chucking javelins or not ?
Leaving my personal opinions out of the whole thing for a moment (only a moment), I have to admit that they put on a darn good show. He had flown over to London and proceeded to bowl his three stock deliveries (off spinner, top spinner and doosra) under the scrutiny of super slow mo camera. No big deal, you think. Well, next, he produced a specially angled cast, reinforced with steel rods and proceeded to bowl the same deliveries with that cast on. Ok, so he wasn't all that accurate, but the point (triumphantly proclaimed), was that it is impossible to straighten the arm while that cast is on. and he still got a serious amount of turn. And darn straight I believe them *grin*. Unmemorable statements by various people followed, which just muddied the waters some more (and I tuned out in any case).
Does he throw ? Yeah, I think in the purist sense of the term, he does. He probably always has. Unfortunately for the haters, I think everyone throws their delivery to some extent, especially fast bowlers trying to bowl a bouncer. There was a point made about arm speed, where Ashley Giles (that lucky sod, getting WI wickets for free because of shocking umpiring) and Harmison and later Pedro Collins were compared side by side. Giles delivers faster than Pedro Collins in terms of arm speed, so obviously different tolerance levels for fast vs slow bowlers is bunkum. No surprise that. But I'm reasonably convinced that he doesn't gain enough unfair advantage to make a difference. Which was the whole point of the law. So, make him "the one that got away", stop hassling the guy and let him bowl. Do periodic checks, make sure he doesn't straighten further than he already has. Nobody points fingers at unky Shane Warne and says "you diuretic abusing druggie, you" when he bowls now ? But I presume he'll probably donate more urine than the norm to testing laboratories for as long as he continues to play.
Miscarriages of justice do happen. Just ask O.J. Occasionally, you luck out as a result. Again, ask O.J. The whole concept of double jeopardy exists for a reason, I think. And further confirming my drift to the mainstream apologists category, a straw poll conducted during the feature had the "just let 'im bowl" camp leading the "kick him out, burn his houses and eat his father's candy" camp by a few thousand votes.
Let there be ambiguity or let there be something else