Time bowlers are given level playing field

My end-of-season accolades are for bowlers. In many ways they have been the real heroes, though, batsmen have managed to hog the headlines most times. Brian Lara''s world record and a rash of high scores by sundry batsmen from India, Australia, New Zealand, indeed almost every country have made the last 12 months memorable. But all said and done, a lot of batsmen are thriving because bowlers are getting the short shrift.
Almost two dozen current batters hover around the 50 runs per innings mark; about half a dozen are well in excess of that magic figure.That would suggest a dramatic improvement in technique and ability from batsmen of previous eras, but in fact is largely because bowlers have had their effectiveness reduced through dubious legislation and far too many ''friendly'' wickets.
Fast bowlers have been restricted to two bouncers an over, and not more than one to the same batsman. That allows batsmen enormous psychological and physical relief, and takes the sting out of a bowler''s armoury. Leg spinners and outswing bowlers still cannot get leg before decisions to deliveries pitched outside the leg stump. I am not entirely convinced that slomos and third umpires are improving the lot of bowlers either.
Former Australia captain Greg Chappell recently voiced concern that blunting the effectiveness of bowlers will hurt the game in the long run. "Ultimately, spectators want to watch a good contest between bat and ball," he said. Chappell has a point. Former India captain Ravi Shastri says some formula must be devised to reconcile the averages of contemporary players with those from earlier eras because the game is now too heavily loaded in favour of batsmen. He has a point too.
For instance Sunil Gavaskar, who averages just a notch above 50, may not seem as good as someone who averages say 55 or 56 today. But Gavaskar made 13 of his 29 hundreds against the West Indies when they were the best side in the world, and powered by some of the greatest fast bowlers in the history of the game who were allowed to bowl six bouncers an over if they wished.
I would advocate that the number of bouncers per over be raised to three, and to the same batsmen if the bowler so desires. The discarded back foot no-ball rule should be revisited by those who decide on such matters in the ICC to see if it has greater merit in the contemporary game.
I would also venture a radical experiment to remove the boundary hit, and compel batsmen to run the runs except for the six hit. Let batsmen earn their runs, as bowlers have to earn wickets. Currently, the physical effort is three or four times more for bowlers compared to batsmen. Some levelling out would help.
****************************************************************************************
Expert opinion is sharply polarized where Muttiah Muralitharan''s bowling action is concerned. For instance, Anil Kumble does not think Murali chucks his ''doosra'', while Bishen Bedi is convinced that his action is suspect even for the regulation off-break.
Frankly, the controversy is befuddling. Why does this erupt every four or five years? And if he had such a dubious action, why has he been allowed to continue playing for more than a decade?