***Official*** Pakistan in England

[honestbharani]

The Pakistani team must have known it, since they were told "get out there now or forfeit".

So it doesn't matter if they were ready to play after that.

And again I see Doctrove is let off.

because he is the junior umpire and Inzy and Woolmer have all made statements saying that it was Hair who wanted the ball changed and it was Hair who refused to come out to play when Pakistan were ready and it was Hair who refused to show them any evidence or reasons why he suspected them of tampering?

 

[honestbharani]

OR the Pakistanis can realise that being accused of ball tampering |= labelling an entire nation as cheats. Hows that for a simple solution ?

It does imply a person of their team to be a cheater and it is not backed up by evidence. Enough reason to get mad, I would think, especially for a sensitive people like them.

 

[SJS]

I could've told you all that too, SJS. The real question - which one is it: exonerated or indicted?

Lets see..

Eenie, meenie, miny, moe......

well ICC could do it the British way or the American way.

The British way is...

Eeny, meeny, miny, moe
Catch a baby by the toe
If it squeals let it go,
Eeny, meeny, miny, moe.

The American way would be...

Eeny, meeny, miny, moe
Catch a tiger by the toe
If he hollers let him go,
Eeny, meeny, miny, moe.

Now lets see if Inzy and hair are babies or tigers and whether they will squeal or holler

 

[honestbharani]

The point is Pakistan say this is a matter of honour/we will not play under Hair again, yet Afridi has done more than Hair will ever do to discredit the team and yet still plays/is worshipped.

If both he and Hair disappeared from the planet tomorrow I'd be nicely indifferent, to put it mildly.

I dont get it, Pedro. Afridi was fined, punished, ridiculed and riled at for his behaviour. Are you suggesting that he shouldn't have been given another chance? Let me see. A person from a country is caught cheating (misappropriating money or watever) and is fined and punished. He gets riled by his people and then serves his sentence and comes out. Are you saying he shouldn't be given another chance to make a better name for himself? And just because this one guy cheated, when another man from the same country is pulled up for the same offence WITHOUT any solid evidence, should the people of the country and the person himself just lie down and take it without any protest? I don't get it. What is your obsession with the Afridi incident? Of course what he did was cheap and humiliating for his country, but it is not like he is being called a hero for his conduct by the Pakistan fans and it is not like he wasn't punished either.

 

[adharcric]

Lets see..

Eenie, meenie, miny, moe......

well ICC could do it the British way or the American way.

The British way is...

Eeny, meeny, miny, moe
Catch a baby by the toe
If it squeals let it go,
Eeny, meeny, miny, moe.

The American way would be...

Eeny, meeny, miny, moe
Catch a tiger by the toe
If he hollers let him go,
Eeny, meeny, miny, moe.

Now lets see if Inzy and hair are babies or tigers and whether they will squeal or holler

very insightful method indeed

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah, my only point was that it'd be better to argue this as a better process (with some ability for discourse, evidence, etc) rather than it being a matter of respecting cultural differences - ie that to Pakistan, it's a greater slur than to other countries (incidentally, I'm not sure that's so much a cultural difference as one that has its roots in quite recent history). Ultimately, no sportsman reacts well to be called a cheat, but having a hearing rather than a five-run penalty wouldn't avoid the accusation being made, anyhow.

well, it won't be in public and it won't happen right in the middle of the heat of the battle. Those are two big advantages right there if that method were to be adopted than the current stupid one.

 

[honestbharani]

I believe that the umpire is well within his rights (and well qualified too, might I add) to distinguish between a ball that is affected by natural wear and tear, and one that also bears marks of deliberate tampering. Why are some people making the simplistic assumption that the umpire is ignorant of the possibilities of the ball being affected by the natural passage of play ? That being the case, he cannot be faulted for acting as he did. Hair cannot be questioned on the steps he took as a result, except perhaps in failing to inform Inzy about his intention to penalise them, although I don't see what purpose that would serve. Umpire's decisions are non-negotiable. The moment one introduces an element of negotiation, a mockery is made of the game.

yeah, it is a mockery of the game to make it fairer.

 

[honestbharani]

The umpires take all factors into consideration and are capable of making the deduction.

