Daryl Hair - The Moral High Ground? Really?

[mittheimp]

So who has acted worse? A cricket team that refused to come onto a cricket pitch for 30 minutes because they were sulking about being branded as cheats -

or

The umpire at the centre of the row who attempted to profit by the whole disagreement to the tune of $500,000!!!!!!

So those that claim Daryl Hair is the bastian of fair play and has the moral high ground - as all those that responded to the previous thread on this topic -

please explain how this sits with your previous comments!

In his letter, which was released to the media, Hair said: " I am prepared to retire/stand down/reqlinquish my position on the elite panel to take effect from August 31 2006. This payment is to be the sum of $500,000 details of which must be kept confidential by both parties. This sum to be paid directly into my account by August 31, 2006. ICC may announce the retirement in anyway they wish but I would prefer a simple "lifestyle choice" as this was the very reason I moved from Australia to settle in the UK three years ago."

Edited August 25, 2006 by mittheimp

[chuchok]

Good on ya Daryl.

[Old Croc]

Haven't you ever heard of superannuation.

Hair was the only guy brave enough to call Muralitheran for the chucker he is!

[mittheimp]

Haven't you ever heard of superannuation.

Hair was the only guy brave enough to call Muralitheran for the chucker he is!

Oh Old Croc, do i really have to explain to you, in one syllable words, why Muralitheran is not a chucker! As seems to be the only way you Ausies seem to be able to grasp this issue (apart from Bradman of course who memorably described Hair's umpiring that day as the worst he had ever witnessed!)

[chuchok]

Haven't you ever heard of superannuation.

Hair was the only guy brave enough to call Muralitheran for the chucker he is!

Oh Old Croc, do i really have to explain to you, in one syllable words, why Muralitheran is not a chucker! As seems to be the only way you Ausies seem to be able to grasp this issue (apart from Bradman of course who memorably described Hair's umpiring that day as the worst he had ever witnessed!)

didn't they change the rules?

[Old Croc]

Bradman was the greatest batsman of all time, but, as a person, up himself and not an authority.

I don't know why you're bashing Hair he gave England an always valuable test win.

In words of more than one syllable the only reason Murali is not outside the rules is because they changed the rules to accommodate his action.

Slow bowlers are now allowed 15 degrees of bend in the arm.

[mittheimp]

Haven't you ever heard of superannuation.

Hair was the only guy brave enough to call Muralitheran for the chucker he is!

Oh Old Croc, do i really have to explain to you, in one syllable words, why Muralitheran is not a chucker! As seems to be the only way you Ausies seem to be able to grasp this issue (apart from Bradman of course who memorably described Hair's umpiring that day as the worst he had ever witnessed!)

didn't they change the rules?

Yes they did, and they did this because they realised all bowlers extended their arm to some degree. In fact at the last world cup a scientific study revealed the only bowler not to extend his arm (i.e the only bowler that would be considered legal under the previous law) was Ramnaresh Sarwan - a part time leg spin bowler! Leg spin is considered to be the cleanest action as its almost impossible to extend your arm at all when doing it - Hair, as ive pointed out before, no balled Muralitheran when he was bowling leg spin as well as off spin. An action that went against the agreed umpire procedure and only served to help needlessly victimise one of the greatest bowlers of all time as the oh so sophisticated Aussie crowds have parroted this action ad nauseum!

I guess in the case of Daryl Hair karma does exist sometimes!

[chuchok]

So dennis Lilly,Richard Hadley,Jeff Thompson,Andy Roberts,joel garner etc all bent their arms?

[mittheimp]

So dennis Lilly,Richard Hadley,Jeff Thompson,Andy Roberts,joel garner etc all bent their arms?

to some extent it would seem so, which of course made the old rule untenable!

