• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Ball-Tampering Hearing

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Exactly. If it goes to court, you are never found innocent - you are found innocent if it's proved you didn't do it before it goes to trial ie no case to answer. therefore, Not Guilty /= Innocent.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Scaly piscine said:
How do we know it's the right ball tho?
If you're going to say that then bugger off from this thread because there's no proper discussion that can occur with you.

If you believe the ICC pulled a shifty, that's fine, but the fact is, if the ICC ruled like you wanted them to rule, you would have taken it as gospel. However since they didn't, you're crying foul politics.

Basically, either way, you were always going to pot Pakistan in this thread.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Scaly piscine said:
How do we know it's the right ball tho?

What the hell? This discussion ends right here. I assume Hair would have recognized the ball at trial.

I suppose Geoff Boycott and everyone else who testified at trials were bought off by the PCB, right?
 
Last edited:

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Nah SS don't you understand, Hair has been threatened that if he reveals the ball is different there will be hell to pay. Its all a massive conspiracy.

I love how the conspiracy theorists in OT get blasted and criticised like there's no tomorrow, but those that claim similar rubbish are almost praised.
 

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
silentstriker said:
What the hell? This discussion ends right here. I assume Hair would have recognized the ball at trial.

I suppose Geoff Boycott and everyone else who testified at trials were bought off by the PCB, right?
including madugalle....:laugh: it was all a setup man, didn't you know?
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
silentstriker said:
What the hell? This discussion ends right here. I assume Hair would have recognized the ball at trial.

I suppose Geoff Boycott and everyone else who testified at trials were bought off by the PCB, right?
The only people who saw the ball close up at the game are the two umpires and some of the Pakistan lot. It's hardly a stretch to think that the ICC (bent as a nine bob note to start with), PCB and the two umpires could have done a deal (Hair was after a settlement anyway and didn't look too unhappy from the pictures I've seen) and so switched the ball - that's all that was required because Boycott and the rest will give their honest opinion on a perfectly normal (and different) cricket ball. Anyone who denies that this could have happened is living in cloud ****oo land.
 

viktor

State Vice-Captain
[B said:
Scaly piscine[/B]]The only people who saw the ball close up at the game are the two umpires and some of the Pakistan lot. It's hardly a stretch to think that the ICC (bent as a nine bob note to start with), PCB and the two umpires could have done a deal (Hair was after a settlement anyway and didn't look too unhappy from the pictures I've seen) and so switched the ball - that's all that was required because Boycott and the rest will give their honest opinion on a perfectly normal (and different) cricket ball. Anyone who denies that this could have happened is living in cloud ****oo land.
that makes sense
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Scaly piscine said:
The only people who saw the ball close up at the game are the two umpires and some of the Pakistan lot. It's hardly a stretch to think that the ICC (bent as a nine bob note to start with), PCB and the two umpires could have done a deal (Hair was after a settlement anyway and didn't look too unhappy from the pictures I've seen) and so switched the ball - that's all that was required because Boycott and the rest will give their honest opinion on a perfectly normal (and different) cricket ball. Anyone who denies that this could have happened is living in cloud ****oo land.

****oo land indeed.
 

Fusion

Global Moderator
GeraintIsMyHero said:
Er, no, incorrect. Not guilty = not found guilty because there is no evidence to prove you did it. It does not mean you have been found innocent. Otherwise the verdicts would be Guilty and Innocent, rather than Guilty or Not Guilty.
Err wrong. Everyone is INNOCENT in the legal system until FOUND GUILTY. The burden of proving guilt lies with the accuser. So Pakistan were ALWAYS INNOCENT until someone proves their guilt. That did not happen. So the REMAIN INNOCENT. It would be a mockery of justice and highly unjust if all "not guilty" meant was "we don't have enough proof to convict you". Because going by that logic, all I have to do to muddy someone's reputation is accused them of something, whether it's true or not. Because obviously they'll never be found truly "innocent" (again based on your faulty logic).
 

Fusion

Global Moderator
Scaly piscine said:
The only people who saw the ball close up at the game are the two umpires and some of the Pakistan lot. It's hardly a stretch to think that the ICC (bent as a nine bob note to start with), PCB and the two umpires could have done a deal (Hair was after a settlement anyway and didn't look too unhappy from the pictures I've seen) and so switched the ball - that's all that was required because Boycott and the rest will give their honest opinion on a perfectly normal (and different) cricket ball. Anyone who denies that this could have happened is living in cloud ****oo land.
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Is this the post that officially proves that Scaly is not right in the head?
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Fusion said:
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Is this the post that officially proves that Scaly is not right in the head?
So you seriously think the ICC are an honest bunch? They're just as dodgy as the likes of Waqar Younis, Shoaib Akthar and Shahid Afridi. The ICC stitched Hair up, there is history of ball tampering in the Pakistan national team and their recent coaching staff, the ICC has basically caved in under PCB pressure over the past month (and to anyone with a bit of muscle since I can remember) yet all of a sudden we're supposed to believe the ICC would stand up for truth and justice which might go against the PCB and the Pakistan captain. How many times in the past have ICC gone for path of least resistance regardless of morals?
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Scaly piscine said:
So you seriously think the ICC are an honest bunch? They're just as dodgy as the likes of Waqar Younis, Shoaib Akthar and Shahid Afridi. The ICC stitched Hair up, there is history of ball tampering in the Pakistan national team and their recent coaching staff, the ICC has basically caved in under PCB pressure over the past month (and to anyone with a bit of muscle since I can remember) yet all of a sudden we're supposed to believe the ICC would stand up for truth and justice which might go against the PCB and the Pakistan captain. How many times in the past have ICC gone for path of least resistance regardless of morals?

