No need to change ICC throwing laws, says Simpson

The controversy over the bowling action of Sri Lankan spinner Muttiah Muralitharan was reignited in Adelaide Saturday when he was called for throwing during his second over in a one-day match against England.

The call by Australian umpire Ross Emerson led to a heated discussion with Sri Lankan captain Arjuna Ranatunga, who took his players from the field.

They returned after lengthy discussions with officials and match referee Peter Van Der Merwe.

Emerson no-balled Muralitharan seven times for throwing in Brisbane three years ago.

Simpson, a former Australian Test captain and team coach, reported Muralitharan's bowling action two years ago, and Sunday defended the law.

``The law is absolutely perfect,'' he said.

``We tried to rewrite the law in the 1960s and tried to define what was a throw. What we have to be careful of is not to make it too difficult.

``To my mind there is no difference between overstepping the mark, going wide of the crease or throwing. They're all illegal deliveries.''

It was the first time this summer that Muralitharan had played under one of the three Australian umpires who called him on the previous 1995-96 tour.

Darrell Hair stood down from Sri Lanka's matches. Tony McQuillan, who also called Murali three years ago, officiated Saturday with Emerson.

Simpson, now Australia's representative on the ICC panel for suspect bowling actions, also claims the current review procedure needs reforming.

He has already recommended the nine-man panel meet regularly, rather than watch videotapes of a bowler's action and decide its legality by telephone hook-up.

Along with Muralitharan, Simpson also reported the actions of fellow Sri Lankan spinner Kumara Dharmasena and Indian Rajesh Chauhan during the Test series in India in November 1997.

To remain neutral, he was not allowed to sit in judgment on the trio.

Under ICC procedures, the Indian and Sri Lankan boards were asked to undertake remedial action with their players.

Chauhan did so, submitted the relevant tapes, was given the okay and returned to the Indian team after being stood down.

Muralitharan also received the all-clear but at no stage did Sri Lanka stand him down.

Simpson said he had not heard from the panel about Dharmasena, who has subsequently played.

Last week the ICC took the extraordinary step of issuing a statement to impress that a bowler is never cleared of suspect bowling actions.

``It is public knowledge that Muttiah Muralitharan's action was referred to the panel in late 1997,'' the statement read.

``At that time, the panel determined on the video evidence available to them, that his action was fair.

``Susequently, it has been reported that Muralitharan has been 'cleared' by the ICC. ``The panel can only decide on what has happened, not what may happen. Boards

and players understand that an umpire can apply Law 24.2, or the above process can be reactivated, at any time, but without an umpire prejudging the situation.''

Simpson rebuffed talk that the issue of suspect bowling actions should be dealt with off the field, taking the heat off the umpires and the bowlers involved.

``The public humiliation of umpires or players occurs only in media reports,'' Simpson said.

``The umpire's job is to enforce the laws of the game. It's made more difficult by the fact that people want to bring emotion into it.

``It's a no-ball and doesn't conform to the rules of the game.''