BREAKING NEWS: Hair removed from the Elite Panel

[pasag]

Yes, he was insulting Australians as a whole (look at the actual post) and I said the cricket world would be better without him? Now, where does that tip the balance here? Is what I said equal to the ones I quoted? I find it very very disheartening that a member usually as fair and balanced as yourself is even making such a counter argument here.

What I said wasn't a patch on what was given to me and others. Now why am I being vilified here when I stopped much shorter? Hmm?

You're not being vilified and don't try and make yourself a victim here. IndianByHeart never said anything about Australians as a whole and he never mentioned you by name, all he said was "just because Aussies are whining". If you look at that statement he never says all Aussies are whining at any stage. That is not an insult directed at you nor all Australians, however, your post insulted him directly and Dasa was fully entitled to 'roll his eyes' at you.

Also the fact that you call me a usually "fair and balanced" member (dubious to say the least), may mean that perhaps I'm on to something here and perhaps this time I’m "fair and balanced" as well and you should take my advice and just apologize or at the very least stop defending your actions?

 

[Ikki]

You're not being vilified and don't try and make yourself a victim here. IndianByHeart never said anything about Australians as a whole and he never mentioned you by name, all he said is "just because Aussies are whining". If you look at that statement he never says all Aussies are whining now does he? That is not an insult directed at you however, your post it an insult directed at him and Dasa was fully entitled to 'roll his eyes' if you will.

Also the fact that you call me a usually "fair and balanced" member (dubious to say the least), may mean that perhaps I'm on to something here and perhaps this time I’m "fair and balanced" as well and you should take my advice and just apologize or at the very least stop defending your actions?

Ahh, that's quite ludicrous and you're clutching at straws here.

My reply wasn't to one post, but his rant as a whole. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and it does not constitute whining. I don't think Hair is disgraceful, I don't think it was entirely right to kick him out and I find it funny that because certain people disagree with IndianByHeart that they are whining.

Now, nevertheless, my reply is not a patch on what was said to me. As I said, you are clutching at straws here and so is the argument you bring to defend Dasa. If what I said causes 'eyes to roll' then I wonder what the rest cause? Seemingly nothing. That isn't something you can defend, it is against the rules as Dasa so kindly provided to insult members personally. It happened not once, but twice - directly. Now if Dasa is as fair and balanced as he wishes to appear, and iseven-handed, I wonder what must be done of the others? But, nothing has happened, it seems I was the only one worthy of a reply to? Just funny really...here we have you defend it.

I do apologise, however, for my lack of judgment on your behalf prior to this dialogue.

 

[Ikki]

Read his post all it said taht Australians were whining over Hair exit, to say that that's an insult to Australian nation is completely absurd.

Except I didn't say it's an insult to the Australian nation did I?

 

[pasag]

Ahh, that's quite ludicrous and you're clutching at straws here.

My reply wasn't to one post, but his rant as a whole. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and it does not constitute whining. I don't think Hair is disgraceful, I don't think it was entirely right to kick him out and I find it funny that because certain people disagree with IndianByHeart that they are whining.

Now, nevertheless, my reply is not a patch on what was said to me. As I said, you are clutching at straws here and so is the argument you bring to defend Dasa. If what I said causes 'eyes to roll' then I wonder what the rest cause? Seemingly nothing. That isn't something you can defend, it is against the rules as Dasa so kindly provided to insult members personally. It happened not once, but twice - directly. Now if Dasa is as fair and balanced as he wishes to appear is even-handed, I wonder what must be done of the others? But, nothing has happened, it seems I was the only one worthy of a reply to? Just funny really...here we have you defend it.

I do apologise, however, for my lack of judgment on your behalf prior to this dialogue.

Sigh.

 

[Johnners]

KaZoH0lic = Fiery's brother?

 

[LA ICE-E]

w/e (this is going round and round) MAJORITY of the people DONT want hair so he's not here. but you being hair lover can say w/e want too...but end of the day mojority wins...

 

[Bracken]

And how many of them testified that a Pakistan player was the one who did the tampering? How many of them believed that, except Hair? That is the question here.

Who else would it have been? The batsmen?

And your version of "common sense" doesn't get the fact that most of us heren't arguing that the ball wasn't tampered with.... We are just saying that there was no real evidence to back up that it was done by a Pakistan player. Had Hair only believed that the ball was tampered and just changed it and got on with it, would Inzy have walked out? I think not.

