Langeveldt said:
Sad news, and it shows just who calls the shots when it comes to international cricket..
Whether Hair decided correctly or incorrectly to act on whatever he saw or didn't see at the Oval, this sets a horrible precedent in that very few umpires will ever come forward against a team, especially one from the subcontinent in the future if they expect any misdemeanours, for fear of how it will jeapordise their position on the elite panel.. Even if Hair was wrong in what he did, I'd be scared of coming forward as an umpire if I'd seen anything going on
Oh please! Let's stop making him out to be a martyr. Hair was not banned for just The Oval fiasco. It's a culmination of wrong behavior that led to his downfall. No one has a problem with him doing his job. It's
how he goes about doing it that makes him a bad umpire. Let's analyze some of his history shall we?
- The Murali incident: Hair has a right to call a suspect action, if he feels a bowler is throwing. However, as Slow Love pointed out before, the umpires had decided beforehand that they would refer any suspect action to the match referee and a decision would be made after the game. Hair, who IMO likes to be the center of attention, decided to create a scene and call Murali for throwing. Then, in his biography, Hair states that he would call Muralii again for a suspect action. This is
after the ICC has cleared his action!! Whether Hair agreed or disagreed with ICC's decision on Murali, as an umpire employed by the ICC he must follow their rules and guidelines. By saying he would call Murali's action again, Hair was displaying his massive ego and hypocrisy.
-His numerous run-ins with players: It's been well documented that Hair is not the easiest bloke to get along with. During a match involving India, Hair boorishly warned Ganguly about dissent. Ganguly had pointed out to Hair that the Indian team had seen replays of his decision and they were incorrect. Hair told him "you are not supposed to watch replays...the Pakistani's did that and see what happened to them". What incredible arrogance! He also is reported to have said to Wasim Akram once that "your team is not going to appeal like a bunch of monkeys are they?" And mind you, he has had other run-ins with non-subcontinental players.
-Ovalgate: I firmly believe that any other umpire would've handled the situation differently. Any other umpire who merely
suspected that tampering was going on and had no proof would've had a word with the Captain first. If the alleged tampering continued, then he would've taken some action. Also, no other umpire would've been so quick to award the forfeiture. We all know that BOTH teams were eventually ready to play, yet Hair would not change his mind. His ego would not let him. He was rightly admonished for this after the hearing by the head referee. That is why the ICC has now taken the power of awarding the forfeiture away from the umpire.
The best umpires are those that don't get noticed. Hair's problem, IMO, is that he loves the spotlight and courts controversy. He seems to have a martyr complex about him. That is why he's not a good umpire and deserved to be banned.
. i can tell you who does love the spotlight though... that kiwi umpire with all the big rocket signs and stuff. lets hope he sticks to 20 20 and ODIs!
