***Official*** Pakistan in England

[Neil Pickup]

how would've viewers sympathy transpire into anything actual result for the Pakistani players ?

As opposed to forfeiting...?

 

[Xuhaib]

But how does it hurt your pride if you know your not guilty?

When i play for my rugby team, the proudest moments are when we play on even though the ref isn't very good or is blatanly biased of if the team we are playing are blatant cheats. Triumphing over adversity is what makes you proud, not being petulant and giving up.

Your rugby team is not a national team it is not in the eyes of the public.When things reach national or international level just knowing yourself that are not guilty is not good eough you have to take a strong stance to defend yourself.

 

[Yahto]

haha, welcome to the forum, nearly as controversial a first post as mine was

Thank you.

 

[greg]

It was hardly a case of
1) Umpires give the bowlers a new ball
2) Umpires check it 56 overs later and think it looks suspicious.

They had checked it a number of times, including just a few overs before the incident when Cook was out, and the TV pictures clearly show that Hair (rightly or wrongly) suspected that something was up an over or two before he changed the ball.

 

[Yahto]

Because Pietersen didn't smash any balls into the boundary now did he?

And please go home 'as your location suggests' if you think this place is full of rubbish being touted.

Other than that, welcome to CW.

Usually the welcoming bit comes before the part where you tell me to go home. Not the other way round

And there have been some sane voices too here. I'm not using the tar brush.

 

[Jono]

It was hardly a case of
1) Umpires give the bowlers a new ball
2) Umpires check it 56 overs later and think it looks suspicious.

They had checked it a number of times, including just a few overs before the incident when Cook was out, and the TV pictures clearly show that Hair (rightly or wrongly) suspected that something was up an over or two before he changed the ball.

What relevance is that though? Is anyone arguing they suddenly decided to claim ball tampering? Footage showed, as you pointed out, that something was irking Hair before the incident. However he never asked for the ball.

When they got to have a look at the ball, i.e Cook's wicket, they said nothing and did nothing.

15 minutes later, they did.

Still comes down to the fact they, from what we know, and what is likely, did not see anyone tampering with the ball.

 

[Langeveldt]

Breaking news, no play tomorrow.. Thats from Charles "unknown player" Colville

 

[open365]

Your rugby team is not a national team it is not in the eyes of the public.When things reach national or international level just knowing yourself that are not guilty is not good eough you have to take a strong stance to defend yourself.

But who would have thought you were guilty?

It is quite clear that nearly everyone knows Hair is a stupid umpire who was wrong, i don't Pakistan ball tampered, heck, i don't think anyone does.

Acting like this makes them look a lot worse than playing on but lodging complaints afterwards.

 

[Jono]

Usually the welcoming bit comes before the part where you tell me to go home. Not the other way round

True but it seems like everything has been ***-backwards today, I thought I may as well join in.

 

[Xuhaib]

Hair goes home (why did he even come) and the match may be stripped of its test status.

 

[TT Boy]

According to Cricinfo.com the Test has been abandoned.

 

[viktor]

It was hardly a case of
1) Umpires give the bowlers a new ball
2) Umpires check it 56 overs later and think it looks suspicious.

They had checked it a number of times, including just a few overs before the incident when Cook was out, and the TV pictures clearly show that Hair (rightly or wrongly) suspected that something was up an over or two before he changed the ball.

If that is true then Hair may have a point.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Breaking news, no play tomorrow.. Thats from Charles "unknown player" Colville

Under 21.3?

 

[Xuhaib]

But who would have thought you were guilty?

It is quite clear that nearly everyone knows Hair is a stupid umpire who was wrong, i don't Pakistan ball tampered, heck, i don't think anyone does.

Acting like this makes them look a lot worse than playing on but lodging complaints afterwards.

no protest = accepting umpires decision.

 

[The Baconator]

Is that abandoned or awarded to England?

 

[Neil Pickup]

Hair goes home (why did he even come) and the match may be stripped of its test status.

Under what grounds? That's a horrifically dangerous precedent - you can't do that mid-match! What if a team's 2-1 up in a series and losing the last Test? Oh, let's get it stripped of its status - wahey, we've won the series.

 

[Neil Pickup]

no protest = accepting umpires decision.

And playing on != no protest

 

[SpaceMonkey]

no protest = accepting umpires decision.

There are better ways to protest rather than refusing to play and ruining it for everyone else.

 

[greg]

What relevance is that though? Is anyone arguing they suddenly decided to claim ball tampering? Footage showed, as you pointed out, that something was irking Hair before the incident. However he never asked for the ball.

When they got to have a look at the ball, i.e Cook's wicket, they said nothing and did nothing.

15 minutes later, they did.

Still comes down to the fact they, from what we know, and what is likely, did not see anyone tampering with the ball.

It's relevant because of posts ridiculing the idea that the ball provides any evidence because of the wear and tear it could have experienced over 56 overs. Whereas in fact the only relevant period is between the last time the ball was checked and the time the ball was changed.

 

[Xuhaib]

Under what grounds? That's a horrifically dangerous precedent - you can't do that mid-match! What if a team's 2-1 up in a series and losing the last Test? Oh, let's get it stripped of its status - wahey, we've won the series.

About time, its been 1 full year since you last won