***Official*** Pakistan in England

[marc71178]

I dont know what cricket you have been watching, but in Gough's last ODI series for England it was very obvious that his problem was that he wasn't getting wickets with the new ball but was still bowling well at the death.

Last series he played 2 games before thankfully being put out of his misery.

The first one his "death spell" was 3-0-26-0, in the second he didn't even get a death spell as Australia had cruised home.

Series prior to that he had death spells of 2-0-11-0 (to the tail), 2-0-9-0, 3-0-21-2 and 0.5-0-8-1

 

[TT Boy]

Seems like if the Pakistani’s do pull out of the tour, than Mickey Arthur’s boys will be more than happy to fill their void.

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/southafrica/content/current/story/257669.html

 

[honestbharani]

That's ridiculous - what youre advocating is letting the lunatics run the asylum.

But isn't Hair still running the cricket as the umpire? Isn't that the same thing?

 

[honestbharani]

if you want to prove people wrong about you, you go out there, and show people that they are wrong...
in this way I think Pakistan just agrees with it...obviously they don't, but show some pride and go out there, now they are sobbing in there dressing room, get over it and play the game, and sort it out after the game ffs.

People who accuse others are the ones who have to PROVE their accusations, not the accused people.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Seems like if the Pakistani’s do pull out of the tour, than Mickey Arthur’s boys will be more than happy to fill their void.

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/southafrica/content/current/story/257669.html

Fair play to teh Boks.

I think the ODI series will go ahead as planned though.

 

[honestbharani]

This is getting so tedious. Any evidence isn't going to be released to the public if the ICC get it first (which it most likely will) for a while, if ever. So could you stop jumping to gormless conclusions for 5 minutes and actually wait til some details are released.

And so it is too much for you to accept that we all here presuming that Paksitan didn't cheat because it hasn't been PROVEN yet. More than one here have said repeatedly that IF it is proved that Pak did cheat, they will take their words back.


AFAIC, even if Pak did cheat, this is just another incident that shows that Hair is really not competent enough to be an international umpire. Inzy and Pak should get all the dessets they deserve for tampering with the ball and making a big deal out of it etc. IF it does get proven, but even if it does, I still think the ICC should understand that most umpires would have handled the situation differently and with a bit more tact and made sure the public got a full game. The way Hair handled all this just goes to show that he doesn't deserve to be on the panel full time (even though strictly speaking he is one of the better judges of caught behinds, LBWs and the like right now in the panel) simply because he refuses to use his common sense and a bit of a soft touch, which is absolutely vital when you consider the fact that cricket is like mad religion in the subcontinent.

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

Just about full strength Middlesex side out today:

Smith, Joyce, Hutton*, Shah, Dalrymple, Morgan, Compton, Scott+, Peploe, Keegan, Silverwood, Finn, Wright

 

[honestbharani]

They're not innocent or guilty because it's an ongoing case with no verdict as of yet, that's why they have all these processes, reviews of the evidence, solicitors etc. involved to get a fair judgement. That is why you don't jump to conclusions - although I'm sure if you could get your hands on Hair you'd lynch him anyway because you've already made your mind up without knowing anything.

on going case means they haven't been PROVEN to be guilty as yet.

 

[honestbharani]

The thing is, what will be gained from it?

Unless the umpires can show them the ball from 4 overs previously (which is impossible) then they can't see what the umpires have acted on.

That is a good point but honestly, if people can just look at a ball and say whether the damage was done by natural causes or not, I think people can also look at the ball and say whether the current state and shape of the ball actually benefits the bowling side or not.

 

[honestbharani]

I believe that it wasnt enough evidence to accuse the team of ball tampering and they should have known better. I think that Darrell Hair truly believed that someone from the team did it and assumed that the evidence would come out later. What he said afterwards seems to suggest that he himself wasnt 100% sure and had very little proof, as he accepted the possibility of being wrong : "But if anything comes out at the inquiry that proves me incorrect I would accept that too."

that sounds probable and that is the reason I want Hair out of the ICC panel. Pak should be punished for the way they handled and so should Hair because they way he handled was as far from the best way as anything can be. It is really time officious guys like him are put to the pasture. The best umpires never get noticed, and he gets noticed A LOT. It is a shame really, because as has been pointed out at CW before by other members, he is a good judge of the normal stuff like LBWs, caught behinds etc. But really, he is not worth. He perhaps never was, but now it is just obvious.

 

[honestbharani]

But you can tell the difference between natural wear and tear, and artificial. Let alone professional umpires who would be trained in such matters.

they are also trained to see if the ball pitches outside the leg stump or not. How many times have they given those out LBW?

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

they are also trained to see if the ball pitches outside the leg stump or not. How many times have they given those out LBW?

Looking at a cricket ball does not have to be a split second decision.

 

[social]

And so it is too much for you to accept that we all here presuming that Paksitan didn't cheat because it hasn't been PROVEN yet. More than one here have said repeatedly that IF it is proved that Pak did cheat, they will take their words back.


AFAIC, even if Pak did cheat, this is just another incident that shows that Hair is really not competent enough to be an international umpire. Inzy and Pak should get all the dessets they deserve for tampering with the ball and making a big deal out of it etc. IF it does get proven, but even if it does, I still think the ICC should understand that most umpires would have handled the situation differently and with a bit more tact and made sure the public got a full game. The way Hair handled all this just goes to show that he doesn't deserve to be on the panel full time (even though strictly speaking he is one of the better judges of caught behinds, LBWs and the like right now in the panel) simply because he refuses to use his common sense and a bit of a soft touch, which is absolutely vital when you consider the fact that cricket is like mad religion in the subcontinent.

