-
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.
BREAKING NEWS : Hair wrote to ICC offering to resign
- Thread starter SJS
- Start date
_TiGeR-ToWn_
U19 Debutant
Get over it and stop playing the "racial" card every argument.silentstriker said:
He just wants to be compenstated for future losses, and $500,000 seems to be a little less then what he should be asking for. The ICC should of payed the cash and be done with Hair. I'd like him to continue, he has the balls to call it as it is, good on him.
I think you are right. The intention of the ICC it would appear is to get Hair out , now that he has dug his own grave by asking payment to go away quietly !!Fusion said:
This is getting more and more bizarre. This is hollywood stuff .
I expect to see a movie from Hollywood with the title perhaps ' Dirty Hair "
or Some such thing like that... Who would star as Darrell though ... Perhaps a Fattened Tom Hanks...
Last edited:
deeps
International 12th Man
http://www.theage.com.au/news/crick...s-row-continues/2006/08/24/1156012674553.html
Woolmer may resign yet again.
Woolmer may resign yet again.
Employees , company directors get Golden Handshakes, if they are not dismissed beforehand for improper conduct.Steulen said:
It would appear ICC may finally be on a winner here with regard to Darrell, if they find adversely against him ... For his poor performance and failure to agree to a compromise and complete the Test instead of steadfastly refusing to allow the Test to be completed and Assuming that Pakistan had forfeited !! Refusing to be flexible ... I am sure the lawyers can find several things in support of his failure to carry out his role as an umpire..And should he then be dismissed .. he becomes ineligible for any compensation ...
As mentioned before, he is set for life, IMO . He will release a book and make a couple of millions pretty quickly in Australia. He is likely to be set for a longer career in Australian domestic umpiring as well. So there you go..
Maybe the intention of the ICC in releasing the E-mail exchange was in the hope that some Pakistani benefactor would pay Darrell the said 500,000 or more and get him to go away quietly ..... the possibilities are too numerous...deeps said:
The sooner the hearing happens the better it is for everyone.
Tony Blade
U19 Cricketer
Im sure Hair will put up quite a fight if the ICC decide to get rid of him..its not going to be easy at all.
Slow Love™
International Captain
Ya know, this whole thing reflects on Speed (who is a fairly loathsome man, IMO) worse than it does on Hair. As others have mentioned, it's obvious from the correspondence that this matter had earlier been discussed (positively) between the two parties.
The impression I get from Hair is that he was willing to fall on his sword for this thing to be over - the heat is too much, and I don't blame him (this doesn't affect my judgement of Hair's behaviour in the incident leading up to this). He's basically giving the ICC and easy out. Hair is entitled to request a payout to end his career (although the ICC isn't necessarily bound to pay it). It seems clear though that they'd already discussed this and Hair believed all he had to do further was to start negotiating numbers.
The one questionable thing Hair did here was where he discussed hiking the fee now that racist allegations were being made. That looks a little ugly, and more like he's holding the ICC to ransom. It could be that's why he blew it, and the ICC decided to hang him out to dry, though it should be said that he explicitly said that if his deal wasn't accepted, he'd continue to be available as an umpire as normal. I don't really buy Speed's story that he had to make all this public (certainly not right now at this moment), particularly when he'd been happy to discuss the matter before Hair put his request on paper.
The impression I get from Hair is that he was willing to fall on his sword for this thing to be over - the heat is too much, and I don't blame him (this doesn't affect my judgement of Hair's behaviour in the incident leading up to this). He's basically giving the ICC and easy out. Hair is entitled to request a payout to end his career (although the ICC isn't necessarily bound to pay it). It seems clear though that they'd already discussed this and Hair believed all he had to do further was to start negotiating numbers.
The one questionable thing Hair did here was where he discussed hiking the fee now that racist allegations were being made. That looks a little ugly, and more like he's holding the ICC to ransom. It could be that's why he blew it, and the ICC decided to hang him out to dry, though it should be said that he explicitly said that if his deal wasn't accepted, he'd continue to be available as an umpire as normal. I don't really buy Speed's story that he had to make all this public (certainly not right now at this moment), particularly when he'd been happy to discuss the matter before Hair put his request on paper.