[mittheimp]

"It's hard to see how Darrell Hair can umpire at any future international match. They have made his position untenable now. To imagine he can umpire down the line in international matches is hard to see. It seems extraordinary when you consider that Inzamam-ul-Haq has been charged on two counts - one of ball-tampering, for which nobody can find any evidence, and secondly for bringing the game into disrepute on the back of the first charge. So poor old Inzy finds himself under two charges, but Darrell Hair, after these extraordinary letters, finds himself under no charge whatsoever "

Former England captain and Sky Sports commentator Mike Atherton

[chuchok]

Listening to NZ sports radio, One commentater said "The IOC have hung him out to dry" Sounds like a fair call, considering that the "Non-white vote' (plus a few pommies )hate his guts.

[chuchok]

Daryl Hair was 100% correct in his rulings.

1) For looking at the ball and knowing that it had been tampered with.(76Tests 124ODIs shold give you the knowledge) just plain common sence and experiance.The Law states 5 run penalty.

2)Awarding the game to England, was also 100% according to the Laws of the game

There was another Umpire, he is from the West Indies

One of the first guys that the media go to is Imran Khan....a man that self confessed to ball tampering

A few years ago in South Africa, John Ried a NZ match referee, saw Waqir Youiss ball tampering.The evidence was also on camera.He was also dubbed a racist by Pakisstan.This time, the ICC backed him and he fined Waqir 75% of his match fee.They also tried to have him(Ried) banned for the next world cup....unsuccessfully.Pricks!

Daryll Hair was asking for 3 years compensation.(Untill his ICC contract ran out) if he was to step down.Why, oh why did he send this letter to a political organisation like the ICC.The ICC is an Asian controlled group.They obviously dislike him.

Edited August 26, 2006 by chuchok

[soi lurker]

So who has acted worse? A cricket team that refused to come onto a cricket pitch for 30 minutes because they were sulking about being branded as cheats -

or

The umpire at the centre of the row who attempted to profit by the whole disagreement to the tune of $500,000!!!!!!

So those that claim Daryl Hair is the bastian of fair play and has the moral high ground - as all those that responded to the previous thread on this topic -

please explain how this sits with your previous comments!

In his letter, which was released to the media, Hair said: " I am prepared to retire/stand down/reqlinquish my position on the elite panel to take effect from August 31 2006. This payment is to be the sum of $500,000 details of which must be kept confidential by both parties. This sum to be paid directly into my account by August 31, 2006. ICC may announce the retirement in anyway they wish but I would prefer a simple "lifestyle choice" as this was the very reason I moved from Australia to settle in the UK three years ago."

Still going on about it? ok,

Your right Mitt, i do claim that Daryl Hair is the bastian of fair play while he is on the field. And so he should be, he's the umpire! He has made his decision and stuck by it, while being vilified for doing so by many people. All i can add is he was there, he made the best informed decision he could make at the time, so be it. You and I are only armchair spectators and some of us will speculate without having all the truths at hand. Anyway, this is his public life your talking about.

Now to his private life. It sounds like hes been affected in such a way, by people with similar opinions to yours, that he's had enough and wants out. Can you blame him? I would suggest he has put together a retirement figuire and put it forward. Others, like yourself, would suggest he is trying to make a quid off the back of all the contraversy. I guess its how you interperet it. One thing i can be reasonably sure about, without knowing the man, is he would rather be left alone and doing his job umpiring, than stuck in the middle of all this bs, and forced to attempt to take a package while being tarnished by sections of the community. Making money off the back of all this? I dont think so, escaping from narrowminded peoples opinions? More likely.....

[soi lurker]

So in answer to your proposed question of who has acted worse between the Pakistani cricket team or the umpire? Well its a tie between the Pakistani cricket team and the halfwits that think they know whats better than the umpire.

Edited August 26, 2006 by soi lurker

[chuchok]

Daryll was a fool for sending a letter with a dollar amount.The ICC scrote who showed it to the press is a ######.simple as that.

[soi lurker]

Daryll was a fool for sending a letter with a dollar amount.The ICC scrote who showed it to the press is a ######.simple as that.

