Muttiah Muralitharan: Grand Double for Sri Lankan Spin Wizard

The 36-year-old Sri Lankan ace off spinner Muttiah Muralitharan created history when he became One-Day International (ODI) cricket’s most successful bowler on February 5, 2009, marking a new high for one of the most dreadful bowlers. Muralitharan, one among the greatest legends of Sri Lanka cricket, crossed this milestone of taking 503 wickets in ODIs, surpassing Pakistan’s former captain and left-handed fast bowler Wasim Akram’s record of 502 wickets. He reached this record in fourth match with India in IDBI Fortis Wealthsurance ODI Series when he claimed the wicket of Gautam Gambhir at the Premadasa Stadium (Sri Lanka). Interestingly, Muralitharan began his ODI career against India at this same venue in 1993. He is already the leading wicket-taker in Test cricket with 769 scalps in 125 matches.
Muralitharan achieved this ODI feat in 328 matches at an average of 22.74 with his best figure being 7/30 while Akram needed 356 games to scalp 502 batsmen. Muralitharan’s feat is remarkable in the era of big bats and smaller boundaries. In addition to becoming world’s leading wicket taker, the ace off spinner also became the country’s highest wicket taker against India. He has now captured 72 wickets against India from 60 one day internationals and beaten the record held by his fellow bowler Chaminda Vaas He is the only cricketer to take 500 wickets in both Tests and ODIs.
Most Successful Bowler
Born on April 7, 1972, Muralitharan made his Test debut in 1992. Apart from his intensely competitive nature, he has an uncanny knack of analysing the strategic aspects of the game—the match situation and the changing nature of the pitch. Averaging nearly six wickets per Test, Muralitharan is one of the most successful bowlers in the game, the greatest player in Sri Lanka’s history, and without doubt the most controversial cricketer of the modern age. Muralitharan’s rise from humble beginnings, being the Tamil son of a hill-country confectioner, to the top of the wicket-takers’ list in Test cricket has divided the cricket world in the past decade because of his weird bent-arm bowling action.
Muralitharan bowls marathon spells, yet is forever on the attack. From a loose-limbed, open-chested action, his chief weapons are the big-spinning offbreak and two versions of the top-spinner, one of which goes straight on and the other, which has now been labelled his doosra, which spins in the opposite direction to his stock ball. His newest variation is a version of Warne’s slider, which is flicked out the side of his hand and rushes onto batsman like a flipper. His super-flexible wrist makes him especially potent and guarantees him turn on any surface.
He continues to pick up wickets by the bucket load, although many large hauls have come against the two weakest nations—Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. However, he saves his most stunning efforts for the big boys, such as his duel with the Australians in 2004 and his eight-wicket haul at Trent Bridge in 2006 which produced a famous series-levelling win against England.
Muralitharan picked up 23 wickets in the 2007 ICC World Cup which took his team to the final, though Sri Lanka were unable to repeat their 1996 final win against Australia. He next featured in the home Test series against Bangladesh when, with the last of his 26 wickets, he became the second player to 700 Test wickets. He duly passed Warne’s Test record of 708 wickets against England in December 2007, fittingly on his home soil. He bowled England’s Paul Collingwood in the first Test at Kandy (Sri Lanka) to claim his 709th wicket and surpass retired Australian spin great Shane Warne’s world record tally of 708.Muralitharan reached the record with his 61st five-wicket haul in an innings, already the highest by any bowler, with Warne trailing a distant second with 37 such feats.
The Sri Lankan master bowler has also grabbed 10 or more wickets in a Test an incredible 20 times, double the Australian leg-spinner’s second-placed tally of 10. He has now achieved the grand double of being the highest wicket-taker in ODIs as well in Test cricket.
Beset with Controversy
His career has been beset with controversy from the start. Suspicions about his action were whispered soon after his debut against the Australians in 1993 and then aired freely after he was called for throwing while touring Australia in 1995-96, first in the Boxing Day Test at Melbourne by Darrel Hair and later in the one-day series that followed. He was cleared by the ICC after biomechanical analysis at the University of Western Australia and at the University of Hong Kong in 1996. They concluded that his action created the 'optical illusion of throwing'.
But the controversy did not die away. He was called again on the 1998-99 tour to Australia, this time by Ross Emerson. Muralitharan was sent for further tests in Perth and England and was cleared again. However, the perfection of his doosra prompted further suspicion and at the end of a prolific three-match home series against Australia in March 2004 he was reported by ICC match referee Chris Broad. More high-tech tests followed, and ultimately forced the ICC to seriously look into the entire issue of throwing in international cricket, which revealed that many bowlers bend their arms during delivery, and that Murali might have been made an unfair victim. On the field, Murali continued to pile on the wickets, overtaking Courtney Walsh's 519-wicket world record to become the highest wicket-taker in Test history in May 2004.
It is unlikely that Muralitharan's career will ever be controversy-free, a fact that he now accepts. But the rapid progress of technology and sports science in the past decade has undoubtedly salvaged his reputation. He continues to pick up wickets by the bucket load, although many large hauls have come against the two weakest nations - Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. However, he saves his most stunning efforts for the big boys, such as his duel with the Australians in 2004 and his eight-wicket haul at Trent Bridge in 2006 which produced a famous series-levelling win against England. The off-spinner, who played an instrumental role in Sri Lanka’s 1996 World Cup victory, was named the Wisden Cricketer of the Year 1999.

