Darrell Hair No-Balls Muttiah Muralitharan — 1995

Muttiah Muralitharan was born with a congenital defect that prevented his right arm from fully straightening. His elbow was permanently hyper-extended in a position that, to the naked eye, resembled the throwing action that cricket's Laws had prohibited since the 19th century. For most observers watching on television, however, the sheer volume of spin he extracted and the wickets he took were the story — not his unusual mechanics.

By 1995, Muralitharan had been playing international cricket for Sri Lanka for three years. Bowlers from the subcontinent had long faced accusations of throwing — the "throwing crisis" of the early 1960s had engulfed players from India, Pakistan and South Asia — and there was a long-standing suspicion among some Australian players and administrators about Murali's action. None of his previous umpires had called him.

Darrell Hair was one of international cricket's most senior umpires. He was known as a strict, uncompromising official who had stood in high-profile Tests across the world. He had privately harboured doubts about Muralitharan's action for some time and had discussed it with colleagues. The Boxing Day Test at the MCG would give him the platform he had been waiting for.

Sri Lanka had arrived in Australia for a two-Test series that was always going to be scrutinised given the host nation's dominance of world cricket at the time. The first Test had already generated heat. When the second Test began at the MCG on Boxing Day — the most watched day of cricket on the Australian calendar — Muralitharan was set to bowl.

Hair took up his position at the bowler's end. From his first over, he began calling Muralitharan for throwing — the signal is a simple extending of the arm to the side. He called him seven times in the same over. The crowd, largely unaware of what was happening, was confused. When the replays appeared on the big screen and television, the enormity of the moment became clear.

The other umpire, Ross Emerson, standing at square leg, did not call Murali at all during this sequence. This asymmetry was itself controversial — the Laws require that an umpire at the bowler's end is responsible for calling no-balls, but the disparity in judgment between the two officials emphasised how subjective Hair's decision was.

On Boxing Day 1995 at the MCG, umpire Darrell Hair called Muralitharan for throwing seven times from the bowler's end. It was the first time a bowler had been called for chucking in a Test match since 1963.

Sri Lanka were outraged. They argued that Muralitharan's unusual action — caused by a congenital condition that prevented him from fully straightening his arm — gave the optical illusion of throwing. Bio-mechanical tests later confirmed that his arm did not straighten beyond the 15-degree tolerance that the ICC would eventually adopt.

The incident was deeply controversial. Hair was accused of overstepping his authority and of having a bias against subcontinental players. Sri Lanka threatened to abandon the tour. The ICC subsequently introduced bio-mechanical testing for bowling actions rather than relying on umpires' visual judgments.

Muralitharan went on to become the highest wicket-taker in Test history with 800 wickets, vindicating those who defended his action. Hair, meanwhile, became a polarizing figure and was later involved in the 2006 Oval forfeiture controversy with Pakistan.

“I was not throwing the ball. I cannot throw the ball. My arm does not work that way. It never has.”

“I called him because I genuinely believed his action was illegal. I stand by that decision. I always will.”

“This is a disgrace. Our player has been humiliated in front of the world based on one man's opinion.”

“The bio-mechanical data is unambiguous. His arm does not straighten beyond what his congenital condition permits.”

The immediate aftermath was diplomatic chaos. Sri Lanka threatened to abandon the tour. The ICC convened meetings with extraordinary speed. Muralitharan was tested by bio-mechanical experts at the University of Western Australia, who confirmed that his congenital condition meant his arm could not straighten fully even when he attempted to do so deliberately. The elbow remained bent beyond the point considered normal, but within the mechanical limits of his specific anatomy.

The ICC cleared Muralitharan provisionally and took the radical step of suspending Hair from standing in any match involving Sri Lanka — an unprecedented restriction on an elite umpire's assignments. Hair was furious and felt he had been sacrificed for political reasons. He believed then, and stated publicly for years afterwards, that he had been correct.

The incident prompted the ICC to commission a comprehensive scientific review of bowling actions. This led directly to the adoption of the 15-degree elbow extension tolerance rule in 2004 — a biomechanically derived threshold that replaced purely visual judgment. Under that rule, Muralitharan was formally and definitively cleared.