The ruling of the independent biomechanical analysis committee of the International Cricket Council (ICC) on West Indies spin bowlers Marlon Samuels and Shane Shillingford could not have come at a worse time for the regional side which prepares to face New Zealand in the third and final test match tomorrow.
The independent analyses of Shillingford and Samuels were performed by Associate Professor Jacque Alderson and her team at the School of Sport Science, Exercise and Health, The University of Western Australia (UWA) in Perth on 29 November and, according to a press release from the ICC, Shillingford and Samuels 
were found to have exceeded the 15 degrees level of tolerance permitted under the ICC Regulations for the Review of Bowlers Reported with Suspected Illegal Bowling Actions.
The off-spinner Samuels’ infringement however was only for his faster ball while Shillingford’s were for his doosra and his off break deliveries.
“The analysis revealed that for both his standard off-break delivery and his doosra, the amount of elbow extension in his bowling action exceeded the 15 degrees’ level of tolerance,” stated the ICC’s release.
The result, suspension from bowling in international cricket for Shillingford and the inability of Samuels to bowl his quicker delivery in matches. It would be an understatement to say that the decisions have not been devastating to both bowlers not to mention the other members of the West Indies team.
Down 0-1 following their not surprising three-day defeat in the second test after rain saved them from a similar embarrassment in the first, the West Indies need to win this match in order to salvage some respectability (if that is altogether possible) from the series.
The suspension of the two bowlers just about rubs salt into the wounds of a West Indies team which might now be totally demoralized following their poor showing on their current New Zealand tour and one wonders how the team will fare given the timing of the ICC’s release.
The ICC’s ruling can be considered to be just another nail in the coffin of West Indies cricket and its administration.
Shillingford and Samuels were reported at the end of the second day’s play of the Mumbai Test against India last month by on-field umpires Richard Kettleborough and Nigel Llong, TV Umpire Vineet Kulkarni and Andy Pycroft of the Emirates Elite Panel of ICC Match Referees.
Shillingford’s case is reminiscent of another West Indies bolwer Jermaine Lawson in that it came after exceptional bowling performances.
Ne can argue that there are other glaring examples of bowlers who seem to pelt or chuck as is the correct term (one has since retired) and yet the ICC seems reluctant to find these bowlers guilty. Is there a double standard here?
The ruling should galvanise (perhaps this is the wrong word) the WICB to immediately move to ensure that there is proper coaching at all levels beginning at the kiddy level.
One might be tempted to ask how is it that persons find themselves playing international cricket only to find out that they have so many flaws.
It is simply because cricket, like most sports in the region is played by players who have the necessary talent and not by players who have gone through a structured coaching programme.
While there have been a lot of talk by the WICB about synchronizing the respective coaching programmes of the territories that make up the West Indies, one can argue that that all the synchronization is just that—all talk.
There is very little coaching done at the entry level hence players begin their sporting careers with basic flaws which go unattended even as the players progresses from one stage to the next.
The result is that by the time the player reach the international level there is precious little that can be done to remedy the faults/flaws of the players which are then exposed ruthlessly by the opposition using the technology that is so readily available these days. It is why some West Indies players are able to make an impact early in their careers and then wonder why they are unable to maintain that success after the television reviews/ replays would have zeroed in on their faulty techniques.
It is time for the WICB to forget about expecting the senior team to do anything better than they are doing at the moment which is to lose in three days against even modest opposition and to concentrate on those players who will be the future of West Indies cricket.
Then and only then might West Indies cricket return to the glory days of the Clive Lloyds and the Sir Vivian Richards’ eras.