And what I am saying is that under the rules that the umpires are responsible for upholding, the umpires didn't have the option of just replacing the ball. If they believed that the ball had been illegally tampered with, they were obliged to replace the ball and award the batting side five runs, which is what they did.

The very reason he was sacked was because they thought he wasn't doing a good enough job. And they decided to drop the charges of "bringing the game into disrepute" to let the issue die. Not hard to understand.

Rubbish. As I posted earlier, Hair made the highest percentage of correct decisions in the 12 months previous to this, and was rated the second best umpire in the world by his employer. He was doing a better job than every umpire except one.

There is no way they could get Hair out through an open, accountable hearing, so they used their stacked vote. To claim that it was for some noble "let's move on" intention is ridiculous.

How are so sure that Cowie initiated the offer? If my memory serves me right, all that was said in Hair's email that was shown was "as per our earlier discussions". What makes you so sure that Hair didn't initiate the offer?

I'm not- but seeing how Hair had a record of being a stickler for process (which is not really disputed- if anything, it is the reason why he is supposedly a bad umpire) it seems believable. As I said, though- I'll wait and see how it is tested in open court before I condemn him for it.

What other option do ICC had? you feel greatful 2 see Muralitharan in action, so am i and million others.The mess was created by Hair and ICC had 2 stop him.

No, it was created by the rules that were in force at the time. The ICC ducked the issue, and kept the law the same until the past year or so.

Doctrove said that he wasn't sure that the ball was tampered and wanted to continue with the same ball yet keep an eye.Also a lot of ex cricketers and pundits covering the match rubbished off the tampering charges.

Wrong. Read the judgment.

"Mr Hair considered that it was necessary in accordance with the Laws of the game that the ball be changed. Mr Doctrove agreed, but he told us in evidence that his initial preference was to play on with the ball because he wanted to try to identify the person responsible."

From Mudagalle's judgment.

Doctrove AGREED that the ball had been illegally tampered with, but wanted to keep the ball so they could find the culprit.

w/e (this is going round and round) MAJORITY of the people DONT want hair so he's not here. but you being hair lover can say w/e want too...but end of the day mojority wins...

Yep. Until Hair gets his day in court, the majority wins. Doesn't mean that the majority is right, though.

"Hair lover?" What are you? 12?

 

[LA ICE-E]

what are you 5? it takes you that long to get it, or did you still not get it? EXACTLY they didn't know who tempared it meaning it could have been some one of the pakis team or not! Doctrove was smart! but hair was dumb, no wonder Doctrove has his job while the other one doesn't. hair could have changed the ball but without evidence no need for the 5 runs panelty

 

[social]

i know KaZoH0lic, bracken how are you defending this guy who asked for $500,000 as bribe to quite? Would it be ok then if the icc just paid him and he quited? hell no we dont have confident in an umpire who asks for bribes

Just how is asking for money accruing to him under an existing contract a bribe?

Unless an employee commits a breach of contract, it is perfectly reasonable for that employee to be paid out when leaving said employment.

It happens every day of the week.

 

[LA ICE-E]

its still a bribe, he can quite on his own but is asking money to do that. its a bribe no matter if it happens everyday of the weak

 

[HowsThat]

Who else would it have been? The batsmen?

If it was so simple then Muddugalle would have declared Inzi guilty by applying the same logic.Muddugalle explained in length about the marks on ball, other experts in Botham etc also had a lot to say on it

And what I am saying is that under the rules that the umpires are responsible for upholding, the umpires didn't have the option of just replacing the ball. If they believed that the ball had been illegally tampered with, they were obliged to replace the ball and award the batting side five runs, which is what they did

First they need 2 know who actually did it before punishing the side, he just assumed that it was tampered by the fielding side and punished them, and in the hearing he failed 2 explained what made him 2 accuse inzi of ball tamepring.

Hopefully Hair will lose again in the court of law.

 

[HowsThat]

its still a bribe, he can quite on his own but is asking money to do that. its a bribe no matter if it happens everyday of the weak

The guy was clearly blackmailing the ICC president, whether someone ask him 2 do it or not, it was still his call....but then its Hair's call we are talking about!!

 

[honestbharani]

Who else would it have been? The batsmen?

