Pakistan Forfeit Test!

[mittheimp]

Pakistan certainly did themselves few favours but isn't it funny how Darryl Hair always seems to be at the centre of it all! Sooner this Ausie attention seeking clown is struck off the Elite panel of umpires the better cricket will be!

Although i was quite happy with the events as i had betted a couple of quid on England at decent odds at the end of day 1

Edited August 20, 2006 by mittheimp

[Mr Jones]

come Monday it wont be Pakistan it will be

Islam

and the pricks will be ??

[Pink Mist]

Pakistan certainly did themselves few favours but isn't it funny how Darryl Hair always seems to be at the centre of it all! Sooner this Ausie attention seeking clown is struck off the Elite panel of umpires the better cricket will be!

Although i was quite happy with the events as i had betted a couple of quid on England at decent odds at the end of day 1

What was he supposed to do?

the pakistanis were playing games and they lost

[mittheimp]

Pakistan certainly did themselves few favours but isn't it funny how Darryl Hair always seems to be at the centre of it all! Sooner this Ausie attention seeking clown is struck off the Elite panel of umpires the better cricket will be!

Although i was quite happy with the events as i had betted a couple of quid on England at decent odds at the end of day 1

What was he supposed to do?

the pakistanis were playing games and they lost

well perhaps not accuse a nation of cheating in a high handed manner without seemingly much evidence. If 27 cameras at the test match on repeated analysis didn't show anything suspicious - 3 or 4 of which will just follow the ball from fielder to fielder all day - then its doubtful Hair had much to go on!

[soi lurker]

Pakistan certainly did themselves few favours but isn't it funny how Darryl Hair always seems to be at the centre of it all! Sooner this Ausie attention seeking clown is struck off the Elite panel of umpires the better cricket will be!

Although i was quite happy with the events as i had betted a couple of quid on England at decent odds at the end of day 1

What was he supposed to do?

the pakistanis were playing games and they lost

well perhaps not accuse a nation of cheating in a high handed manner without seemingly much evidence. If 27 cameras at the test match on repeated analysis didn't show anything suspicious - 3 or 4 of which will just follow the ball from fielder to fielder all day - then its doubtful Hair had much to go on!

Nah, he wouldn't know mitt, he was only right there overseeing everything going on wasn't he? Oh yes, and thanks for pointing out, hes Australian.

[Pink Mist]

Pakistan certainly did themselves few favours but isn't it funny how Darryl Hair always seems to be at the centre of it all! Sooner this Ausie attention seeking clown is struck off the Elite panel of umpires the better cricket will be!

Although i was quite happy with the events as i had betted a couple of quid on England at decent odds at the end of day 1

What was he supposed to do?

the pakistanis were playing games and they lost

well perhaps not accuse a nation of cheating in a high handed manner without seemingly much evidence. If 27 cameras at the test match on repeated analysis didn't show anything suspicious - 3 or 4 of which will just follow the ball from fielder to fielder all day - then its doubtful Hair had much to go on!

Nah, he wouldn't know mitt, he was only right there overseeing everything going on wasn't he? Oh yes, and thanks for pointing out, hes Australian.

sorry another question comes to mind, was he the only umpire, wasn't a discussion happening between them, cmon get a life, the "pakistni crikt team" were playing games, they lost

[chuchok]

Pakistan certainly did themselves few favours but isn't it funny how Darryl Hair always seems to be at the centre of it all! Sooner this Ausie attention seeking clown is struck off the Elite panel of umpires the better cricket will be!

Although i was quite happy with the events as i had betted a couple of quid on England at decent odds at the end of day 1

What was he supposed to do?

the pakistanis were playing games and they lost

well perhaps not accuse a nation of cheating in a high handed manner without seemingly much evidence. If 27 cameras at the test match on repeated analysis didn't show anything suspicious - 3 or 4 of which will just follow the ball from fielder to fielder all day - then its doubtful Hair had much to go on!

The Pakistanis have been guilty in the past.There is more than one ex-player that have comented on how "amazing" the ball can be when in the hands of a Pakistanis fielding side.All rough as hel_l on one side, yet shiney and hard on the other.They are as cunning as, soI wouldnot put it past them at all.

[Pink Mist]

Just on the question of Big Dazza, he might be the only one who has the guts to call the hard ones with the off white cricketers, thoughts please

[chuchok]

Just on the question of Big Dazza, he might be the only one who has the guts to call the hard ones with the off white cricketers, thoughts please

Probably right there.Everybody is running scared of the "brown" vote in Cricket.About time somebody stood up to them.

[mittheimp]

Just on the question of Big Dazza, he might be the only one who has the guts to call the hard ones with the off white cricketers, thoughts please

My thought is that it is an incredibly ignorant and possibly quasi-racist comment to make!