Extraordinary claims require extraoridinary proof. You are just grasping right now, unless you can provide some proof.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Scaly piscine said:
So you seriously think the ICC are an honest bunch? They're just as dodgy as the likes of Waqar Younis, Shoaib Akthar and Shahid Afridi. The ICC stitched Hair up, there is history of ball tampering in the Pakistan national team and their recent coaching staff, the ICC has basically caved in under PCB pressure over the past month (and to anyone with a bit of muscle since I can remember) yet all of a sudden we're supposed to believe the ICC would stand up for truth and justice which might go against the PCB and the Pakistan captain. How many times in the past have ICC gone for path of least resistance regardless of morals?

Basically what you are saying is:

  1. Darrel Hair
  2. Doctrove
  3. Magadulle
  4. Inzamam
  5. Woolmer
  6. Misc. Pakistani team
  7. ICC

They all came together one day and created this huge controversy involving all these people. Basically the entire list of people I listed above is without any integrity or honor, and every one of them agreed to this massive conspiracy.

A question: do you sleep with tinfoil hat on?
 

godofcricket

State 12th Man
Scaly piscine said:
So you seriously think the ICC are an honest bunch? They're just as dodgy as the likes of Waqar Younis, Shoaib Akthar and Shahid Afridi. The ICC stitched Hair up, there is history of ball tampering in the Pakistan national team and their recent coaching staff, the ICC has basically caved in under PCB pressure over the past month (and to anyone with a bit of muscle since I can remember) yet all of a sudden we're supposed to believe the ICC would stand up for truth and justice which might go against the PCB and the Pakistan captain. How many times in the past have ICC gone for path of least resistance regardless of morals?
Scaly whatever u would like to say about the Pakistani team, which u never seem to have any positive to say, Inzamam has been cleared and thats because the team didnt do anything to be called cheats, Pakistan has been accussed of tampering before which made his decision even more idiotic, it was a very sensitive issue which should have been dealt with in a more mature manner.
 

open365

International Vice-Captain
Scaly, what's the point in you arguing?

What would you have said if Pakistan were found guilty of tampering?
 

C_C

International Captain
social said:
Geez u talk nonsense

Madugalle had absolutely no knowledge of what caused the ball to deteriorate or at what rate it deteriorated because he was x000 kms away at the time. Therefore, unlike the umpires' in question, his opinion is uniformed speculation at best.
Again, stop being daft. Madugalle, who has played cricket in his career has quite a credible idea on how fast a ball normally deteriorates and what is/isnt normal wear and tear. His proximity to the ball is irrelevant - i dont need to be present at the very moment of a car crash to deduce what exactly happened from the mangled remains.

Unfortunately, the umpires made a decision in accordance with the law and in full knowledge that the team in question had been warned on numerous previous occasions - therefore no more leniency
And that is where the umpire is wrong - the 'team' in question has no relevance because as i said, all the allegations had different managers, players, coaches etc, representing no continuity. That Hair thought there is continuity, like you do, underscores the inherent bias of his mind.


Hughes and Boycott have more knowledge than the umpires - are you serious? It's the umpires job to study the condition of the ball and they do it for umpteen thousand deliveries and hours during their careers
Yes i am serious. A part of the umpires job is to study the ball-that notwithstanding, a batsman and a bowler are in FAR more contact with the ball and know far more about the ball than the umpire does.

You conviniently forgot that Afridi addded the English players to the list and many others have repeatedly said that some level of tampering is done by every single team. Your selective quotations, yet again, underscores the bias in your mind.
Now I'll go away for another couple of days whilst u concoct another white supremacy conspiracy theory
Concoct ? ha ha.
Like it is so not typical and entrenched in the history of your young and fledegeling nation and its collective psyche. 8-)
 

Fusion

Global Moderator
open365 said:
Scaly, what's the point in you arguing?

What would you have said if Pakistan were found guilty of tampering?
He would've said that justice was served because his bias and hatred towards Pakistan prevents him from seeing things in a level headed and honest way.
 

R_D

International Debutant
Fusion said:
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Is this the post that officially proves that Scaly is not right in the head?
lol :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
So if ICC had gone onto say Pakistan were guilty than ICC are fair and just eh Scaly ? 8-)
 

Top