Your right there chuchok....

[mittheimp]

The ICC is an Asian controlled institution? I dont really get it?

The current President is Percy Sonn of South Africa

The current CEO is Malcolm Speed of Australia!

The asian cricket world India/pakistan/sri lanka/bangladesh have a combined population of around 1.3 billion people. The remainder - Aus/England/S.A/NZ/ West Indies around 150 million.

Considering the two major officials of the ICC come from South Africa and Australia i am not sure how you can substantiate this point! This is a conspiracy by the Asian nations that control the ICC seems as paranoid and groundless as those that accuse Daryl Hair of racism. The ICC released the letter as after the corruption scandals of the past they know cricket has to be as transparant as possible - imagine the problems if these letters had been discovered after the Inzaman hearing!

I am not narrow minded, why should i be over this? I just think there is a lot of double standards demonstrated by many who have commented on this issue! (although interestingly most ex players who have commentated have been far more balanced).

Obviously Daryl hair isn't a racist and those that argue that point are ridiculous, and you could well argue that his actions were by the letter of the law. However his umpiring smacks of someone who revels in the limelight (and not for the first time) - he must have known what was coming when he took the actions he did. He knew Pakistan were deeply unhappy about his umpiring for a long time. To ask for a secret transaction of money in order to walk away from the game is verging on corruption! Imagine if the team was England or Australia and the umpire was from Pakistan - and the umpire had made the accusation of ball tampering with seemingly the same amount of evidence - and then a day later asks for $500,000 to walk away from the game! Do you think your reactions would be the same? I really doubt it!

[chuchok]

The ICC is an Asian controlled institution? I dont really get it?

To ask for a secret transaction of money in order to walk away from the game is verging on corruption! Imagine if the team was England or Australia and the umpire was from Pakistan - and the umpire had made the accusation of ball tampering with seemingly the same amount of evidence - and then a day later asks for $500,000 to walk away from the game! Do you think your reactions would be the same? I really doubt it!

How many votes in the ICC are there and where do they come from.

He was asking for a golden handshake I think.most of these that I know of have a "confidential' clause in them.

DH can be an ######, but I don't believe he is dishonest.

Do you know what happened regarding the NZ/Zim cricket tours?

The ICC is controled by the "brown vote".

Listen to this for a start.

Interview with John Ried.Ex ICC Match Official,Ex NZ test Capt (One of the best we had), match umpire and as straight as they come.Probably the most respected man in cricket in NZ. .First interview starts about 10mins into the first audio stream

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/thisweek/71400.wma

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/thisweek/71315.wma

I have also heard the boss of NZ Cricket and various other commentators metion on how the "asian block" run the game, cause that's where the money is.

[mittheimp]

The ICC is an Asian controlled institution? I dont really get it?

To ask for a secret transaction of money in order to walk away from the game is verging on corruption! Imagine if the team was England or Australia and the umpire was from Pakistan - and the umpire had made the accusation of ball tampering with seemingly the same amount of evidence - and then a day later asks for $500,000 to walk away from the game! Do you think your reactions would be the same? I really doubt it!

How many votes in the ICC are there and where do they come from.

He was asking for a golden handshake I think.most of these that I know of have a "confidential' clause in them.

DH can be an ######, but I don't believe he is dishonest.

Do you know what happened regarding the NZ/Zim cricket tours?

The ICC is controled by the "brown vote".

Listen to this for a start.

Interview with John Ried.Ex ICC Match Official,Ex NZ test Capt (One of the best we had), match umpire and as straight as they come.Probably the most respected man in cricket in NZ. .First interview starts about 10mins into the first audio stream

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/thisweek/71400.wma

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/thisweek/71315.wma

I have also heard the boss of NZ Cricket and various other commentators metion on how the "asian block" run the game, cause that's where the money is.

