BREAKING NEWS: Hair removed from the Elite Panel

[vic_orthdox]

Hair deserved to be left stranded.

The bald audacity of the man has, in the end, claimed his own scalp.

There - I've said my piece.

Great punning there.

 

[Anil]

In the same week that they get rid of Hair, they reinstate a match fixer

How appropriate

http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2006/nov/04rehman.htm

...and exactly what has one got to do with the other? absolutely nothing...try again, i am sure you could come up with some other even vaguer innuendo because that's pretty much all you've been doing in these threads....

 

[Sanz]

In the same week that they get rid of Hair, they reinstate a match fixer

How appropriate

http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2006/nov/04rehman.htm

I dont understand the link between the two though and the reason why it is being mentioned her. Ata was the biggest victim of the match fixing politics, If I am not wrong he was never involved in match fixing and was banned because he spoke against Akram and later changed his statement.

 

[Fusion]

...and exactly what has one got to do with the other? absolutely nothing...try again, i am sure you could come up with some other even vaguer innuendo because that's pretty much all you've been doing in these threads....

Oh come on Anil, the poor guy is grasping for straws and you want to ruin it for him. How mean!

 

[social]

...and exactly what has one got to do with the other? absolutely nothing...try again, i am sure you could come up with some other even vaguer innuendo because that's pretty much all you've been doing in these threads....

It's all as to credibility - the ICC has none

The ICC would like everyone to believe that they act in the best interests of the game

Yet, on the one hand, they're getting rid of an umpire whose major crimes seem to be upholding the laws of the game correctly and not being friends with players whilst, on the other, they turn to a player that has committed the worst act possible and say "welcome back, all is forgiven."

And both of these decisions were made at the same meeting.

They are a joke

 

[honestbharani]

It's all as to credibility - the ICC has none

The ICC would like everyone to believe that they act in the best interests of the game

Yet, on the one hand, they're getting rid of an umpire whose major crimes seem to be upholding the laws of the game correctly and not being friends with players whilst, on the other, they turn to a player that has committed the worst act possible and say "welcome back, all is forgiven."

And both of these decisions were made at the same meeting.

They are a joke

The ICC appointed Hair (and for that matter, all officials), social. Why didn't this credibility thing get raised at that time?

 

[Son Of Coco]

You mean accused a bowler of chucking even though it was decided by all the umpires, including themselves, that any chucking will be referred to the third umpire? And then belligerent acts toward certain teams, and then accusing someone of ball tampering without any evidence?

He would have been gone 10 years ago, spare me.

Are you sure?

 

[Son Of Coco]

...and exactly what has one got to do with the other? absolutely nothing...try again, i am sure you could come up with some other even vaguer innuendo because that's pretty much all you've been doing in these threads....

That's pretty much all anyone's been doing.

 

[silentstriker]

Are you sure?

Yup, positive. You can probably find it in news articles somewhere.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Yup, positive. You can probably find it in news articles somewhere.

That's the first time I've heard that, but anyway, I can't be bothered!

 

[Poker Boy]

According to Sunday Telegraph poor Mr Hair was disowned by his own country! They said it was 7-1 - England voted for, Aus and NZ abstained. What would Mr Ponting think of that? Looks like Hair might end up in county cricket next year -ball-tamperers beware!! (Remrmber Surrey and Kirby of Gloucestershire got into trouble for this offence in 2005.) PS - if Mr Hair gets compensation it should go straight to ECB. Remember EVERYONE wanted the Oval Test restarted except Hair - so I reckon HE should compensate ECB for loss of revenue.

 

[Son Of Coco]

According to Sunday Telegraph poor Mr Hair was disowned by his own country! They said it was 7-1 - England voted for, Aus and NZ abstained. What would Mr Ponting think of that? Looks like Hair might end up in county cricket next year -ball-tamperers beware!! (Remrmber Surrey and Kirby of Gloucestershire got into trouble for this offence in 2005.) PS - if Mr Hair gets compensation it should go straight to ECB. Remember EVERYONE wanted the Oval Test restarted except Hair - so I reckon HE should compensate ECB for loss of revenue.

Over here I read NZ, Aus, and Eng voted for him.

 

[Dasa]

Yup, positive. You can probably find it in news articles somewhere.

Wasn't it match referee, not third umpire?

 

[R_D]

Wasn't it match referee, not third umpire?

Don't think they had match refree's back than.. its a fairly new post.

 

[C_C]

Good riddance is all i can say.
A confrontational, typically condescending attitude determined by demographics and a fairly incompetent umpire allround. Not to mention, tried to take the money and run like a git.
Sorry but no sympathy for Hair. He got what he deserved and if anything, it was a few years too late.

 

[SA]

To be fair, there's not too many better - Doctrove, Rudi, Bucknor, Bowden, Dar, etc have all made more howlers but none as controversial

Everyone makes mistakes but Hair did it intentionally.He's a racist & there are enough evidences to prove that.

 

[Anil]

That's pretty much all anyone's been doing.

not at all...most people have been straight-forward here, and i can appreciate that even if i don't agree with them, it's just that this guy has been throwing ridiculous, supposedly subtle hints and innuendos, just shows a lack of anything decent to argue with....

 

[PhoenixFire]

As far as desicion making goes, Hair was the best in the business, around this time. He followed the letter of the law, which is by no means a bad thing, but just upset the wrong people. IMO, this smacks of the whole 'Under Seige' thing that some countries have, which is a sad state of affairs.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

According to the BBC Ceefax service in the Uk the Australian Cricket Board are demanding an explanation from the ICC for Hair's sacking.

 

[silentstriker]

According to the BBC Ceefax service in the Uk the Australian Cricket Board are demanding an explanation from the ICC for Hair's sacking.

You mean Cricket Australia weren't at the Executive Board meeting where they actually participated in the vote (and if reports are to be believed, refused to say anything in his defense, and let the ECB do it)?

Thats like George Bush demanding an explanation of why we went into Iraq.