***Official*** Pakistan in England

[open365]

Youre suggesting Pakistan shouldnt have protested even if they came back right after tea?

Well ok, your allowed to appeal to the ICC after the games finished in cases like this.

 

[TT Boy]

I'm pretty sure 2 or 3 players owned up, but Surrey understandably wouldn't tell the media.

It was rumoured at the time that the whole team was in on it. Hence the reason why the internal enquiry was completely useless and rather redundant.

 

[silentstriker]

I thought i need to make this a bit clearer.

It is not wrong, no where in the laws of cricket does it say that for an umpire to call ball tampering does he need evidence of a certain player tampering with it, the condition of the ball is evidence enough.

Its not working, so I thought I need to make this a bit clearer.

Just because its within the laws of the game, doesn't mean its appropriate. The umpires must make sure the game is also played witin the spirit of the game, and played in the right atmosphere.

Being a fundamentalist when it comes to the laws serves no purpose, except fulfilling your ego at the expense of the sport.

 

[Mecnun]

if I was labelled a cheat infront of million of people, i'd prove them that I'm not..and to be honoust I wouldnt care, aslong as I know that i'm not.

And how exactly would prove anything in this context if say you were in teh place of Pakistan captain? I am sorry to say but that is a ******** comment.

 

[open365]

Its not working, so I thought I need to make this a bit clearer.

Just because its within the laws of the game, doesn't mean its appropriate. The umpires must make sure the game is also played witin the spirit of the game, and played in the right atmosphere.

Being a fundamentalist when it comes to the laws serves no purpose, except fulfilling your ego at the expense of the sport.

But you can't keep saying 'he had no evidence' because however much discretion you put on it, he had evidence enough.

You can't blame hair for not having the same discretion levels as you.

And if making sure the game is being played in the right atmosphere means not calling something that you think is cheating, then sorry, but your wrong, umpires can't be influenced by how big an over reaction they'll get if they give a certain decision.

 

[Tony Blade]

But you can't keep saying 'he had no evidence' because however much discretion you put on it, he had evidence enough.
.

We'll see, come friday whether it was indeed evidence enough.

 

[Mecnun]

Can you explain how else the ball deteriorated in such a manner in the space of 4 overs to warrant the umpires making the decision?

What manner would that be? Do we have a picture of before and after?

 

[Mecnun]

So you examined the ball when Cook was dismissed and when the runs were added then did you?

Did you?

 

[Gloucefan]

...If he was rational, and thinking about not his ego but the game...

If Pakistan had followed this advice we wouldn't be in this mess. They didn't need to do what they did it was simple petulance or their behalf. They were warned and had plenty of time to come back out and now they are sulking about the consequences of their own actions. All they had to do was come back out when they were warned and register a comlaint by following the proper procedures. It's Pakistan who didn't follow the laws of the game not the umpires, even if Hair was being a jobsworth. It's something you would expect from a child to stop playing because they feel hard done by.

 

[Mecnun]

But you can't keep saying 'he had no evidence' because however much discretion you put on it, he had evidence enough.

Did he? or did he have what he preceived to be enough evidence to specifically charge Pakistan with cheating?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Did you?

So you're questioning what the umpires saw and felt, when you did neither yourself?

 

[silentstriker]

So you're questioning what the umpires saw and felt, when you did neither yourself?

But you are questioning what the pakistani players did, when you did not see yourself? I'd much rather believe the Pakistani players than that despicable racist Hair.

 

[Mecnun]

So you're questioning what the umpires saw and felt, when you did neither yourself?

Err no, I was questioning mark's questioning.

 

[Mecnun]

But you are questioning what the pakistani players did, when you did not see yourself? I'd much rather believe the Pakistani players than that despicable racist Hair[.

I would like to add 'tub of lard' after despicable and before racist if you dont mind.

For the purists only my assertion can be conclusively proved ; ) in this sad saga..

 

[Fusion]

I simply don't get the vicious attacks against Pakistan. For what? Taking offense to being called cheat with no evidence? For those attacking Pakistan, why is Hair's role being ignored? Is he a Saint that can do no wrong? Surely, you can at least agree that he could've handled things better. And let's suppose that Pakistan had come out and played after tea. Would you all then defend them as passionately as you're attacking them? From the comments that some (definately a minority) have posted, I doubt that Pakistan can do any right. This is very disheartening.

 

[Rajeev]

I thought i need to make this a bit clearer.

It is not wrong, no where in the laws of cricket does it say that for an umpire to call ball tampering does he need evidence of a certain player tampering with it, the condition of the ball is evidence enough.

Then I wouldnt take my mom for that eye test today

 

[Dasa]

I simply don't get the vicious attacks against Pakistan. For what? Taking offense to being called cheat with no evidence? For those attacking Pakistan, why is Hair's role being ignored? Is he a Saint that can do no wrong? Surely, you can at least agree that he could've handled things better. And let's suppose that Pakistan had come out and played after tea. Would you all then defend them as passionately as you're attacking them? From the comments that some (definately a minority) have posted, I doubt that Pakistan can do any right. This is very disheartening.

Can you imagine how different the reactions would be from some people if it was a team such as England in Pakistan's position?

 

[chipmonk]

Can you imagine how different the reactions would be from some people if it was a team such as England in Pakistan's position?

Hear Hear !

 

[Dasa]

So you're questioning what the umpires saw and felt, when you did neither yourself?

We're questioning what the umpires, particularly Hair, saw and felt based on their past actions and based on the magnitude of the Pakistani protest. I think it's fair to assume that no team would make such a protest if they weren't convinced they were innocent. Furthermore, Hair has been known to act incorrectly and hastily in the past and has shown an inability to be diplomatic about his decisions. Based on all this, the logical assumption is that the Pakistanis are rightly aggrieved at what could be a wrong decision.

 

[Fusion]

Can you imagine how different the reactions would be from some people if it was a team such as England in Pakistan's position?

Nasser Hussain had based his support to Pakistan by putting himself in their shoes. He said that if he was playing in Pakistan and was accused of cheating, he would've done the same thing as Inzi. But like you said, he would've been lauded as a hero by some of the same people ripping into Pakistan.