Just listened to the first one,

Wow, very interesting, particularly the coverage of the international mountain bike meeting! Controversial stuff! Pity cricket wasn't mentioned AT ALL!

[chuchok]

Opps...try this one.The interview starts 10 min in...

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/thisweek/71300.wma

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/thisweek/71315.wma

Edited August 26, 2006 by chuchok

[mittheimp]

Opps...try this one.The interview starts 10 min in...

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/thisweek/71300.wma

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/thisweek/71315.wma

Do you really think this is balanced?

"the other blokes name is Billy Doctrove and the reason you are not hearing so much about him is that he is a black South African and the Paksitanis are playing the race key in here and had a go at a white Australian, now we are pretty used to that type of behaviour in the modern world but that is what has happened here"

firstly he is not South African but West Indian (good research!!!)

secondly the fuss has concentrated on Hair because

a) He is the senior umpire

b ) Pakistan have complained about Hair in the past and didnt want him in this test match.

c) The world media concentrated on Hair from the outset - not led by the Pakistanis.

You maybe happy informing your view from this outlet but i'll stick with the BBC thanks!

Edited August 26, 2006 by mittheimp

[mittheimp]

John Reid says Asia runs the ICC because quote.....

"there are ten test playing countries and seven of them are basically asian"

So Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh

emmmmm...... who else exactly West Indies? South Africa? Zimbabwe? England? Australia? New Zealand?

come on clearly you can see the bias in this, its like watching Fox News. And the comment about Pakistan not wanting anything to do Mike proctor because he is white is totally unsubstantiated and basically untrue!

[Pie Boy]

So those that claim Daryl Hair is the bastian of fair play and has the moral high ground - as all those that responded to the previous thread on this topic -

please explain how this sits with your previous comments!

In his letter, which was released to the media, Hair said: " I am prepared to retire/stand down/reqlinquish my position on the elite panel to take effect from August 31 2006. This payment is to be the sum of $500,000 details of which must be kept confidential by both parties. This sum to be paid directly into my account by August 31, 2006. ICC may announce the retirement in anyway they wish but I would prefer a simple "lifestyle choice" as this was the very reason I moved from Australia to settle in the UK three years ago."

Perhaps old Daryl was a bit pissed off with the circus of the last week, and just decided to milk it for what he thought he could get ?

Who knows what has been going on behind the scenes? I wouldn't look at this in isolation - you need to keep your eye on the bigger picture.

I'm sticking to my original comments and would add that I think good old Daryl is worth every penny in fact can we organise a TV whip round?

I'm sure you'd be the first to contribute Mittheip

[mittheimp]

So those that claim Daryl Hair is the bastian of fair play and has the moral high ground - as all those that responded to the previous thread on this topic -

please explain how this sits with your previous comments!

In his letter, which was released to the media, Hair said: " I am prepared to retire/stand down/reqlinquish my position on the elite panel to take effect from August 31 2006. This payment is to be the sum of $500,000 details of which must be kept confidential by both parties. This sum to be paid directly into my account by August 31, 2006. ICC may announce the retirement in anyway they wish but I would prefer a simple "lifestyle choice" as this was the very reason I moved from Australia to settle in the UK three years ago."

Perhaps old Daryl was a bit pissed off with the circus of the last week, and just decided to milk it for what he thought he could get ?

Who knows what has been going on behind the scenes? I wouldn't look at this in isolation - you need to keep your eye on the bigger picture.

I'm sticking to my original comments and would add that I think good old Daryl is worth every penny in fact can we organise a TV whip round?

I'm sure you'd be the first to contribute Mittheip

You would probably raise a lot! intranssient bunch you all are! Can't actually believe not one other person can see the light

[Basil B]

As stated this guys position is untenable and probably will never be called upon to umpire an international match again, it is only fair he should have a golden handshake (annuity) to see his years out, the error was for him to make the first move by naming his price, had he waited a few days the ICC would have been asking him how much he wanted, now they are using him as a scapegoat.