I don't trust Hair to be that good. And even if he was sure the ball was tampered with by a human being, he still CANNOT have been sure it was one of the Pakistanis unless he saw it. I mean, even if Pakistan did tamper with the ball, the least he could have done (since there was no solid evidence) was to first warn Inzy about his suspicions and then taken such actions if he was still worried that something wrong was going on. I am sorry, but no matter what u say, Hair is still in the wrong and he should be sent out. I do think Inzy and maybe the PCB deserve some fines and bans over this, because they handled this affair not very well at all, but Hair still needs to learn how to conduct the game in the proper manner and if not, he should not be on the panel at all.

 

[JASON]

Breaking news -
Madugalle ICC's chief referee unable to attend Friday's hearing. Inzy disrepute Hearing Postponed .
Throws rest of Pakistan tour into further chaos.

 

[Langeveldt]

While sitting on the fence and having had a few days to digest this I'm starting to side with Darryl Hair on this one, okay he could have handled the situation better, and with a bit more tact, but cricket has been compromised, the best game in the world, by the actions of the Pakistan team.. Walking off sets an incredibly dangerous precedent and the game will be tarnished forever as a result of this forfeited test match

 

[SJS]

Breaking news -
Madugalle ICC's chief referee unable to attend Friday's hearing. Inzy disrepute Hearing Postponed .
Throws rest of Pakistan tour into further chaos.

You think Madugalle is worried of repurcussions at home if he happened to go with Hair, Jason ?

 

[honestbharani]

While sitting on the fence and having had a few days to digest this I'm starting to side with Darryl Hair on this one, okay he could have handled the situation better, and with a bit more tact, but cricket has been compromised, the best game in the world, by the actions of the Pakistan team.. Walking off sets an incredibly dangerous precedent and the game will be tarnished forever as a result of this forfeited test match

So, you think that Hair could have handled it better AND Pakistan could have handled it better and yet you think Hair was right?



Hair acted without common sense and I think that is as big a crime as anything for an umpire. Umpires are supposed to ensure smooth running of the game, not disrupting it like this. If he has strong reasons for his actions, let him say it out now. And even if Pak did tamper with the ball, he could have handled it better as has been said. Just because Pakistan handled this horribly doesn't absolve Hair to any extent. A player (or team) getting angry at the heat of the moment is understandable, but the umpires aren't doing anything too much physical out there and they are supposed to be able to keep their cool and use common sense to make decisions out there. And since Hair couldn't do either, I think he doesn't really deserve a place on the elite panel.

 

[JASON]

You think Madugalle is worried of repurcussions at home if he happened to go with Hair, Jason ?

Unlikely .

I honestly think Madugalle has been told by the powers that be at the ICC to come up with some ' Hog wash' to delay the damn thing , so that all the anger and emotions will die down and then ICC can decide in their own time or just leave it open for awhile, and allow the tour to go ahead or even terminate it for the moment .... Not sure which way they want it to go... But that's my feeling.

There's too much at stake here for the ICC to let it come to a conclusion quickly and cause more strife for them...that's my personal feeling..

They must be getting legal advice on how to resolve it ....what is the best way out without getting into more trouble , legal trouble and Legal Suits and counter suits from Pakistan or Darrell ...

 

[Pedro Delgado]

I dont get it, Pedro. Afridi was fined, punished, ridiculed and riled at for his behaviour. Are you suggesting that he shouldn't have been given another chance? Let me see. A person from a country is caught cheating (misappropriating money or watever) and is fined and punished. He gets riled by his people and then serves his sentence and comes out. Are you saying he shouldn't be given another chance to make a better name for himself? And just because this one guy cheated, when another man from the same country is pulled up for the same offence WITHOUT any solid evidence, should the people of the country and the person himself just lie down and take it without any protest? I don't get it. What is your obsession with the Afridi incident? Of course what he did was cheap and humiliating for his country, but it is not like he is being called a hero for his conduct by the Pakistan fans and it is not like he wasn't punished either.

It's just an example. I don't like the hypocrisy is all, if Pakistan is so honourable why is this dishonourable clown still playing for them? Now he says ball-tampering is rife in his country; I'm surprised he's not been stoned to death by the pure cricket fundamentalists.