No, natural causes. That thought never entered your head?

And what I am saying is that under the rules that the umpires are responsible for upholding, the umpires didn't have the option of just replacing the ball. If they believed that the ball had been illegally tampered with, they were obliged to replace the ball and award the batting side five runs, which is what they did.

They CANNOT have been sure that it was tampered with ILLEGALLY. That is the whole point. They were sure that it was tampered with. They couldn't have been sure how. That is what came out in the enquiry as well.

Rubbish. As I posted earlier, Hair made the highest percentage of correct decisions in the 12 months previous to this, and was rated the second best umpire in the world by his employer. He was doing a better job than every umpire except one.

There is no way they could get Hair out through an open, accountable hearing, so they used their stacked vote. To claim that it was for some noble "let's move on" intention is ridiculous.

Umpiring is not just about getting LBWs and caught behinds right. He should ensure smooth conduct of the game and THAT Hair definitely didn't do that day. And who came out trumps in the enquiry that was held, after all... Hair? And why is it ridiculous. You think PCB won't be willing to let an issue die because they have so much else to look out for.

I'm not- but seeing how Hair had a record of being a stickler for process (which is not really disputed- if anything, it is the reason why he is supposedly a bad umpire) it seems believable. As I said, though- I'll wait and see how it is tested in open court before I condemn him for it.

And seeing how Hair has behaved recently, I think it is very probable that he initiated the offer. As you said, all this proves nothing and it is better to not voice opinions on this till the issue actually sees the conclusion.

No, it was created by the rules that were in force at the time. The ICC ducked the issue, and kept the law the same until the past year or so.



Wrong. Read the judgment.

"Mr Hair considered that it was necessary in accordance with the Laws of the game that the ball be changed. Mr Doctrove agreed, but he told us in evidence that his initial preference was to play on with the ball because he wanted to try to identify the person responsible."

From Mudagalle's judgment.

Doctrove AGREED that the ball had been illegally tampered with, but wanted to keep the ball so they could find the culprit.



Yep. Until Hair gets his day in court, the majority wins. Doesn't mean that the majority is right, though.

"Hair lover?" What are you? 12?

And regarding what Doctrove said, it is clear that even if he believed it was illegally tampered with, he wasn't sure who it was. For all we know, it could even be a ball boy. I know it is not probable, but still possible. So it is obvious that there is no way Hair could have been sure that it was a Pakistan player who did it.

 

[Stumped]

ahahha....just reading the title of this thread...all the icc board members r bald!

 

[chipmonk]

Apparently Hair is in big financial trouble and he needs quite a lot of cash to cover his "gambling debts". I am told that it's now way over a million dollars. Hair is now desperate and is hopeing to write a book and sue the ICC to get himself out of this mess. This Info was given to me through one of my friends in australia.

 

[pasag]

Apparently Hair is in big financial trouble and he needs quite a lot of cash to cover his "gambling debts". I am told that it's now way over a million dollars. Hair is now desperate and is hopeing to write a book and sue the ICC to get himself out of this mess. This Info was given to me through one of my friends in australia.

Right....

 

[social]

Apparently Hair is in big financial trouble and he needs quite a lot of cash to cover his "gambling debts". I am told that it's now way over a million dollars. Hair is now desperate and is hopeing to write a book and sue the ICC to get himself out of this mess. This Info was given to me through one of my friends in australia.

Given that Hair lives in England, I'm not sure how reliable your sources are.

BTW, I recently attended a luncheon for a club at which Hair used to play that was attended by numerous test cricketers of many different nationalities - to a man they backed Hair and his opinions.

However, our anecdotes/rumours/hearsay arent going to change anyone's opinions as most were formed years ago when facts were the least of our concerns.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Apparently Hair is in big financial trouble and he needs quite a lot of cash to cover his "gambling debts". I am told that it's now way over a million dollars. Hair is now desperate and is hopeing to write a book and sue the ICC to get himself out of this mess. This Info was given to me through one of my friends in australia.

TBH, those sort of accusations don't really help the reputation of CW forums themself, so I'd be very careful throwing it around.

 

[James]

Hair withdraws lawsuit against PCB

 

[chipmonk]

Hair withdraws lawsuit against PCB

Ha Ha Ha ...... Finally Hair has to admit that he has bitten more than he could chew.