NEWS
MATCH REPORTS
DIARY
OTHER SPORTS
SLIDE SHOW
PEOPLE
ARCHIVES

Crossfire

'Test cricket' in Australia has a connotation markedly different from anywhere else in the world -- the 'test' being more outside the arena, than over the 22 yards that separate batsman and bowler.

And the Indian team is in the process of finding it out -- courtesy Brett Lee, and a brewing controversy over the Indian team's supposed reaction to his bowling action.

A story that headlines today, and is bylined Mark Ray and Martin Blake -- two of the most widely read names in cricket -- talks of how "India has turned up the heat on the eve of the three-Test series with a private and unofficial allegation that the bowling action of Brett Lee, Australia's emerging speedster, is suspect."

To quote relevant excerpts: "The Indians are believed to have floated the suggestion in some circles after Lee, arguably the quickest bowler in this country, played against the tourists in a four-day match against New South Wales in Sydney last week.

"While there has been no official complaint, the Australian camp is aware of the allegation and is bracing itself for a stepping up of the campaign if - as is widely tipped - Lee is picked to play against India in the Boxing Day Test match in Melbourne. Lee's action has not been questioned in any official sense before. But one source said last night that former Australian captain and coach Bob Simpson, more recently a consultant coach with India, raised some doubts about Lee during or after the Sydney game.

Simpson is a member of the International Cricket Council's panel of eminent cricket people who are called in to sit in judgment upon bowlers deemed to have suspicious actions.

India's coach, Kapil Dev, last night denied that any action had been taken by his team. He rejected suggestions that the Indian camp had requested videotape of Lee in action.

``No, we asked for tapes of our boys bowling,'' Kapil said.

Asked whether the Indians had any doubts about the legitimacy of Lee's action, Kapil said: ``That is not our business. That is not our job.''

That is the business end of the story. Now try separating the wheat from the chaff and what do you get?

This -- The Indians have not, in any forum whatsoever, questioned Brett Lee's action. It is believed... it is supposed... it is presumed... but is it known?

No.

The rest of it is mere wordplay. For instance, it is pointed out that as per "one source" -- a catchall that could mean anyone from the bag-handler, to the guy who was sitting eight rows back in the spectators' gallery when the teams were at nets -- Bob Simpson has some doubts about Lee's action.

It is further pointed out that Simpson has served a stint as India's coach. Which, presumably, implies that if Simpson -- even as per the "one source" -- has some doubts, then those doubts are being entertained on behalf of the Indian team.

Inadvertently perhaps, a little factoid is omitted -- Simpson has been captain, and coach, of Australia. Would the same implied logic indicate that Simpson's doubts reflect doubts the Australian team have, about the validity of Lee's action?

The funniest part of the whole controversy is that Kapil Dev, coach of the Indian team, is quoted as saying that the Indians have no doubts, they have not asked for any tapes of Lee's bowling.

That is the official view. And ideally, that should be the end of it.

Not. The Indians are, speculation runs, merely biding their time, and will kick up a dust as and when Lee is picked for the Australian tour.

Interestingly, the story goes on to quote a certain Anand Vasu, writing on Cricinfo, to this effect:

"In the article, Vasu writes that the Indian team's ``batting is failing as predicted'' and its ``toothless bowling has clearly bitten off more than it can chew''. ``So what does the Indian camp do?'' writes Vasu, ``They respond by raising doubts about the legality of Brett Lee's action.''

"The journalist is critical of India's action. ``From all the evidence, it seems the only thing suspect is the Indians' ability to play Brett Lee. To question his action at this juncture is childish and unprofessional.''

It would be all of that -- and worse. Only, there is no evidence whatsoever that the team has, individually or collectively, expressed any doubts, or pointed any fingers at Lee's action. Which is precisely what they haven't done.

So what on earth is this all about? An attempt, perhaps, to create controversy where none exists, and thereby to create in the touring team a defensive, beleaguered mindset? An attempt, simultaneously, to whip up a storm of "righteous indignation" among the members of the Australian team, and the Australian public?

Are those reasons merely speculative? Sure -- but then, what is the story that the Indians suspect Lee's action?

The unfortunate aspect of this controversy is that without any real reason, without any basis in anything other than innuendo, fingers are being pointed at a young quick bowler starting his career. It would be a different matter had there been some official questioning of his action -- as happened in the case of Shoaib Akthar. In this case, there is none -- not officially, not by the Indian players, not by their coach, not by Bobby Simpson, not by the ICC.

Never mind the Indian team -- does Brett Lee deserve this? Does this controversy, created entirely with smoke and mirrors, serve any purpose at all?

Your guess is as good as mine.

Prem Panicker