If he was English I doubt he'd have ever played for his country again.

Sorry if I come across as obsessed, I simply cannot abide liers and cheats :****ed: particularly when supposedly done in the name of sky pixies - "inshallah I shall now dance down the wicket or rip the seam" etc.

Leave God and honour out of the game if you have none, in fact leave them out even if you have some, play the game as a game and play by the laws even if you disagree with them.

Hair and Doctrove acted without common sense and forsight, Pakistan then bared their **** at the game.

No winners really, and certainly no honour.

 

[Yahto]

That is true, although Bob Woolmer has been quoted as saying all the other players swore they had done nothing to the ball. It comes down to who you trust...and to me, I would rather trust Inzamam and the Pakistani team than Darrel Hair and Billy Doctrove.

Hair is one person who has been involved with controversy before. While the Pakistan team as a whole has been involved in controversial incidents in the past, the individuals in this Pakistan team have not. Just because the West Indian team of the 80s was the best in cricket at the time, we don't assume they still are the best team around.

Mohammad Asif supposedly has a history at Leicestershire.

 

[Goughy]

Am I the only one who notices that some officials treat certain teams better than others ? some umpires will have a friendly chat or word with some players but not other's. Shane warne can grumble and mumble and go on & on when he does not get a decision and the umpire will still indulge him with an explanation while Warne caverliarly recovers his shades from the umpires hat. Vass or perhaps an asian player gets a batsman plumb and more often that not gets a stern cold NOT OUT .....

For example take the now infamous incident between Hair and Inzy.
Hair Checks the ball with Billy and when Inzy walks towards them totally dismissas him (or dismissively walks away) takes absolutely no notice or effort to explain the situation and walks towards the 4th umpire who brings the reserve balls. Inzy being the Captain of the team involved Has to again walk up to them to get a handle of whats going on. Hair's explanation seems short and sharp after which he asks peterson to select a ball. Does anyone believe even in their wildest dreams that if the tables were turned the attitude of the umpires will remain constant? If their is such a person/people they are living in la la land.

My guess was Inzy probably was shellshocked not sure for certain if one of his team mates has commited an offense. He probably waited for tea just to verify with all his team if they have done anything questionable before making a stand which I think is the right thing to do. There is no point huffing and puffing not knowing absolutely the situation.

Out of interest, how many full days of Cricket do you get to watch a year on which to base that blanket statement?
Im guessing, far fewer than what is actually required to qualify that statement.

Why would he be shellshocked. Its not as if would be a unheard of accusation for any team. Noone close to cricket would ever be too surprised if such a decision was made as it fairly common.

 

[honestbharani]

Mohammad Asif supposedly has a history at Leicestershire.

'supposedly' proves everything, doesn't it?

 

[Yahto]

Natural causes. Why is it so difficult for you to believe? U have any kind of evidence that Pakistan DID tamper with the ball? So easy to accuse others.

And why is it so difficult for you to consider that the umpires have factored in the so called natural causes ? This isnt a powerplay we're talking about. AFAIK the ball was hit for 1 boundary and absolutely no sixes in the period concerned.

 

[Yahto]

It does imply a person of their team to be a cheater and it is not backed up by evidence. Enough reason to get mad, I would think, especially for a sensitive people like them.

Shane Warne was found guilty of ingesting diuretics. Diuretics aren't anti-inflammatory drugs and the only stretch that can be made wrt them is that they could mask other drugs.

Now, without any proof of Warne having used those other drugs that could benefit him, he was banned for ONE WHOLE YEAR, from all forms of cricket at that.

Inzamam might be banned for 8 ODIs. Might.

Did you see Australia make a scene like the Pakistanis did ? No.

The laws might seem unfair, but IT IS THE DAMN LAW. You get up and carry on. The ICC werent breaking any laws then, and neither are the umpires (ie The ICC) now.

Warne being indicted was the right thing to do, and so is this case we see now.

 

[Yahto]

yeah, it is a mockery of the game to make it fairer.

Pray, enlighten me how Pakistan were endeavouring to make the game fairer.