Tony Becca, Contributor

FOUR YEARS ago, up to May 2003, fast bowler Jermaine Lawson was the talk of the region.

In fact, as one of the fastest bowlers in the world, as a bowler who had taken six wickets for three runs against Bangladesh, a hat-trick against Australia then, in the following match, seven wickets for 78 runs against the same side, and as the bowler who, up to then, had taken 29 wickets in seven Test matches, Lawson, fast, really fast and accurate, was the talk of the world.

A forgotten man

Today, however, Lawson, at only age 25, seems to be a forgotten man - and that despite some good bowling in the regional Carib Beer Series competition, including earlier this year when he took the table-topping 29 wickets highlighted by an impressive six for 70 versus the Windward Islands, and in spite of a bowling record for the West Indies that should be the envy of the bowlers now in South Africa.

In 13 Test matches before his last match two years ago when he was only 23, Lawson took 51 wickets at an average of 29.69 and with a strike rate of 46.30 - figures which leave the West Indies bowlers now in South Africa in his shadow.

For those who do not know, after 22 matches, Daren Powell has taken 56 wickets at an average of 43.62 and a strike rate of 77.50.

After 13 matches, Jerome Taylor has taken 35 wickets at an average of 39.69 and a strike rate of 64.70.

After 27 matches, Fidel Edwards has taken 72 wickets at an average of 43.01 and a strike rate of 63.70.

After 32 matches, Pedro Collins has taken 106 wickets at an average of 34. 63 and a strike rate of 65.60 and as far as I am concerned he is a batsman more than a bowler, after 23 matches, Dwayne Bravo has taken 45 wickets at an average of 43.37 and a strike rate of 79.00.

And, after four matches, legspinner Rawl Lewis boasts the unflattering figures of one wicket at an average of 388.00 and a strike rate of 759.00.

The question is this: why is Lawson out of the West Indies team, the West Indies squad, for the past two years and since the first Test match against Australia in Brisbane in 2005 when he suffered an injury to his left ankle?

On the surface, it would seem that Lawson is out because of a suspect bowling action - an action that was, like that of many, including fast bowlers Shoaib Akhtar of Pakistan and Brett Lee of Australia, spin bowlers Harbhajan Singh and Muttiah Muralitharan, reported to the ICC on two occasions.

After remedial work, however, Lawson, like Akhtar and Lee, Singh and Muralitharan, was cleared.

What is strange, however, is that while all four bowlers, including Muralitharan, who recently broke Shane Warne's record for the most wickets in the history of the game, have been back playing Test cricket, Lawson, who still represents his club and who still represents Jamaica in the regional tournaments organised by the West Indies board, has been ignored by the West Indies selectors.

Unfair behaviour

The question is this: Why is it so? Why has it been allowed to continue being so?

Is it that the West Indies selectors, despite the ruling of the ICC following its remedial work and unlike the selectors of Pakistan and Australia, India and Sri Lanka, believe that Lawson still throws and are therefore determined to ignore the game's governing body?

If that is so, they have an obligation to let Lawson know and, more important, they also have a responsibility to let Jamaica know.

It just does not make sense for the West Indies selectors, representing the West Indies board, not to select Lawson to represent the West Indies because of an illegal action and yet the Jamaica selectors are allowed to select him to represent Jamaica.

It also must be unfair to the batsmen around the region to ask them to compete against a bowler, a fast bowler at that, with an illegal action. Most important, it must be unfair to Lawson to train every day, to play club cricket, to represent Jamaica, to bowl well, to get wickets, to bowl better and to get more wickets than the other bowlers and still cannot get back into the West Indies team.

It is high time the West Indies board and the West Indies selectors make up their minds and then act responsibly in the interest of West Indies cricket, in the interest of the regional competition, and in the interest of Lawson.

It is either that Lawson can bowl or he cannot bowl. It is either that Lawson can represent the West Indies or he cannot represent Jamaica.

Based on the ruling of the ICC, Lawson is straight enough to bowl, and once he is bowling well enough, once he is getting wickets that merits selection, he should be selected to represent the West Indies.

Give an opportunity

There are those who believe that the selectors are protecting Lawson because of a fear that if they select him and, he is reported for a third time, that would be the end of his career. Even if that is so, however, that is nonsense, and for one simple reason.

Right now, Lawson is not playing Test cricket and he has not been playing Test cricket for some time. As far as he is concerned, therefore, it makes no difference if he plays again, is called again and cannot play again.

By selecting him, however, at least the West Indies selectors will be giving Lawson an opportunity to prove beyond a doubt, if he can, that he is a bowler and not a chucker.

Once he is fit and bowling well, Lawson should be selected to represent the West Indies and if he cannot represent the West Indies because the selectors believe that his action is illegal, then he should not be allowed to represent Jamaica.

Based on the ICC ruling, however, the West Indies selectors should select him and, especially so, as they are neither umpires nor match referees and that based on their lack of expertise and the absence of equipment to test, they are not qualified to pass judgement as to who bowls and who throws.

Sri Lanka and Australia will be here next year and if Lawson bowls well in the regional tournament he should, depending on what the fast bowlers do in South Africa, be selected to represent the West Indies. It should be as simple as that.