Quote:
> On Sun, 10 Mar 2002 02:58:47 +1100, "Larry de Silva"
> >I have had ***y Michael Holding & his goody two shoes image here. Enough
> >is enough. I'll now tell you why he is a mongrel & hates the Sri Lankans.
> >He had a baby boy (Ryan Holding) to a Sri Lankan girl in Brisbane when he
> >toured Australia a few years ago. I know her personally. He has been an
> >awful, disinterested, useless father to him since he was born. Young Ryan
> >still lives in Australia and now has NOTHING to do with his absent father
> >but his poor mother is trying to get some maintenance from this *** & is
> >making life difficult for Michael. That is why he is angry with all Sri
> >Lankans at the moment. Holding is a ***y disgrace to the human race &
> >should have a good look at himself. Sick of dealing with all these hidden
> >agendas so I'm going to say it as it is as usual & stuff the consequences.
> Get used to it Larry. People are realising that a player with an at
> best "suspicious" action is going to become the leading all-time
> wicket taker and as I thought, credible, high-profile people are
> starting to come out of the woodwork and calling it like it is and
> political correctness be damned.
In other words, they are only doing so because he is going to become the
leading all-time wicket taker. If he was an everyday Joe they wouldn't
have cared about it... If he had only taken 250 wickets - still a
significant number - at 30 in tests and retired, these same people
wouldn't have said what they're saying now... So much for "credible".
Somehow I think these "credible" people would've been even more "credible"
if they'd come out and said in 1995 that in their opinion Murali chucks
and maintained this opinion right through. Instead of appearing on TV
every other day, commenting in various games/tournaments involving Murali
and the Sri Lankans, participating in a 100 talk shows and not saying a
word about it.
I'm sure a lot more people will now jump on the bandwagon to have a
potshot at Murali. Now that they've realized they can spew whatever they
want about his action with impunity and have people agree with them. Bedi,
for one, wasn't even able to pin-point exactly what makes Murali's action
- i.e. the straightening of his elbow at delivery. Whether any
straightening happens or not. He went on and on about his wrist and his
follow-through and javelins without for a moment mentioning the *key*
issue in chucking. Yet, simply because he agreed with your p.o.v. and
damned Murali, he's a "credible" fellow now.
Ask an Indian how much Mr. Bishen "throw them into the Pacific" and
"Sunil Joshi is the best spinner in the country" Bedi's word is worth...
Quote:
> I just hope the ICC will offer an official apology to Umpire Hair
> after things are finally put right.
I'm sure Murali won't mind whatever happens between Hair, the ICC and
whoever after he's taken 500+ test wickets, won his team matches all over
the world and has his name in the record books. The ICC can do what it
wants to Hair but it can't change what the record books say, can it? I'm
somewhat amused that in all of this perceived injustice in a bowler with a
suspect action getting a truckload of wickets, you seem to be more
concerned about Hair. If I perceived an injustice in the system - which at
this point I don't - I would be far more concerned about how this affects
the game at large, its record books and traditions rather than one
insignificant individual.
-Samarth.
>
Quote:
> Mike
by