Achievements
* Highest wicket taker in Test as well as ODI cricket. Muralitharan’s Career Highlights

* Holds a world record for most five-wicket hauls (61).
* Holds a world record for most instances of 10 wickets in a Test match (20).
* Holds a world record for most Man of the Series awards (11). Pakistan’s Imran Khan, New Zealand’s Richard Hadlee and Australia’s Shane Warne with 8 awards each, share the second place.
* His tally of 18 Man of the Match awards is exceeded only by South Africa’s Jacques Kallis.
* First bowler to capture five wickets in an innings against all the nine opponents.

* His tally of 373 wickets at an average of 15.19 in 45 Tests is the third best for a winning cause in Test annals, next only to Shane Warne (510 in 92) and Glenn McGrath (414 in 84).
* Claimed 9 wickets in an innings twice—9 for 51 (career best) vs Zimbabwe at Kandy in 2002—the fifth best in Test annals and 9 for 65 against England at The Oval in 1998.

* His feat of claiming 143 wickets (ave. 20.94) in 21 Tests at Colombo, SSC and 114 wickets (ave. 15.70) in 16 Tests at Kandy are without parallel in Test cricket.
* Reached 350, 400, 450, 500, 550, 600 and 650 wickets in the fewest number of matches played.
* Part of the most successful bowler/fielder combination -- c Mahela Jayawardene b Muttiah Muralitharan
* Only player to take 10 wickets in a Test match in four consecutive matches twice.

Australian Open 2009

Men’s Singles
The World No.1 Rafael Nadal of Spain won the 2009 Australian Open Men’s Singles Tennis Championship with an enthralling 7-5, 3-6, 7-6, 3-6, 6-2 victory over Roger Federer in Melbourne (Australia) on February 1, 2009, denying the Swiss a chance to win a record-equalling 14th Grand Slam title. Nadal became the first Spaniard to win the Australian Open and chalked up his fifth straight victory over Federer, including the 2008 French Open and Wimbledon finals.
It was an incredible effort from the left-hander Nadal, who played nearly 10 hours of tennis in three days. The victory took the 22-year-old’s Grand Slam tally to six and left him needing only to win the US Open to complete the full set while reducing Federer to tears. Federer remains on 13 Grand Slams, one behind American Pete Sampras, and with an enduring mental block against Nadal who has now defeated him in their last three Grand Slam finals.
Can there be anything crueler in sport than the disintegration of a true champion, the dissipation of a veritable great? Or indeed, can there be anything more breathtaking than the incarnation of the next legend, the new hero? This final match witnessed both and one is not sure who received a greater ovation: the vanquished or the conqueror?
The 2009 final was magical rallies, unbelievable angels and heart-breaking winners. It almost looked like two superheroes, two gods relay, were engaged in mortal combat. At the end, Nadal came out victorious.
Women’s Singles

