***Official*** Pakistan in England

[Yahto]

That was a pure case of diplomacy we could all see.

Diplomacy would be getting on with the game and registering a protest through proper channels later. What we witnessed was A-Grade sulk.

 

[Slow Love™]

This was the version related by the Chairman of the PCB. The only editorialising is the bits in brackets.

Wow, in person? He actually said that they fully intended to play, until the umpires demanded they play, and then they decided not to play? And he said he was aware the game had been forfeited, but Pakistan decided to play on regardless, just for the hell of it?

And if they were emerging from the dressing room five minutes late to see the umpires leaving the field, why are the umpires then described as leaving the field 15 minutes later?

Got a link or anything? I find it all a little hard to swallow that far more of this wasn't significantly "fleshed out" outside of what was in brackets.

 

[Xuhaib]

Uh, Because 25,000 of our public who've paid 30 pounds for a ticket are getting conned out of a days play by Pakistans and Darrel Hair antics?

you forgot the main culprit sir.

 

[BoyBrumby]

you forgot the main culprit sir.

If not Pakistan or Darrell Hair, then who is the main culprit?!?

 

[Xuhaib]

Xuhaib you seem strangely reluctant to answer my question...

I have been replying regularly to you.

 

[open365]

you forgot the main culprit sir.

Answer: Couldn't Pakistan have protested in a way that would have let the finish the test match?

 

[FRAZ]

If not Pakistan or Darrell Hair, then who is the main culprit?!?

ICC for keeping Hair ?

 

[Langeveldt]

Why would this match be stripped of its test status? Mohammed Asif for example has taken a load of perfectly legitimate test match wickets!

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

ICC for keeping Hair ?

Only because Pakistan have no superior, unlike Hair.

 

[greg]

Wow, in person? He actually said that they fully intended to play, until the umpires demanded they play, and then they decided not to play? And he said he was aware the game had been forfeited, but Pakistan decided to play on regardless, just for the hell of it?

And if they were emerging from the dressing room five minutes late to see the umpires leaving the field, why are the umpires then described as leaving the field 15 minutes later?

Got a link or anything? I find it all a little hard to swallow that far more of this wasn't significantly "fleshed out" outside of what was in brackets.

Sorry. I should backtrack slightly on the bit about "the game being forfeited". Although having been given an ultimatum and seen the umpires subsequently walk to the middle, wait, take the bails off, and walk back again, they must have known that.

 

[TT Boy]

Why would this match be stripped of its test status? Mohammed Asif for example has taken a load of perfectly legitimate test match wickets!

And Monty Panesar went for a ton and only got one wicket. For Scaly's sake his needs his figures to get back to the mid 30's.

 

[Yahto]

Why would this match be stripped of its test status? Mohammed Asif for example has taken a load of perfectly legitimate test match wickets!

It must be the ICC's "Lets pretend it never happened" mentality.

 

[superkingdave]

Wow, in person? He actually said that they fully intended to play, until the umpires demanded they play, and then they decided not to play? And he said he was aware the game had been forfeited, but Pakistan decided to play on regardless, just for the hell of it?

And if they were emerging from the dressing room five minutes late to see the umpires leaving the field, why are the umpires then described as leaving the field 15 minutes later?

Got a link or anything? I find it all a little hard to swallow that far more of this wasn't significantly "fleshed out" outside of what was in brackets.

The Pakistan team came on to the balcony as the umpires were coming off for the first time, they then went back in, the umpires and England batsmen came out again and waited for the pakistan team to come out, when they didn't they removed the bails and came off.

 

[Xuhaib]

Answer: Couldn't Pakistan have protested in a way that would have let the finish the test match?

With an offical for whom they have lost all the respect continuing to umpire.

 

[Langeveldt]

It must be the ICC's "Lets pretend it never happened" mentality.

You sir will go far

 

[chalky]

A question for those in the know according to rules does the umpire have to physically see someone altering the ball or can he base it solely on the condition of the ball?

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

With an offical for whom they have lost all the respect continuing to umpire.

But now everyone's lost all (or a lot of) respect for Pakistan.

 

[Xuhaib]

Test might still be on according to cricinfo.

 

[Fusion]

Answer: Couldn't Pakistan have protested in a way that would have let the finish the test match?

Yes they could've. But as Xuhaib has pointed out, back in the 90's they did that and many took it as an admission of guilt. We all know there were other methods of protests that Pak could've employed. However, they were accused of cheating, IMO the ULTIMATE accusation in sports. They had a right to not take the field with Hair as umpire.

 

[Yahto]

Sorry. I should backtrack slightly on the bit about "the game being forfeited". Although having been given an ultimatum and seen the umpires subsequently walk to the middle, wait, take the bails off, and walk back again, they must have known that.

What must have really riled Hair was the sight of Akmal opening up the newspaper on the balcony. Did he see that ? Talk of a team shooting itself in the foot.