As for ball tapering I for one still think this should be investigated further, but the actions of the Pakistani’s that followed tea last Sunday clearly breached the rules of the game and DH had only one option and that was to award the game to England.

There is a lot of money invested in test matches, fans have already paid for tickets for the last day, companies invested in hospitality packages, advertising space sold, TV & radio rites paid for and franchises awarded all needed to pay the high salaries and expenses of international cricketers, and there is no certainty that the game will run for five day with interruptions from the weather and the possibility of the game being won within three days, but to have teams throwing tantrums and locking themselves in their dressing room is totally unacceptable.

One hours lost play could change the outcome of a game so if the Pakistani’s get away with this you can expect to see a lot more of it, considering England had already won the series and it is highly unlikely that 5 runs would decide the outcome of this match, the ICC need to punish the Pakistani’s by making them pay compensation for the cost and costs involved in administering all claims for refunds further more I think as punishment Pakistan should be forced to play one of next years home series in an neutral country.

BB

[chuchok]

Opps...try this one.The interview starts 10 min in...

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/thisweek/71300.wma

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/thisweek/71315.wma

Do you really think this is balanced?

"the other blokes name is Billy Doctrove and the reason you are not hearing so much about him is that he is a black South African and the Paksitanis are playing the race key in here and had a go at a white Australian, now we are pretty used to that type of behaviour in the modern world but that is what has happened here"

firstly he is not South African but West Indian (good research!!!)

secondly the fuss has concentrated on Hair because

a) He is the senior umpire

b ) Pakistan have complained about Hair in the past and didnt want him in this test match.

c) The world media concentrated on Hair from the outset - not led by the Pakistanis.

You maybe happy informing your view from this outlet but i'll stick with the BBC thanks!

he later corrected himself saying that doctrove was WI.

I'm sure that the BBC is is always fair and balanced.

[chuchok]

John Reid says Asia runs the ICC because quote.....

"there are ten test playing countries and seven of them are basically asian"

So Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh

emmmmm...... who else exactly West Indies? South Africa? Zimbabwe? England? Australia? New Zealand?

come on clearly you can see the bias in this, its like watching Fox News. And the comment about Pakistan not wanting anything to do Mike proctor because he is white is totally unsubstantiated and basically untrue!

Well actually, they mean the "brown vote" or "non-white vote" for all the PC people.most people know that asia holds the power in cricket.

That's a pretty bold claim calling John Ried a liar.He is probably the most respected person in NZ cricket.Ex NZ Caption and ex Test Match official.BTW, he happens to know mike Procter quite well.

Does the BBC always go to cheats like Imran for comments?

"The TimesOnline":

Quote:

Inzamam was punished four times by the ICC last year after adverse reports by umpires.

As things stand he still faces charges of being responsible, as captain, for alleged illegal tampering with the ball

[Pink Mist]

So those that claim Daryl Hair is the bastian of fair play and has the moral high ground - as all those that responded to the previous thread on this topic -

please explain how this sits with your previous comments!

In his letter, which was released to the media, Hair said: " I am prepared to retire/stand down/reqlinquish my position on the elite panel to take effect from August 31 2006. This payment is to be the sum of $500,000 details of which must be kept confidential by both parties. This sum to be paid directly into my account by August 31, 2006. ICC may announce the retirement in anyway they wish but I would prefer a simple "lifestyle choice" as this was the very reason I moved from Australia to settle in the UK three years ago."

Perhaps old Daryl was a bit pissed off with the circus of the last week, and just decided to milk it for what he thought he could get ?

Who knows what has been going on behind the scenes? I wouldn't look at this in isolation - you need to keep your eye on the bigger picture.

I'm sticking to my original comments and would add that I think good old Daryl is worth every penny in fact can we organise a TV whip round?