He was wrong about Murrili if that it was you were referring to and i will discuss at length and explain why if you wish!

I agree that Pakistan handled this pretty badly but you can't ignore the role of Hair. Pakistan had apparently asked for him not to be used again prior to this match. In the Pakistan series against England Hair was the umpire that called dead ball and sent Salman Butt back for running down the wicket - a very odd thing to do - and he gave him out LBW the next ball. He also gave Inzaman run out after jumping out the way off a ball hurled at him by Steve Harmison - in his ground but in the air. A totally wrong decision that smacks (at best!) at complete incompetence.

Now imagine if the Ozzies or the England team had been accused of this during the last Ashes tour - under the same circumstances and amount of evidence - by an Asian umpire. The focus of debate would surely be on the competence on the umpire - and him being branded a maverick and attention seeker!

Now I say this as an England fan!

[Pink Mist]

Just on the question of Big Dazza, he might be the only one who has the guts to call the hard ones with the off white cricketers, thoughts please

My thought is that it is an incredibly ignorant and possibly quasi-racist comment to make!

He was wrong about Murrili if that it was you were referring to and i will discuss at length and explain why if you wish!

I agree that Pakistan handled this pretty badly but you can't ignore the role of Hair. Pakistan had apparently asked for him not to be used again prior to this match. In the Pakistan series against England Hair was the umpire that called dead ball and sent Salman Butt back for running down the wicket - a very odd thing to do - and he gave him out LBW the next ball. He also gave Inzaman run out after jumping out the way off a ball hurled at him by Steve Harmison - in his ground but in the air. A totally wrong decision that smacks (at best!) at complete incompetence.

Now imagine if the Ozzies or the England team had been accused of this during the last Ashes tour - under the same circumstances and amount of evidence - by an Asian umpire. The focus of debate would surely be on the competence on the umpire - and him being branded a maverick and attention seeker!

Now I say this as an England fan!

you might be an england fan, big deal my point was, there were 2 umpires, did you see the news clip

[Pink Mist]

Pakistan certainly did themselves few favours but isn't it funny how Darryl Hair always seems to be at the centre of it all! Sooner this Ausie attention seeking clown is struck off the Elite panel of umpires the better cricket will be!

Although i was quite happy with the events as i had betted a couple of quid on England at decent odds at the end of day 1

What was he supposed to do?

the pakistanis were playing games and they lost

well perhaps not accuse a nation of cheating in a high handed manner without seemingly much evidence. If 27 cameras at the test match on repeated analysis didn't show anything suspicious - 3 or 4 of which will just follow the ball from fielder to fielder all day - then its doubtful Hair had much to go on!

just the ball,which he conferred with his co-umpire

[chuchok]

Just on the question of Big Dazza, he might be the only one who has the guts to call the hard ones with the off white cricketers, thoughts please

My thought is that it is an incredibly ignorant and possibly quasi-racist comment to make!

He was wrong about Murrili if that it was you were referring to and i will discuss at length and explain why if you wish!

It only took hi-tech equip to work that one out mate...I would say that to the naked eye, it was a very fair call.

There has been a distinct change in the power of cricket, from the old white guard to now the non- white.call it what you like, but it is real and it is there.There is no way that the old croud would have put up with the crap that has happened in Zim.....

[mittheimp]

Daryl Hair was the senior umpire, and the instigator of the 5 penalty runs. The other umpire did concur with his decision, yes - but I'm not aware yet of numerous incidents following Billy Doctrove around in the same way - so rightfully a lot the attention has been put on Hair.

Interestingly a lot of commentators, pundits analysts etc although critical of Pakistan have also been critical of Hair. Botham said he would have done exactly the same as Inzaman!

Lets also not tarnish Pakistan for misdemeanors in the past, after all it was Atherton who was seemingly caught red handed with dirt in his pocket but no action was ever taken! Was someone too afraid to punish him because of his white colour?

[mittheimp]

Just on the question of Big Dazza, he might be the only one who has the guts to call the hard ones with the off white cricketers, thoughts please

My thought is that it is an incredibly ignorant and possibly quasi-racist comment to make!

He was wrong about Murrili if that it was you were referring to and i will discuss at length and explain why if you wish!

It only took hi-tech equip to work that one out mate...I would say that to the naked eye, it was a very fair call. except he called his leg breaks as well as his off breaks - try and bowl a leg break with a straightening arm!

