JEDDAH, 3 December — The legendary Imran Khan, one of the greatest ever all-rounders, has welcomed the end of the row between the International Cricket Council and India that at one time appeared to be heading toward an internecine civil war.
India had insisted on fielding batsman Virender Sehwag in the first Test against England beginning at Mohali today. The ICC insisted that Sehwag must serve the one-match ban imposed on him by match referee Mike Denness. India had claimed that Sehwag had served the ban by not playing in the unofficial third Test against South Africa.
The row finally ended when India bowed to the pressure and the cancellation of England’s tour was averted.
“It is a very positive step. If the row had escalated, the game of cricket would have been a big loser. As it is, very few countries play cricket and it is imperative that they stay united,” Imran told Arab News yesterday.
He said the controversy should not have been allowed to get out of control. “I feel the problem should have been handled more maturely and should not have been blown up,” he added.
Imran, however, felt that the punishments meted out to the Indians was too harsh and unprecedented but he blamed the Indian board for not handling the matter properly. “I did think that the punishments given by Denness were harsh. I thought the punishment was disproportionate, particularly to a new bowler when he comes in. He is all enthusiastic, he does a lot of appealing. You cannot give a suspended match sentence for that. I also think the Indian board should have handled it differently. They should have lodged a protest. They should have raised the matter in the next ICC meeting saying what happens if you do not have confidence in a match referee,” he added.
Imran said the role and functions of the match referee should be clearly defined. “Until now you had problems with the umpires, especially with home umpires. So you now have neutral umpires. The match referee’s duties need to be clearly defined. The offense for various things should be defined. I think some good can come out of this controversy. Streamline the actual job of the match referee, what is the punishment for each offense. There should be some way by which an affected party can appeal to some higher authority,” Imran said.
He also said the ball-tampering law was ambiguous and needed to be totally changed. “The law of ball tampering is faulty. This was proved in the case which I fought (against Ian Botham and Allan Lamb) in 1996. The jury understood what I was trying to say. It should be changed otherwise anyone can be caught for ball tampering,” he said. “Restoring the seam is ball tampering. Without telling the umpire if you clean the seam, it is ball tampering. If there is a piece of leather sticking out and you take it out without telling the umpire, then it is ball tampering.
“It’s a ridiculous law. They need to change the law. So technically Tendulkar was ball tampering but it’s an acceptable practice what he was doing.”
Imran said he was surprised at the way people keep raising the controversy with regard to Shoaib Akhtar’s bowling action.
“I can see why they worry about it because when they show him in slow motion, it is like Sri Lankan spinner Muralitharan’s action. In the case of Shoaib, his arm is double jointed. You can see his arm is hyper extended, that’s why it creates an illusion (of chucking) in slow motion, and so if Muralitharan can bowl so can Shoaib Akhtar,” he explained.
When asked who was a better batsman between Sachin Tendulkar and Brian Lara, Imran said, “Unfortunately I have not seen both of them bat long enough to come to any conclusion. Had I bowled to them, then I would have definitely been in a position to make a judgment.”