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
In India we have the VRS (Voluntary Retirement Scheme). It is offered b y many large Corporations and banks (mostly from the public sector though not always) who have historically beeen saddled with massive number of employees leading to extremely low productivity levels.Complicated said:
They come out with very attractive schemes to employees to take up retirement voluntarily. The amount of money that is paid out is enough for most of them to strike out on thier own or buy the house they never could afford and still take up another job.
My younger sister gave up a managerial position in a public sector bank to build a lovely house in Chandigarh and become a full time housewife !
No its neither uncommonn, nor frowned upon and definitely not available to CEO's etc only.
BUT
this is different. Here it is offered (if it was an offer to start with) to avoid an ugly situation
PLUS
Hair's asking for the money transaction to be kept secret doesnt sound very good. anything that needs to be kept under the wraps and away from public eyes (and we agree this is not a case of national security being compromised) does not reflect too well on those involved.
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
One more thing.
I think it is high time people stopped beating Hair with the racism stick. There isnt much difference between the evidence available for his being a racist and Pakistani's having tampered with the ball. Both are based on assumptions and dubious 'circumstancial' evidence.
By calling him a racist, his opponents are making him a martyr which he certainly doesnt deserve to be and somehow diluting the many other very valid arguments against Hair's suitability as an 'arbitrator-***-judge-*** facilitator and the conductor' of an international sporting contest.
I think it is high time people stopped beating Hair with the racism stick. There isnt much difference between the evidence available for his being a racist and Pakistani's having tampered with the ball. Both are based on assumptions and dubious 'circumstancial' evidence.
By calling him a racist, his opponents are making him a martyr which he certainly doesnt deserve to be and somehow diluting the many other very valid arguments against Hair's suitability as an 'arbitrator-***-judge-*** facilitator and the conductor' of an international sporting contest.
Fusion
Global Moderator
Excellent point. I think one loses the moral high ground by accusing him of being racist. You may suspect it, but you can't say that for sure. To me, he's just a bad umpire with a horrible attitude. He looks forward to confrontations, instead of avoiding them. He thinks his understanding of the rules are better than the game's governing body (as evident by his statement in his autobiography that he would call Murali's action again, even though ICC has cleared him. He's an umpire, he should follow the ICC's directives, not overrule them!). He makes himself the center of attention too many times, when an umpire should strive to be unnoticed. So those of us that dislike Hair and want him gone have many legitimate grievences. We don't need to go down the "racist" avenue.SJS said:
Slow Love™
International Captain
Yeah, now and then the amount of a redudancy settlement can be confidential, but it's not very orthodox to actually conceal that one took place.SJS said:
Fusion
Global Moderator
Excellent article by Geoffry Boycott below.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/sport/2006/08/26/scboyc26.xml
Hair has lost credibility in sorry affair
By Geoffrey Boycott
(Filed: 26/08/2006)
What Darrell Hair has just done is make himself a laughing stock. It weakens his case considerably because it smacks of somebody just interested in the money. It's amazing to think that on Sunday night he was blocking a restart in the Test match on a point of principle, and then 36 hours later he was sending this letter asking for $500,000. I'm sorry, but to me, that's just a joke.
By calling Pakistan cheats at the very start of this affair, Hair had already proved what an officious, high-handed man he is. That was not a line decision, like giving someone out. Even if a batsman doesn't actually nick the ball, he still knows that in a couple of days they'll have another innings. But this sort of accusation leaves a stain that never goes away.
This idea that umpires are always right is a load of old cobblers. What I want to know is: Who umpires the umpires? The players suffer from their mistakes, but no one ever seems to get rid of the umpires themselves. It is clear to me that Hair was acting beyond the bounds of his office. Being an umpire is a people job: that's why Dickie Bird was good at it. Yes, he was a loony, and he made mistakes - everyone does. But he knew how to deal with people, so they respected him.
It will be interesting to see what happens to Hair now. He is going to struggle to umpire with any authority after this, especially on the subcontinent. The whole affair confirms my theory that the International Cricket Council have made a fundamental error in appointing a small number of full-time umpires, only a couple of whom have played the game at first-class level. How could you make me a high-court judge when I know nothing about the law? We're talking about people who have just played club cricket, and we're asking them to deal with the best players in the game, under huge pressure from TV, radio and newspaper scrutiny. If you haven't been there, you can't understand. It's not enough just to pass an exam proving you know the Laws of the game back to front. The Laws are black and white, but that's not how the world works, you have to have some give, some discretion and some commonsense.