[b]There has been a distinct change in the power of cricket, from the old white guard to now the non- white.call it what you like, but it is real and it is there.There is no way that the old croud would have put up with the crap that has happened in Zim.....[/b]

Although they were quite happy to tolerate South Africa for a longer time! The whole issue of Zimbabwe in cricket goes much deeper and is a lot more complicated than you are painting it, after all they are currently suspended from test cricket.

[Khutan]

...Lets also not tarnish Pakistan for misdemeanors in the past....

Of course not, rather the misdemeanours of today.

Its an ugly thought - tampering with balls

[mittheimp]

Just on the question of Big Dazza, he might be the only one who has the guts to call the hard ones with the off white cricketers, thoughts please

My thought is that it is an incredibly ignorant and possibly quasi-racist comment to make!

He was wrong about Murrili if that it was you were referring to and i will discuss at length and explain why if you wish!

It only took hi-tech equip to work that one out mate...I would say that to the naked eye, it was a very fair call.

There has been a distinct change in the power of cricket, from the old white guard to now the non- white.call it what you like, but it is real and it is there.There is no way that the old croud would have put up with the crap that has happened in Zim.....

"the worst example of umpiring that [he had] witnessed, and against everything the game stands for."

Said by who about whom?

Donald bradman about Daryl Hair's performance no balling Murali!

He also went against the recognised procedure put in place off reporting the bowler at the end of the game as explained by steve dunne the other umpire in the game - "There were many thoughts going through my mind. What do I do? Do I support Darrell Hair because he has called Muralitharan and do I call him as well? Or do I support what I believe, which was what we had discussed and decided at a conference in Coventry earlier this year?

The issue of Daryl Hair is not about race, it's to do with an incompetent umpire grandstanding for attention.

[Pie Boy]

It would seem that regardless of the manner of their call, the umpires acted within the laws and spirit of the game.

Refusing to come out to play because they disagreed with the umpires was a very poor decision by the Pakistani team and management.

Why didn't thay simply carry on playing, beat England and then lodge a formal protest? I also don't like the idea that teams can request that certain umpires do not umpire their games.To top it off the Pakistani team have implied that umpire Hair is a racist!

[mittheimp]

It would seem that regardless of the manner of their call, the umpires acted within the laws and spirit of the game.

Refusing to come out to play because they disagreed with the umpires was a very poor decision by the Pakistani team and management.

Why didn't thay simply carry on playing, beat England and then lodge a formal protest? I also don't like the idea that teams can request that certain umpires do not umpire their games.To top it off the Pakistani team have implied that umpire Hair is a racist!

I dont actually think the Pakistan team has said anything to imply that Hair is a racist, maybe some people at one time connected to the team have - but that is entirely different!

and they didn't refuse to come out to play because they 'disagreed with the umpire' - they refused to play because they were branded of cheating! surely you can see the difference?

Having said that i think they handled the situation badly - but should the umpires decision be final even if the umpire himself is going against the spirit of the game - an umpire is not god and to parrot that line out as a defence doesn't take into account exceptional circumstances!

[Pie Boy]

I dont actually think the Pakistan team has said anything to imply that Hair is a racist, maybe some people at one time connected to the team have - but that is entirely different!

and they didn't refuse to come out to play because they 'disagreed with the umpire' - they refused to play because they were branded of cheating! surely you can see the difference?

Having said that i think they handled the situation badly - but should the umpires decision be final even if the umpire himself is going against the spirit of the game - an umpire is not god and to parrot that line out as a defence doesn't take into account exceptional circumstances!

Hi Mittheimp

I'd love to get in to a debate about the rights and wrongs of what has happened but I'm far too Lazy.However I think too much is being played on this 'we're not cheats/honour card' that the pakistanis are playing and until they change the rules to accommodate the 'exceptional circumstances 'then isn't the umpires decision final?

The real question is - will the ODIs going ahead?

Pie Boy

[mittheimp]

I dont actually think the Pakistan team has said anything to imply that Hair is a racist, maybe some people at one time connected to the team have - but that is entirely different!

and they didn't refuse to come out to play because they 'disagreed with the umpire' - they refused to play because they were branded of cheating! surely you can see the difference?

Having said that i think they handled the situation badly - but should the umpires decision be final even if the umpire himself is going against the spirit of the game - an umpire is not god and to parrot that line out as a defence doesn't take into account exceptional circumstances!

Hi Mittheimp

I'd love to get in to a debate about the rights and wrongs of what has happened but I'm far too Lazy.However I think too much is being played on this 'we're not cheats/honour card' that the pakistanis are playing and until they change the rules to accommodate the 'exceptional circumstances 'then isn't the umpires decision final?

The real question is - will the ODIs going ahead?

Pie Boy

I thought they would - but having just seen Bob Woolmer on Channel 4 news it is looking unlikely. this could cost the ECB a lot of money!!! Fortunately they are flushed with cash after selling their souls to Sky!

