And let it NOT have been about this.

IT’S JUST NOT CRICKET.

*Head in hands*

I do agree with your suggestions for the changes that should be brought about to the throwing and ball-tampering laws. That they should be applied retrospectively, and based entirely on hard evidence.

And, in case of serious offence, the penalties can include awarding the match to the opponents – thus deterring anyone from blatantly violating the rules (knowing there is no immediate censure) to win a tight game.

ty: I am working on the assumption that the umpires believed (rightly or wrongly) they had sufficient evidence to make the call. I am also assuming that the umpires are working in good faith, i.e. have no bias. Thus, although in the absense of evidence in the public domain, I sympathise with Pakistan, I’m not sure that the manner of their protest can be condoned.

The only thing I think this shows, is that like throwing, this is an occurrance that cannot really be dealt with on the field of play and that the laws should be changed to deal with it retrospectively, in the match referee’s room, before it goes public. At least then, if there is sufficient evidence to present a charge, a captain would not be able to try and claim the moral high ground before the case has been answered. This kind of case should be fairly cut and dried – either there is evidence (whether tv or something the umpires have seen) or there is not. I don’t believe that someone saying “We are honourable, thus we must be innocent” is relevant.

On another point, what kind of penalty is 5 runs for an offence like this anyway? – is tampering with the ball, i.e. cheating, as bad as the ball hitting the helmet, i.e. bad luck?

As of yet, there is no evidence of any ball tampering being caught on any one of skysports 20-odd camera’s.

It will be interesting to see if the ICC stick by their umpires, Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove if there is no evidence of any ball tampering at the end of all this. If not, what will happen to the umpires?

Also I think it will be inevitable that Pakistan will get some sort of fine/ban for their protest, although I think they were right to protest being called “cheats”.

What needs to be seen is how does the match referee adjudicate on the actual ball-tampering charges. As there is no precedence of a charge being brought up where the umpire had no video evidence to back his claim (and I’m assuming Hair atleast has a name of a guilty party), we can only wait on this one.

If the referee does not penalise Pakistan, then the ICC is obviously conceding Hair got it wrong. Since there is no clause to actually penalise the umpire in such a case, all they can do is assure Pakistan that Hair won’t officiate in their future games (there is precedence for this one). At the same time, ask Pakistan to cop the penalties imposed within the laws of the game, including the actual result of the test.

If this latter case does not happen, and the referee upholds umpire’s verdict without convincing evidence, then there are chances of serious implications. Then, once again, it would depend on how ICC decides to assuage Pakistani’s fear of future misgivings by Hair.

And btw, going by what has been reported so far, the ICC (through its match referee) already decided to persuade its own official (Hair) into reverting his decision. That was the result of the first crisis meeting when all except the umpires were in favour of getting on with the game.

Ofcourse I go entirely by what has been reported officially and unofficially. Since I don’t expect ICC to ever come out with the whole thing

Throwing this forward, we can presume that if charges are brought, Pakistan will defend them strenuously, including the use of legal action. Once lawyers are involved, the only winners are the lawyers’ accountants.

As all parties are backed into corners (Pakistan and the umpires to defend their honour, ICC to follow their procedure) this is bound to end badly for someone.

The question is how badly – could this end up with a split in the ICC?

And since then, they’ve been trying to add legal support pegs to their moral stand (with which a majority sympathise, going by evidence of comments on internet).

But that, to my mind, is not the question here. The question is did they cheat or not. And would the ICC come out decisively in favour of the innocent party.

Having said that, even if Darrell Hair was completely certain that ball-tampering had taken place – perhaps having seen it happen – he still has to take some blame for handling it badly. He doesn’t seem to have properly explained himself at the time, or later, or in any way to have made allowances for the fact that penalising a team for ball-tampering is a bigger deal and a more sensitive issue than, say, adjudicating on an LBW. When even Boycs is criticising you for lacking sensitivity , that probably means you’re a dickhead. He will no doubt go to his grave pointing out to people that he was within his rights and was applying the letter of the laws, and feeling a warm glow of self-righteousness. Personally I think that in any sport, if a match completely self-destructs, the umpire or referee who was supposed to be in charge takes some of the responsibility.

I was just reading http://sport.guardian.co.uk/englandpakistan2006/story/0,,1855087,00.html where Bob Woolmer claims “We didn’t find out out until 9.15pm that evening. If he [Hair] had forfeited the innings someone should have told us.”

Frankly I find that to be a ridiculous claim, and it furthers my point on the previous thread that there is spin doctoring and obsfucation happening on the part of Pakistan to try and strengthen their position. Why do they feel that they need to do this?