So youre saying that Hair should be replaced by a less competent umpire because his strict interpretation of the law upsets the delicate sensibilities of teams from the sub-continent?

 

[honestbharani]

Therefore so is every other decision ever made by an umpire. That's pretty much what an umpire is.

except in this case, one of the parties involved don't think he is independent. So let them produce the ball now and let some other real neutral experts judge. Are you saying that none of the 26 TV cameras plus a number of still photo cameras around the ground follow the ball during the short period in question and that some Pakistan player has so skillfully tampered with the condition of the ball such that it will not only enhance his team's chances of bowling out the opposition but also did it away from all those cameras. Are you really sure that not even one of the 26 sky cameras was tracking the ball durign the period in question? And how else is Hair so sure that it was PAKISTAN who tampered with the ball? At best, he can conclude that the tampering is not because of natural causes and may have been caused by some people. How is he so sure that those people are the PAKISTAN team? Does the ball's current state really give that big an advantage to the bowling side? Again, let us see the ball and let some real experts conclude whether the current state of the ball gives significant advantage to the bowling side. And for all that, it could still have been one of the England players who did that, or maybe someone from the crowd or may be even Hair and Doctrove themselves because they do get the ball from time to time who did it to pass the blame on to Pakistan. I know it all sounds ridiculous but these all are still possibilities. So it is obvious that Hair acted on speculation which was at best backed up circumstantial evidence. But even that is no conclusive enough in this case.

 

[honestbharani]

So youre saying that Hair should be replaced by a less competent umpire because his strict interpretation of the law upsets the delicate sensibilities of teams from the sub-continent?

no, I think he insists a little too much on "running the show" to be an umpire. He looks like one of those blokes who wont have much of a convo with the opposition, esp. the subcontinental sides (and THIS I have seen) and expects players to obey to his commands.

 

[honestbharani]

Looking at a cricket ball does not have to be a split second decision.

It looks as though it didn't take them too long to come to their verdict.

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

Tour match vs Middlesex abandoned.

 

[social]

no, I think he insists a little too much on "running the show" to be an umpire. He looks like one of those blokes who wont have much of a convo with the opposition, esp. the subcontinental sides (and THIS I have seen) and expects players to obey to his commands.

Different people have different styles.

Darrell Hair, off the field, is one of the nicest guys you'll ever meet.

On the field, he obviously takes the attitude that he is there to adjudicate the game based on a strict interpretation of the laws not to make conversation.

That, in itself, is not a weakness.

As to whether a more laid back approach could have difused this situation, that's open to debate.

Obviously he felt that there was evidence of ball tampering.

Let's say that, rather than penalising Pakistan, he merely warned them.

Do you really think that Inzy's reaction would have been any different - his team has been accused either way.

Should he have remained mute in the knowledge that Pakistan were gaining an unfair advantage?

Of course not.

IMO, it all comes down to the fact Pakistan reacted badly and now Inzy is compounding his error by attempting to black-mail the ICC into exonerating him by threatening to pull out of the tour should he be found guilty.

 

[SJS]

Mohammad Sami - Another God amongst Fast Bowlers!!

Mohammad Sami is a remarkable cricketer. At such a young age he has some of the most astounding achievements in the history of the game. Here are a few.

1. He has conceded 126 runs per test match played. :
No fast bowler (in the side as a bowler) in the entire 129 year history of the game has given as many and survived to play even 20 tests in his entire career. Our Sami has already played 28 and there should be more to come, Inshallah !!
2. He is also joint second fastest in the race to conced 3000 test runs amongst all fast and medium fast bowlers in the world for the last 129 years !! :

- Our Sami achieved this feat in a fantastic run of 25 test matches. Bedser may have done it in one test fewer but look at the sneaky way he achieved that – by bowling as many as 1200 or so overs. Our Sami did us proud by doing it in just 850 overs !!

- And look at how profligate Bedser was. He had to get 93 wickets in his 24 tests to get tp this coveted target. Our Sami did it by bothering the umpires only 65 times.


- Even the other five pretenders, Hadlee, Roberts, Devon Malcolm, Jeff Thomson and Danny Morrison who matched Sami’s feat got 502 wickets between them and at a combined average of 30.4. Our Sami stands proudly at 47.2 for his economical tally of 65 wickets !!

3. Of the hundred odd bowlers we compared. Sami was head and shoulders above everyone else in his “strike rate’ at the end of the 25 test matches.

His strike rate (wickets per test match) stood at an astounding 2.60 wickets per test match !!

It is clear that on the overall criteria of average, strike rate, race to reach runs targets our Sami is head and shoulders above any fast bowler in the history of the game. We are confident that given the kind of support such a bowler deserves, he will set up records that future generations of fast bowlers will look back at in bewilderment.

The only player in the entire history of the game who comes close to challenging our Sami is that elephant-eared God from Mumbai. Their figures make interesting comparisons.

BOWLER…TESTS…..OVER..RUNS…..WKTS….AVG…..STR RATE…W/T…5-for

Sami…………28……….997…3531………65……48.4……….81.95…….2.28…….2
Agarkar……....26………809….2745………58…….47.3………83.74….....2.23……1

Very tough fight indeed. Imagine if India were to join hands and both these amazing bowlers played on the same side. That would be a treat!!

 

[Tony Blade]

Lol