The problem is that the best umpires don't want to be away from their families 12 months a year. They've done that throughout their playing careers. So the solution is for the ICC to start doubling the money per Test and allow the best ex-players to be part-time. Someone like Peter Willey will be happy to go away, as long as it's only for a couple of months. But these amateur cricketers, they think they know it all. They don't - that's why we're in a mess here with Hair.
I would like to see Inzamam's hearing held as soon as possible after the end of this one-day series. He needs a small slap on the wrist for his action in not coming out last Sunday, and that should be the end of it. The ball-tampering accusation should be found not proven, unless Hair has some evidence we haven't heard about. You can't just make a claim like that on the basis that a ball 50 overs old has got some scratches and scuffing on it.
We've got to kill this thing as soon as possible because it can only do cricket harm. Pakistan are indignant right now, and if they stay that way, who knows what damage it will do to the Champions Trophy and the World Cup. If it's not sorted, it will fester like a sore. All these ICC officials sitting in their tax haven in Dubai and saying the umpire's always right - that's not going to help anyone. They've got to forget about their big egos for a moment and let us move on.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/sport/2006/08/26/scboyc26.xml
Hair has lost credibility in sorry affair
By Geoffrey Boycott
(Filed: 26/08/2006)
What Darrell Hair has just done is make himself a laughing stock. It weakens his case considerably because it smacks of somebody just interested in the money. It's amazing to think that on Sunday night he was blocking a restart in the Test match on a point of principle, and then 36 hours later he was sending this letter asking for $500,000. I'm sorry, but to me, that's just a joke.
By calling Pakistan cheats at the very start of this affair, Hair had already proved what an officious, high-handed man he is. That was not a line decision, like giving someone out. Even if a batsman doesn't actually nick the ball, he still knows that in a couple of days they'll have another innings. But this sort of accusation leaves a stain that never goes away.
This idea that umpires are always right is a load of old cobblers. What I want to know is: Who umpires the umpires? The players suffer from their mistakes, but no one ever seems to get rid of the umpires themselves. It is clear to me that Hair was acting beyond the bounds of his office. Being an umpire is a people job: that's why Dickie Bird was good at it. Yes, he was a loony, and he made mistakes - everyone does. But he knew how to deal with people, so they respected him.
It will be interesting to see what happens to Hair now. He is going to struggle to umpire with any authority after this, especially on the subcontinent. The whole affair confirms my theory that the International Cricket Council have made a fundamental error in appointing a small number of full-time umpires, only a couple of whom have played the game at first-class level. How could you make me a high-court judge when I know nothing about the law? We're talking about people who have just played club cricket, and we're asking them to deal with the best players in the game, under huge pressure from TV, radio and newspaper scrutiny. If you haven't been there, you can't understand. It's not enough just to pass an exam proving you know the Laws of the game back to front. The Laws are black and white, but that's not how the world works, you have to have some give, some discretion and some commonsense.
The problem is that the best umpires don't want to be away from their families 12 months a year. They've done that throughout their playing careers. So the solution is for the ICC to start doubling the money per Test and allow the best ex-players to be part-time. Someone like Peter Willey will be happy to go away, as long as it's only for a couple of months. But these amateur cricketers, they think they know it all. They don't - that's why we're in a mess here with Hair.
I would like to see Inzamam's hearing held as soon as possible after the end of this one-day series. He needs a small slap on the wrist for his action in not coming out last Sunday, and that should be the end of it. The ball-tampering accusation should be found not proven, unless Hair has some evidence we haven't heard about. You can't just make a claim like that on the basis that a ball 50 overs old has got some scratches and scuffing on it.
We've got to kill this thing as soon as possible because it can only do cricket harm. Pakistan are indignant right now, and if they stay that way, who knows what damage it will do to the Champions Trophy and the World Cup. If it's not sorted, it will fester like a sore. All these ICC officials sitting in their tax haven in Dubai and saying the umpire's always right - that's not going to help anyone. They've got to forget about their big egos for a moment and let us move on.