NEWS
MATCH REPORTS
STAT SHEET
HOT LINKS
OTHER SPORTS
SLIDE SHOW
BOOKS & THINGS
PEOPLE
DEAR REDIFF

Some are more equal...

For two years, Rajesh Chauhan was condemned without a trial. Now, hunted, even ridiculed, he is overjoyed merely because the evidence is faulty.

Sort of like the Emergency regime, when people languished in jails without their voice ever being heard. But in the case of Chauhan, everything happened under the very nose of a media that is forever looking for a 'story'.

The essential tragedy, then, is that Rajesh Chauhan was never considered important enough to be a "story".

He could have been heard, though, had he chosen to talk to the media; had he chosen to be an angry man with a point of view. But angry men don't go very far in Indian cricket, and in spite of the welcome openness of recent times, this is an episode that doesn't cover anyone with any credit at all.

One did hear the odd comment from Chauhan about never being called; about having bowled before unpires from the ICC panel and not having a word mentioned to him. The umpires are the guardians of cricketing law, and they saw nothing wrong with Chauhan's action over 13 Test matches. And then came the mysterious ICC videotape, which was considered important enough for him to be left out without consideration by the selectors for almost two years.

What is important, and not very well known, is when this piece of evidence arrived. Apparently it was based on his bowling action during the India-New Zealand series of late 1995 and presumably was provided to the BCCI in early 1996. Chauhan was asked to undertake a test of his bowling action in May 1997, whereupon it was discovered that the tape only had shots taken from behind the bowling arm and had none from a square angle. That is considered insufficient, and Chauhan is now free to play for India.

Now, if somebody had seen the tape as soon as it arrived, it would not have been too difficult to arrive at an identical conclusion because, in spite of being marvels of technology, videotapes do not have a mind of their own. They stay faithful to what is on them. And what was on the ICC videotape has been found inadequate.

If Chauhan now feels cheated, can we offer him more than sympathy? Or even an admission that one and a half years have been sliced off his career because nobody had time to watch a videotape?

One and a half years adds up to a lot of money these days.

There are two intriguing aspects to this whole episode. First, this mysterious videotape. It is inconceivable that the ICC did not have a mid-wicket angle to present to the BCCI. I was part of the commentary team for that series, which was covered by Trans World International, and can vouch for the fact that the pictures produced were excellent and that the mid-wicket cameraman is one of the best in the business.

Thus, if the umpires had indeed decided to report Chauhan, and the match referee needed evidence, it would have been no problem obtaining every possible angle. Yet, for want of a mid-wicket replay, there is still an element of doubt hanging over Chauhan's career.

Secondly, Chauhan was asked to bowl in the nets in front of Sunil Gavaskar, a member of the ICC technical committee, and Kapil Dev, a member of the ICC's special committee on throwing. If Chauhan is now eligible for selection, and naturally Gavaskar's and Kapil Dev's opinion would have been considered, why is there any further uncertainty? The two people who, it would appear, have cleared him have the greatest credentials in the game - and both hold positions on the ICC panel.

So after nine years of first class cricket, 13 Test matches, several one-day internationals, an inspection before two legendary cricketers and not a single call for throwing, Rajesh Chauhan should be singing. Instead, he is looking at the remains of a career.

On the other hand, Muralitharan was called in a Test match, under full scrutiny of a match referee and several television cameras. His second "calling" was a colossal farce because his arm had never been straighter. But the Sri Lankan Board kept playing him. Wasn't there an ICC videotape on his action? If there was one, the Sri Lankan Cricket Board obviously got over the situation very quickly. Indeed, the manner in which the Sri Lankans backed Muralitharan represents one of the most caring moments in world cricket in recent times. 'You go out and play, we are behind you,' they told him.

No one said that to Rajesh Chauhan.

The issue here is not whether Chauhan would have changed the face of Indian cricket had he been picked. For all that you know, he probably would not have been picked anyway, given that he hadn't bowled too well in international cricket in 1995. But he deserved the right to be considered fairly. Either that, or he should have been told, 'We think you throw. Go back to the drawing board and return with a different action.'

For an organisation that has been quite sympathetic to the cause of the players, this was inhuman stuff. I believe the Indian cricket board should apologise to Rajesh Chauhan.

The law says a man is innocent until proven guilty. That is why the batsman always gets the benefit of the doubt. Chauhan, though, was assumed guilty without a fair trial.

Just a final, passing thought for you to ponder over. Had the bowler in question been Anil Kumble, would everyone have behaved the same way?