American Serena Williams is back being numero uno in the world after a dominating victory over third-seeded Russian Dinara Safina that gave her a fourth Australian Open trophy and 10th Grand Slam singles title on January 31, 2009. The 27-year-old Williams reclaimed the World No.1 title from the Serb Jelena Jankovic.
Williams routed the 22-year-old Safina 6-0, 6-3 in 59 minutes. It was among the most lopsided Australian Open women’s finals ever. Williams Still remains far away from the women’s record for Grand Slam singles titles. Margaret Court Smith had 24 and German Steffi Graf 22, with Martina Navratilova among the others she would have to pass.
It was Williams’ second overwhelming victory in a final in Melbourne, where she kept alive her record of winning in odd-numbered years since 2003. Coming into the 2007 tournament unseeded after being plagued by injuries the year before, she defeated top-seeded Maria Sharapova of Russia 6-1, 6-2. Williams is the fifth woman to win four or more Australian titles, with her previous victories coming in 2003, 2005 and 2007. By making the singles and doubles finals, she already had become the all-time leading money winner in women’s sports.
It was Williams’ 20th overall Grand Slam title. She has also won two mixed doubles championships.
Men’s Doubles
American brothers Bob and Mike Bryan won their seventh Grand Slam doubles title when they bounced back to defeat the third-seeded Indo-Bahamian pair of Mahesh Bhupathi and Mark Knowles 2-6, 7-5, 6-0 in the final on January 31, 2009. The Americans looked headed for defeat when Bhupathi and Knowles raced through the first set. But after the Bryans won the hard-fought second, it was plain sailing in the third round.
Women’s Doubles
Serena and Venus Williams won their eighth Grand Slam doubles title in Melbourne when they defeated Ai Sugiyama of Japan and Daniela Hantuchova of Slovakia 6-3, 6-3 for the women’s doubles title on January 30, 2009. Serena and Venus, who also won the Australian Open women’s doubles titles in 2001 and 2003, kept intact their record of never having lost a doubles final at a Grand Slam.
The two sisters are now tied with Virginia Ruano Pascual and Paola Suarez as the third most successful Grand Slam women’s team in the Open era, behind Martina Navratilova and Pam Shriver with 21 and Gigi Fernandez and Natasha Zvereva with 14.
Mixed Doubles
India’s Mahesh Bhupathi and the 22-year-old Sania Mirza registered their first Grand Slam title together, crushing Andy Ram of Israel and French-woman Natalie Dechy in straight sets in the mixed doubles final of the Australian Open on February 1, 2009. The Indian wild card pair proved too good for the Israeli-French duo, outclassing them 6-3, 6-3.
The win also gave the 34-year-old Bhupathi his 11th Grand Slam title—seventh in mixed doubles. This was also Bhupathi’s second mixed doubles title in the Australian Open, following his 2006 victory with Swiss Martina Hingis.
For Sania, it was her maiden Grand Slam title. She is also the first Indian woman to win Grand Slam title, she was earlier junior singles champion at the Wimbledon.
Junior Singles
The 16-year-old Delhi boy Yuki Bhambri scripted history by becoming the first Indian to win the Australian Open junior singles crown with an emphatic straight-sets win over Alexandros-Ferdinandos Georgoudas of Germany on January 31, 2009. Top-seeded Yuki swept aside unseeded Georgousdas 6-3, 6-1 to pocket his first Grand Slam singles title, becoming the fourth Indian to do so in the process.
The other Indians in the elite club are Ramanathan Krishnan (1954 Junior Wimbledon Champion), his son Ramesh Krishnan (1979 Wimbledon and French Open Junior Champion) and Leander Paes (1990 Junior Wimbledon and 1991 Junior US Open Champion).
This victory put Yuki in a long list of former Australian Open Junior Champions, who have made it big in the men’s circuit, including Andy Roddick, Marcos Baghdatis and Gael Monfils.
The 2009 Australian Open junior girls’ title was annexed by Ksenia Pervak on January 31,2009. She thrashed Laura Robson 6-3, 6-1 in the final.

Right to Information Act

All public functionaries agree that transparency is the key to effective governance and they are all for it. Such bravado, however, goes out of the window when the guns are actually trained on them. Transparency within the judiciary serves at least two important purposes—it decreases the opportunities for corrupt practices and promotes public confidence in the institution. Given these vital roles, it is surprising that there should be stiff judicial resistance to making public whether members of the higher judiciary are submitting declarations about their financial assets as they are expected to. Such declarations after all were supposed to be made to the Chief Justice of India and the Chief Justices of the respective High Courts in accordance with a 1997 resolution adopted at an all-India Judges Conference. Against this background, it is inexplicable that the Supreme Court should block the Central Information Commission’s (CIC) order asking it to provide this information to an applicant under the Right to Information Act (RTI).
The Court’s decision to challenge the order in the Delhi High Court—High Courts are the final court of appeal under the RTI Act—is both unprecedented and, under the circumstances, quite unnecessary. It would have been far more sagacious had the Court simply made the information—which the CIC rightly described as “innocuous” –available.
Transparent System
Ever since RTI came into effect, it has forced the Indian State, notorious for its stonewalling ways, to open up. In a recent order, the CIC, which oversees RTI, has declared all political parties should disclose their IT returns. The reason given by the CIC is that information on the funding of parties is a democratic imperative and is in public interest.
In the US, for instance, the Federal Election Commission, an independent regulatory body keeps records of campaign finance and enforces laws on the limits and prohibitions on contributions. Anyone can log on to their website and access the latest campaign, finance information on presidential candidates or on those running for other offices. One can also find out the names of individual or corporate fund givers, how much they have donated and to whom. Though this by no means foolproof—slush funds do find their way to election candidates—it is a remarkably transparent system.
Larger Issues
Transparency and accountability in the judiciary, however, are larger issues that go well beyond the question of the applicability of the RTI Act. Since the Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan assumed office, he has earned a well-deserved reputation of being responsive to public and professional concerns. He needs to ensure that not just the answer to the question whether all the judges have declared their assets but also the details of the assets themselves are placed in the public domain.
Despite clear pronouncements from the highest bodies, there seems to be almost no movement in the direction of financial transparency by the political establishment. This is what prompted this effort by the civil society which seems to have run foul of the Court.
Governance of the country cannot improve unless systemic reforms are carried out in the political system. The political establishment is not going to do these it is used to the existing system.
However, when it comes to being opaque, the executive and the judiciary are mirror images. Therefore, it is imperative that civil society utilises progressive laws like the RTI more to demand what is our right to know.