The Throwing Action Controversy: History and ICC Testing Procedure
The history of bowling action controversies in cricket — from the 19th-century debates over round-arm and overarm bowling to modern biomechanical testing; the specific historical cases (Tony Lock, Geoff Griffin, Shoaib Akhtar, Muttiah Muralitharan) that shaped the modern rules; how the ICC's action testing protocol was developed; and why the line between throwing and bowling has been genuinely contentious throughout cricket's history.
The Historical Debate
Cricket's throwing controversies date to the sport's origins. The original bowling style was underarm — rolling the ball along the ground. In the early 19th century, bowlers began raising their arm (round-arm), which produced more pace and was initially controversial. By the 1860s, overarm bowling was legalised after decades of debate. Within the overarm era, throwing (the snap-elbow action that gives additional pace through a throw-like mechanics) immediately became controversial. In the 1950s-60s, multiple bowlers were called for throwing by English and Australian umpires — including Tony Lock (England) and South African Geoff Griffin, whose action was repeatedly called illegal during the 1960 Lord's Test. The lack of a precise scientific definition made these calls inconsistent and politically charged.
Specific Controversies and Their Impact
Shoaib Akhtar (Pakistan) was subjected to action testing multiple times during his career. His extreme pace (routinely above 150 km/h) generated suspicion that his elbow was used as a throwing lever — biomechanical testing produced inconsistent results across different testing sessions, with some showing legal actions and others borderline measurements. Muralitharan's case prompted the scientific threshold research that produced the current 15-degree rule. More recent controversies include several spinners — particularly off-spinners bowling the doosra — being tested and found to exceed the threshold. Each controversy produced refinements in both the testing procedure and the communication of results, moving the process from pure umpire opinion toward measured biomechanical data.
Why the Controversy Persists
The throwing action controversy persists for several structural reasons. The 15-degree threshold is not visible to the naked eye — which means umpires report based on 'impression' rather than measurement, creating inconsistency (the same action might be reported by one umpire and not another). Different bowler physiology (people whose elbows hyperextend at rest versus those whose elbows are naturally straight) means the same degree of straightening looks visually different across different bodies. Politically, reports of international star bowlers for throwing generate diplomatic tensions between cricket boards — umpires are aware of these consequences and may be less willing to report, or more willing depending on match context. These factors combine to make throwing one of cricket's most persistently unresolved controversies.
Frequently asked questions
Has any bowler ever been called for throwing in an international match in the modern era?
Calling a bowler for throwing mid-match is now very rare — the last significant on-field calling was South African Geoff Griffin in 1960 at Lord's. Modern practice is to report suspected illegal actions to the ICC for off-field testing rather than calling mid-match, because on-field calling without biomechanical evidence is now considered insufficiently precise. However, the laws still permit umpires to call no-ball for a throw if they are certain in the moment — it is theoretically available but practically unused in modern international cricket. The report-then-test system has replaced real-time calling as the standard enforcement mechanism.
Why do different testing centres sometimes produce different results for the same bowler?
Biomechanical testing results can vary between sessions because: a bowler's action under test conditions (deliberately observed, not in match heat) may differ slightly from their match action; different camera angles and marker placements produce marginally different measurements; and bowlers who are aware of being tested sometimes subtly modify their action below consciousness. The ICC testing protocol uses multiple deliveries and averages across them to reduce this variability. However, a bowler whose action is right at the 15-degree boundary may produce measurements either side of the threshold depending on the session — creating apparent inconsistency. The ICC's response has been to use larger delivery samples and standardise testing protocols across approved centres.
Can a bowler return to international cricket after being banned for throwing?
Yes — the ICC process explicitly allows return. A bowler found to have an illegal action is suspended, works with their national board to remediate the action, and then retests. If retesting shows the action is within the 15-degree threshold, the suspension is lifted and the bowler may return. Some bowlers (Saeed Ajmal, several T20 specialists) have returned after remediation with modified actions. Others have found it impossible to maintain their effectiveness with a modified legal action — their effectiveness was dependent on the arm mechanics that were specifically identified as illegal. For these bowlers, the finding effectively ends their career even if they technically remain eligible to play after a modified action passes testing.