Duncan wrote in to say he had an exclusive interview with Imran Khan who feels Pakistan should sue Darrell Hair:
“Pakistan have been unhappy with Hair’s umpiring before: it’s his manner, as if he wants to stamp his authority on the game. These kind of umpires do so much damage to the game.
“If he thought the ball had been tampered with, Hair should have given Inzamam a warning – instead of immediately jumping in and suggesting that ball tampering had occurred.
“Inzamam made a big mistake: he should have taken a stand on the spot when the ball was changed. Not coming out after tea was the wrong kind of protest. The captain’s job is to focus on winning the game. The manner of the protest has lost Pakistan valuable time in a game they looked like winning.
It’s all kicking off, and it’s all pretty depressing too. Thanks to Scott for the flurry of posts. Cricinfo has the mess in full of course.
Loading ...
Oh please! Imran is well qualified to talk about litigation. We should wait till the end of the week then do a poll for the ‘most idiotic’ quotes to come out of this fiasco.
Speaking of which, someone ought to ask Dean Jones for his views.
Surely Imran is missing the point here? As a politician himself, he should know better than to make comments like that.
Whilst yes, the umpires *could* have given a warning, they were under no obligation to do so. If they believed that tampering was occuring then they took the right action.
If the umpires had “warned” Inzy that they thought there was ball tampering going on, would that not have provoked a similar reaction anyway? Its still an accusation of cheating, no matter whether wrapped around a brick and thrown through the window, or written on scented notepaper tied with a bow delivered by courier.
I have a fresh view of this matter
.
Clearly, England are to blame here. Had they not taken the field with the umpires when Pakistan clearly refused to do so, the fiasco would never have happened. For whom would Hair have awarded the match then? (Knowing his pompous ass, I bet he would have then declared himself the winner of the match.)
England saw an opportunity to win a game they could not otherwise, and seized it. And look how they are the only party which comes out looking like lambs.
In so far as the reality and the experts are concern the Hair has commited a big mistake.It is indeed that whenever you feel thigs rong,you do express and you have to do that as a good humainbeing.
Do not blame on Imran khan he knows better rather than any other common person.He is not only well educated but also has a great record as a cricket player.
As for the matter of sue is concern every one has right in rem(means right to sue any one).So do not think that I am pakistani that,s why i am in favour of Imran but Facts speak themselves.
Thanks to provide an oppurtunity to write some thing on this burnning issue in the world of cricket.
That is balderdash, Amit. The laws of cricket state that if the batting team and umpires are out on the field and the fielding team remains in their dressing room, then the match is forfeited (bear in mind this was the second time the umpires had taken the field). The decision had been made in effect to forfeit the match (by Pakistan) before they took the field 30 minutes later. If they were confused on the matter, maybe they should’ve scanned their rule books more thoroughly.
Just read that Inzy has been charged with ball tampering and bringing the game into disrepute! Well the gloves are well and truly off now . . .
Had to be an australian again in another controversy. First Mel, then Dean now Hair, i wonder who the next aussie will be?
Skippy the kangaroe!!!!!
Of course Martin, it is balderdash
.
I had planned to start writing a draft of my disseration yesterday, but the sensational events at the Oval have totally flabbergasted me.
On a more serious note, I must say that I cannot put help feel sympathy for Pakistan, and utter disdain for all the match officials, including the referee. Yes, it would seem valid to ask that if this intransigence by Pakistan is waived, then where do we draw the line? I, however, don’t think it’s a valid question at all. Thinking about what kind of precedent this will set will only cloud the due arbitration. First, the hearing committee needs to decide this case on merit. And, as we have seen here and on numerous occasions before, if an umpire can change the course of a game, he should be held accountable for his actions.
The trouble is, Pakistan took their entirely justifiable protest too far. I partly blame their management, as they must have known what Hair was up to, and presumably completely mis-timed their appearance on the field.
Unless there is some as yet unseen, genuine proof of ball-tampering that charge can’t stick. But he is bound to be done on bringing the game into disrepute. Why couldn’t they leave it alone and stick with the ball-tampering charge?
I know it sounds like special pleading for Pakistan, but with the sensitive history of similar allegations and Hair playing “give a dog a bad name…” it is just going to be awful. And Inzy isn’t the man to take it lying down – wouldn’t be the same cricketing hero if he were. Who trusts the ICC to come up with a sensible and diplomatic solution? Certainly not me.
I think his hair is all right, certainly no need to sue it.
“Surely Imran is missing the point here? As a politician himself, he should know better than to make comments like that.”
He’s a politician, not a diplomat. He probably thinks there’s a few votes in it for him.
If Imran wants to sue, let him sue – he has the money to do it.
There’ll be no effect on the outcome though – Pakistan chose to abandon the match because of the way they protested, and they now have to take the consequences.
Ironically, if they had followed the Gatting approach and just walked off for a time, play could have contined.
The question now is how hard are Pk going to be hit by the ICC, as the ICC’s authority is now in question.
Remember the threatened level of fines when England tried to avoid a Zimbabwe tour for objections that could also be called “honour”.
Pk need to decide what their “honour” is worth and that will set the point where they will stop.
My take: Inzy will be fined or banned for the disrepute charge, and the ODIs will happen or not happen depending on that result.
Then it will all simmer down to a higher level of resentment than before until Hair retires.
I’m just glad England aren’t involved in this fracas.
Well,
I can understand if shoaib and Waqar tampered the bowl, They were great fast bowlers. Pakistan doesnot have a single decent bowler… I have no idea what Mr.Hair saw,but it was a sad day indeed. Well Inzy is a a great player a well respected player, but looksl ike his senses r gone to the gutter. Well whats goes around comes around…
Inzz
I think Pakistan were justified in protesting. They have been at the receiving end of Mr Hairs decisions not just during this game but in the past too and from what I have read, other countries have had issues with him too. This whole issue could have been avoided if ICC had not appointed Hair as umpire after complaints from Pakistan. Or perhaps even stripped him from umpiring duties if there have been complaints from a few countries. Clearly he is not serving the best interests of the game.
The ball tampering allegation served as the catalyst to ignite this issue. There is a human element to Pakistan’s reaction which I can totally understand. Inzamam is definitely not the greaest diplomat but thats not his job. There can be arguments about whether Pakistan went over board with their protest but those arguments are useless. This issue highlights the problem that has always existed abourt umpires having great power in determing the results of games. There needs to be a stricter code of umpiring for umpires just as it is for players. And umpires found repeatedly unfair or incompetent need to be stripped off their “Elite Status” for good. I cannot imagine there is a lack of umpires.