[soi lurker]

On any given sporting day, the umpire's decision IS final. Wether he has got it right or wrong is for the umpire's peers to decide on review if necessary. Thats whats going wrong in this world today, too many people know better than the appropriate authority.

[chuchok]

On any given sporting day, the umpire's decision IS final. Wether he has got it right or wrong is for the umpire's peers to decide on review if necessary. Thats whats going wrong in this world today, too many people know better than the appropriate authority.

Agreed.It reminds me of those football wallys that argue with the ref after a penalty has been given...why?Never seen one reversed!

[Pink Mist]

Even their great champion has come out saying that the pakistan teams actions were not understandable, in not returning to the field.

[chuchok]

Cricket: Umpire Hair lauded as a hero in Australia

4.00pm Tuesday August 22, 2006

SYDNEY - Umpire Darrell Hair has been hailed a hero in Australia for his role in the ball tampering row which led to Pakistan forfeiting the fourth cricket test against England.

While Hair has been branded a racist in parts of Asia and derided as an attention seeker by sections of the British media, he has been praised by Australians for standing by his convictions.

Former test captain Steve Waugh and Simon Taufel, the International Cricket Council's (ICC) umpire of the year, both said they supported Hair's decision to abandon the match yesterday after Pakistan captain Inzamam ul-Haq's team refused to resume playing.

"I definitely agree with that - if they don't go back on the field the test is over," Waugh told the Daily Telegraph newspaper.

"If the fielding side refuses to take the field, there is not much the umpires can do," Taufel told the Sydney Morning Herald.

"Umpires have to follow the laws as they are written, so it's hard to fault the umpires in this case."

The Australian media also sided with Hair, saying he should be applauded for taking a tough stand against the scourge of ball tampering.

Robert Craddock, writing for the Daily Telegraph, said he had been told by an English umpire last year that ball tampering was now rife in the English county competition but other umpires were afraid to speak up because of the repercussions for their own careers.

"Darrell Hair is prepared to poke his nose into grubby corners of the cricket world where most of his fellow umpires refuse to go," Craddock wrote.

"He knows a 'tampered' ball when he sees one."

Phil Wilkins, writing for the Sydney Morning Herald, said Hair was being unfairly portrayed as the culprit when all he did was follow the game's rules.

"Hair is a man of the strictest principle, an official absolutely true to the game, an umpire of the fairest, most unswerving practices," Wilkins wrote.

"He has always been a man of the strongest fibre and for that he is being castigated ferociously."

Hair was condemned by the Asian cricket community a decade ago when he no-balled Sri Lankan spinner Muttiah Muralitharan for chucking and was later dropped from the ICC's panel of elite umpires.

The ICC's decision to subsequently bend the rules so Muralitharan could continue bowling without fear of being called for throwing remains a highly contentious issue in Australia.

"If there were a few more Hairs available to stand in matches around the world then cricket would be in less of a mess than it is right now," Patrick Smith wrote in The Australian.

"If other umpires had been as strong as Hair then bowling would not have been corrupted in the manner it is now."

Hair now faces an uncertain future in the sport with the powerful Asian bloc united in their criticism of him but The Australian's chief cricket correspondent Malcolm Conn said the ICC would be wrong to bow to pressure and abandon him.

"Cricket is once again on the verge of disgracing itself by failing to support an umpire who has the courage to uphold the laws of the game," Conn wrote.

"Hair should be considered a hero for his courage, despite being subjected to death threats in the past.

"The spirit of cricket is central to the well being of the game and Inzamam crushed that spirit by refusing to play.

"Only half a decade after the match-fixing scandal that tore at the very fabric of cricket, this is another low blow the game cannot afford."

[Pink Mist]

He is being branded as a racist by the Pkistanis.

They refuse to play if he is involved.

They are going to sue him if he cant prove the ball was tampered.

just off the presses and from a pakistan spokesman talking.

my suggestion give them a one innings lead, use their own officials and make the result clear from the start.

[Fast Eddie]

If Hair was convinced by looking at the ball that it had been tampered with, what do people suggest he should do? Say nothing and let the game continue? Give me a break. It's amazing the number of people who are so strong in their opinions that he must be wrong. Have they seen the ball? You have to trust the umpires judgement, or else what is he there for? People saying that he has to actually see them do it are talking cobblers. As if any cricketer in this day in age is going to be stupid enough to do it in full view of the umpire, and the fact that Sky can't find pictures of it happening is no sort of evidence either.

Whether he's right or wrong in his decision, he has done what he is clearly convinced was the right thing to do in the situation. The response of the Pakistani team was nothing short of a disgrace.