Ross Emerson, the Australian umpire who in 1999 called Muttiah Murlitharan for chucking, feels the Sri Lankan spin wizard doesn't deserve to hold the record of highest wicket-taker in Tests.
Muralitharan retires on Thursday on the final day of Galle Test against India, his last Test match in an illustrious career, in which he scalped 800 Test wickets, a world record.
“I haven't changed my view in 15 years - he doesn't deserve the record,” Emerson, banished from international cricket after no-balling Muralitharan in a one-day game against England in Adelaide in January 1999, was quoted as saying the Daily Telegraph Thursday.
Emerson in 1996 had no-balled Muralitharan seven times in a one-dayer at the Gabba.
“You couldn't compare his record to Shane Warne's - no one ever doubted the legality of Warne's action. Murali was a great competitor and a great bowler but a lot of the time he just didn't bowl within the limits of the law,” Emerson maintained.
A season of barely-stifled controversy exploded at the MCG on Boxing Day 1995 when Australian umpire Darrell Hair called Muttiah Muralitharan for throwing.
'Murali', a rubber-wristed off-spinner, was no-balled seven times in three overs by Hair, who believed the then-23-year-old was bending his arm and straightening it in the process of delivery; an illegal action in cricket.
Murali's action (he bowls with a slightly bent elbow) had been queried before by a handful of international umpires, but this spell, in front of a huge MCG crowd, was the first time he had been called for 'chucking'.
Sri Lankan captain Arjuna Ranatunga spoke briefly to Hair after the second call, and after the seventh call, at the end of Murali's sixth over of the morning, he removed his deadliest bowler from the attack.
The controversy bubbled on during the rest of the two-day Australian innings, as Murali bowled 32 more overs from umpire Steve Dunne's end without protest from either Dunne or Hair, at square leg. The Sri Lankan camp was outraged after the incident, but the ICC leapt to Hair's defence, outlining a list of steps they had taken in the past to determine, without result, the legitimacy of Muralitharan's action.
Hair found himself in more hot water later, when he called Muralitharan's action "diabolical" in his autobiography, and claimed he would have no-balled the spinner "27 times or more" but he "did not want the matter to become a complete farce".
Both Hair and Muralitharan remain major figures in Test cricket, although the two have never crossed paths on the playing field since that Melbourne Test.
"I have no angst over him holding the record but the fact that the rules had to be changed to handle bowlers like that vindicated my actions and the actions of other umpires who called him," Hair said.
"Once they changed the rules and made it legal for bowlers to bend their arm to 15 per cent they gave an advantage to a couple of bowlers [Muralitharan included] who could get something extra from that rule.
"I would rather see the rule as it was where you couldn't bend your arm at all. That would mean everyone was the same," Hair said.
38-year-old Muralitharan, who made his debut in 1992 against Australia, had the world cricket debating about his unorthodox and weird bowling action.
Three years after his debut, Muralitharan was called for throwing during the 1995-96 Australia tour by Hair and ICC soon recommended a biomechanical analysis, which concluded that his action created the 'optical illusion of throwing'.
But still he was charged with suspected action again in the 1998-99 Australia tour by Emerson and was sent for further tests in Perth and England before being cleared once again. He faced the same charges in 2004 but the Sri Lankan kept on taking wickets and overtook West Indies' Courtney Walsh's 519-wicket mark to become the highest wicket-taker in Test history.
“Once they changed the rules and made it legal for bowlers to bend their arm to 15 percent they gave an advantage to a couple of bowlers (Muralitharan included) who could get something extra from that rule. I would rather see the rule as it was where you couldn't bend your arm at all. That would mean everyone was the same,” Hair said.
