourless as opposed to colourful (no pun intended!) band of cricketing critics presently hell bent on intimidating one of the world's best if not the best International Spin Bowler of all time, with little reason or justification for it.( There is also a current West Indian Commentator too guilty of verbal indiscretions while in the commentary box who who should choose his words carefully at times as he appears to flaunt ' freedom of expression' in how he disassociates the gentlemanly nature of the game and certaily not in keeping with West Indian attributes of congeniality with his wisecracks, we shall monogram him TC ) Does the West Indies by virtue of its past reputation as a great Cricket Playing Nation not feel any embarrassment that someone such as Michael Holding has had the nerve to open up 'a can of worms' based upon his personal conclusions and a rationale which defies even the laws of trigonometry on projectiles, angles of projection relative to the human arm in the delivery of a leather ball in a manner acceptable to the Laws Of Cricket, and the ICC whose research and conclusions have given Muttiah Muralitharan the green light.
Or does Mr. Michael Holding so critical of one of Sri Lanka's Best, believe that through his interjections, International Cricket will be at a crossroads of indecision and could be swayed by his panderings towards controversy based on inconclusive conjecture?
BACK TO LATEST NEWS
Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved.