Perera's action must be scrutinised to remove all doubts

First Test: Controversy surrounding Sri Lanka seamer overshadows century by England opener born out of patience and determination

Internal links

Vaughan shows England the escape route

'I just put my head down and ran'

Vaughan's talent needs disciplined concentration to flourish

Accusations of bowlers throwing are not new to the game of cricket. There is, however, nothing worse for a bowler than to have his action questioned.

The stigma of being called a "chucker" is akin to being called a cheat. In the eyes of many, he is deemed to be doing it deliberately to get an unfair advantage – sending down faster balls with more spin on them – and once the accusations have been made a label hangs round his neck which is very hard to loosen.

It is hard not to sympathise, therefore, with Ruchira Perera, the Sri Lankan left-arm seamer whose action began to come under such scrutiny on Saturday. Perera would have walked off the field fairly chuffed with his day's work and the part he had played in getting his country into such a dominant position. His team-mate Muttiah Muralitharan informs us that Perera cannot read English and by yesterday morning that was just as well.

But it cannot be hidden that there is something going on in the action of Perera that is not quite right. It is a fault that should have been sorted out before a Lord's Test match, even allowing for the fact that some bowlers do not necessarily have the benefit of being coached from an early age by those who would pick up on any faults. There is a kink or a twist in Perera's left arm as it comes over that gets everyone scrambling for a copy of "The Laws of Cricket", and in particular, Law 24.3, Definition of a fair delivery – The arm. This law states: "A ball is fairly delivered in respect of the arm if, once the bowler's arm has reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing, the elbow joint is not straightened partially or completely from that point until the ball has left the hand. This definition shall not debar a bowler from flexing or rotating the wrist in the delivery swing."

There can be no doubt that Perera's action needs further scrutiny. Indeed, it is hard to imagine that the match referee, Gundappa Viswanath, and his two umpires, Daryl Harper and Srinivas Venkataraghavan, will not issue a report, given the interest it has generated. Action would then follow.

Bio-mechanics experts at the University of Western Australia would probably be used to straighten things out – namely his arm. This is where Muralitharan and the Pakistan paceman Shoaib Akhtar were sent to following similar attention. The computerised stick figures the university's work produces, to show the change in angles as a bowler's arm comes over, would then tell us the true faults in Perera's action. It would be then down to coaches to remedy the problem before getting the all-clear and giving Perera the opportunity to continue his career.

The current rules allow a bowler to finish the match before action is taken. This, however, has always been a grey area because it is such a serious charge, and looking at the black-and-white footage of years gone by there are plenty of actions that would be causing a stir now. There have been whispers off-microphone and chats off the record concerning the legitimacy of the actions of some of the "all-time greats" but that is as far as pundits have been prepared, or allowed, to go.

It is the advances that have been made in television coverage which have brought such misdemeanours to the forefront of our attention. A batsman's decision not to walk when he has clearly edged the ball through to the wicketkeeper is accepted these days as being part of the game. It must be hoped that a bowler whose action can now be taken apart on television is treated in the same way.