I'm sure you'd be the first to contribute Mittheip

You would probably raise a lot! intranssient bunch you all are! Can't actually believe not one other person can see the light

well mr mittheimp you remind me of the old story, some proud parents watching their son march in a parade,

"look at that dear, everyone is out of step except our jonnie"

[Siam_superfly]

So those that claim Daryl Hair is the bastian of fair play and has the moral high ground - as all those that responded to the previous thread on this topic -

please explain how this sits with your previous comments!

In his letter, which was released to the media, Hair said: " I am prepared to retire/stand down/reqlinquish my position on the elite panel to take effect from August 31 2006. This payment is to be the sum of $500,000 details of which must be kept confidential by both parties. This sum to be paid directly into my account by August 31, 2006. ICC may announce the retirement in anyway they wish but I would prefer a simple "lifestyle choice" as this was the very reason I moved from Australia to settle in the UK three years ago."

Perhaps old Daryl was a bit pissed off with the circus of the last week, and just decided to milk it for what he thought he could get ?

Who knows what has been going on behind the scenes? I wouldn't look at this in isolation - you need to keep your eye on the bigger picture.

I'm sticking to my original comments and would add that I think good old Daryl is worth every penny in fact can we organise a TV whip round?

I'm sure you'd be the first to contribute Mittheip

You would probably raise a lot! intranssient bunch you all are! Can't actually believe not one other person can see the light

well mr mittheimp you remind me of the old story, some proud parents watching their son march in a parade,

"look at that dear, everyone is out of step except our jonnie"

Well said Bronc's.....

[chuchok]

Cricket: Umpire Hair says ICC encouraged his offer

1.00pm Monday August 28, 2006

Australian Darrell Hair said he was encouraged by the ICC to make an offer to quit as an umpire following the Pakistan ball-tampering furore at the Oval last week.

Hair has been heavily criticised since the International Cricket Council (ICC) revealed details of an email he sent to officials requesting a US$500,000 ($798,084) one-off payment in return for quitting their elite panel of umpires after the row.

In a statement released by his lawyers last night (NZ time), Hair said: "I was encouraged to make the offer that was disclosed by ICC on 25 August 2006.

"During an extended conversation on 21 August 2006 with Mr (Doug) Cowie, the Umpires' Manager for ICC, I was invited to make a written offer.

"The opening words of my first email to Mr Cowie confirm this: 'Just (to) firm up what we discussed earlier this evening.' I note that Mr Cowie replied on the same date: 'Your offer may have merit and is acknowledged and under discussions with ICC management'.

The controversy flared after Hair and fellow umpire Billy Doctrove imposed a five-run penalty on Pakistan for ball tampering on the final day of the fourth test against England in London last week.

Pakistan subsequently forfeited the game when they refused to take the field after tea in protest at the decision. It was the first forfeiture in test cricket's 129-year history.

Pakistan captain Inzamam-ul-Haq faces charges of ball tampering and bringing the game into disrepute at an ICC disciplinary meeting on Sept. 15.

Hair told an Australian newspaper on Sunday his decision, subsequently withdrawn, to ask for a payoff had not been a panic reaction.

"It wasn't a spur of the moment thing. I didn't do it off the cuff," Hair told Australia's Sunday Mail.

In his later statement he added: "I would have thought that it was quite apparent from the text of correspondence that I had been in discussions with ICC about the issue prior to sending the email.

"I was encouraged to make a written offer by ICC. The figure in the email correspondence was in line with those canvassed with the ICC."

His lawyers said the purpose of his statement was to "address certain misconceptions that appear to have arisen as a consequence of the release of certain confidential correspondence between Mr Hair and ICC."

Hair said he did not give his consent to the emails being made public and added the context in which they were sent was not made clear. There was only a "partial disclosure of the exchanges", he added.

ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed disclosed the correspondence at a news conference on Friday.

Hair has been vilified in Pakistan's media over his decision and a perceived bias against Asian teams.

Asked whether he would ever umpire again, Hair told the Sunday Mail: "Let's address one thing at a time."