Botha's No-Ball: Not Going Away in a Hurry

by Trevor Chesterfield

As South Africa remained at the head of the International Cricket Council’s limited overs log after a 3-2 series win over injury-hit Australia, reality has set in over a question of the legality of Johan Botha’s action.

botha with team

A key player to South Africa’s limited-overs cause, the absence of Botha was felt at The Wanderers Friday night where Australia were allowed to score far too many runs after Graeme Smith, on winning the toss, decided to field first.

Sure, there were a couple of dodgy umpiring decisions, but . . . hey, no one’s perfect in this world and the second reporting of Botha’s action doesn’t come as a surprise. And why they won’t admit it, it is also the reason Botha was left out of the South African side for the final game of what has been a four and a half month period of keen, competitive games between the two nations.

More remarkable, considering the bickering, aggressive history of the two sides, this has been a remarkably friction free LOI tournament, if not tour. The players went about their game, as all good professionals should. Ricky Ponting and Smith led by examples.

But after Botha’s action was cited yet again, the South Africans in all honesty, could not allow him to play in this last game. It would be asking for extra problems, no matter the positive jingoism emerging from Mickey Arthur. The South African coach is convinced Botha’s action will pass muster when tested in Perth, Western Australia in a couple of days. Yet it makes you wonder how he has escaped so long when playing in Australia in the series won 4-1 that edged the tourists to the top of the ICC rankings.

It seems that one set of umpires were leaving it for the others to do the citing, and possibly rather that it be in South Africa than Australia where accusations may have been made of biased umpiring and match referees.

What would have escaped the notice of most observant watchers of the game is that last November Botha’s action was again in trouble with the umpires. This time Brian Jerling, the South African Test and limited overs international umpire reported him in a SuperSports game to Cricket South Africa.

This will of course be disputed as few people were watching the game and Jerling had been told not to comment on the issue. There is a good reason for this as he was reported twice in 2006. The first was on his Test debut in Sydney in January. While he had worked on his action, there was some doubt whether it still met the required 15 degree's flexation limit needed by the International Cricket Council to pass a bowler.

Botha’s action first raised questions while on tour of Sri Lanka in September 2005 in what was Paul Adams’ last tour for any South African side. In the two A team ‘Tests’ in Colombo and Dambulla it is known that the four umpires ‘noted the action. Further concerns were raised as well during the triangular series with New Zealand being involved.

Sir Richard Hadlee, the Kiwis team’s manager and the coach Mark O’Donnell felt that there were certain deliveries Botha bowled that were above the 15 degree flexation allowed. In the final against the Kiwis, further questions were raised about his action during the six overs he delivered.

Sri Lanka 'A' Team Coach Stan Nell raised concerns about Botha's action, after watching him bowl in the nets prior to the first tour match. However as there is no avenue for team manager's or coach's to voice an opinion privately or publicly, Botha carried on playing with his suspect action. Time has proved all three right as Botha is now up on his fourth suspect action report.

Views of the Sri Lanka panel of umpires who stood in the two ‘Tests’ and the triangular limited overs series were said to be ‘compiling a report and this would be sent to Sri Lanka Cricket’. The recommendation is that it was to be forwarded to the ICC.

Whether this is the case is uncertain, for when questions were asked by certain Sri Lanka A team management members if it was done, the suggestion was it was still being translated as it was part of a report in Sinhalese. This type of obfuscation is often used a delaying tactic by SLC as it is considered not to be important enough. With the failure to do anything official, Botha’s action not brought to the attention of the ICC and time was lost to remedy the action.

Two months later, in November 2005 with South Africa in India for five-match limited overs series, the question of Botha’s action was raised more than once in the Indian media, and also by the umpires. No one though felt the need to make an official report. This has certain shades of South Africa’s umpires of 1957/58 and their decision not to call Ian Meckiff during that Australia’s tour. In those days there was no match referee or elite panel umpires.

Two months after the India tour, it was left to Chris Broad, the ICC match referee in that series who had to clean up the action others didn’t want to attempt. It was Aleem Dar and Billy Bowden, and the television monitor Robert Parry at the Sydney Cricket Ground who felt that Botha’s action transgressed the allowed flexation. As was the case in Sri Lanka, the doosra and quicker balls were considered illegal.

Interestingly, Broad had been called a racist in Sri Lanka over his questioning of the doosra bowled by Muttiah Muralitharan and which subjected him to a temporary ban in 2004. The problem is they don’t like those who are upfront and speak their mind. Look at Marvan Atapattu after his comments of Muppets and a Joker referring to the Sri Lanka selectors.

Anyway, the Botha issue is not going to disappear as he fails to spin the ball or take wickets when bowls normally.

‘I have put a lot of work into my action,’ Botha told The Australian in an interview with the national daily after the one-day series in Australia. ‘It probably took 10 months from my first test to the one I passed. I still have (the doosra), but I probably don't bowl it as much as I used to. Definitely, it is possible to bowl it legally.

‘In fact when tested, my doosra was lower than my off spinner for elbow extension. I think my doosra was at nine degree's, and my offie at 11 degree's, and are well below the limit. With the doosra, your wrist cocks to a point where it is actually harder to extend your elbow. I just use it better than I did in the past.’

Botha though has a harder road ahead this time. According to two South African reports quoting, Professor Bruce Elliott, who checked the action in 2006 at the University of Western Australia, the professor has confirmed how the flexation of a bowler's elbow would no longer be assessed, as in the past, when it was a matter of taking an average reading from the several overs bowled. Now it is a matter of ‘a one-strike-and-you're-out basis’ he added.

When asked to comment, Arthur, the South African coach felt confident Botha would pass the tests without a problem.

Botha now faces another problem, it has become evident that he is trying to bowl with as much bend in his arm as possible, to take advantage of the current law on suspect actions. This is not in the spirit of cricket or what the current law intends. He more often than not breaks the law, and extends his arm more than 15 degree's to gain an unfair advantage.

Also the ICC have in place the most unprofessional system for assessment, where a bowler can bowl with a suspect action in a match, get reported and front up to an assessment, bowl with a straight arm, get cleared and were back in action again with a suspect action. The ICC have an even greater problem, umpire's and match referee, not prepared to report suspect action's.

Broad has stood alone in his honest reporting and assessments of bowler's actions and umpire's Jerling and Asoka De Silva should be congratulated for there prompt action and should be fully supported by the ICC, and broader cricket community. Let us hope they don’t go the way of Darrell Hair.

The only solution to the problem is to say to bowlers, you have one chance, you are caught chucking in a match, your go for an assessment of you match video, if you are over 15 degree's your out.

Botha does have the support of CSA, ‘You have to remember that he has been through this process before and was cleared. I am confident that this will happen again,’ commented Arthur. ‘I don’t believe anything major has changed in his action since then but we will obviously respect the process and the outcome.’

Note: Prior permission has sought from the author before republication of the above article.

SA's Glum Amidst the Smiles: Botha Called for Suspect Action