Quotehanger

  • I think those speed guns are a load of crap. Somehow the white ball goes faster - I bowled 83-84mph in the Test match, and 93mph in the one-dayers. It's crazy. I hadn't bowled a ball for ten days.
    Steve Harmison has his doubts about the pace at which he's been bowling

    Aug 28, 2008

    • Recent Posts

    Try DVD rental for £3.99 per month!

    The headlines

    The news

    TWC



    BCCI (comb) back Hair, not Pakistan

    By Will 2 years ago, at the end of August Leave a comment on this post

    Sensationalist headline, apologies for that. How about I improve it with the news that the BCCI are acting like a soothing, herbal shampoo for Darrell; that’s right, the India board have stated their allegiance to the ICC, not Pakistan.

    This has many implications, some of them a little worrying; others rather amusing; most utterly fascinating. In short….had India agreed to Pakistan’s stance (and Sri Lanka’s too) on refusing to play in any matches Hair officiates in, the umpire’s career would be over. And that would’ve been the very start of the problems.

    I stuck up the full fart in all its wafty glory on Cricinfo:

    “We would never say no to any umpire that the ICC supported,” Shah told the Sydney Morning Herald. “If the ICC is happy with [Hair], then we are happy. Let us see a report first, and if Mr Hair has made a mistake, then we will see what happens. But it is up to the ICC to take action.”

    Were India to side with the ICC and not Pakistan, a potentially disastrous situation would be avoided. Given Hair’s history - he has courted controversy with Pakistan in the past, as well as Sri Lanka - it is unlikely he will ever umpire games involving either of those two countries. And if India were to be added to that list, his role as an elite international umpire would be reduced to officiating in only half the international sides. Hair also cannot stand in matches involving Australia, his birthplace.

    “If the Asian bloc gangs up on him and says, ‘We don’t want him appointed in our games’, there might be trouble,” Dick French, a former umpire and Hair’s mentor, told AAP. “He can’t umpire Australia as a neutral, so he can’t then just umpire South Africa, West Indies and England for the rest of his career. So that’s a tough one for the authorities.”

    Tags: , , , , , , , |

    8 Responses to “BCCI (comb) back Hair, not Pakistan”

  • Bowman wrote:
    August 22nd, 2006 at 10.39 pm

    Haha, India are such suck-ups.

    I think it would be totaly wrong if Hair was exempt from umpiring games involving Pakistan because that is effectively calling him a racist, and in that case, wouldn’t it be wrong to have him umpiring in any games involving asian/black players which most sides have at least one of?

    It’s either all or nothing IMO.

  • Wraye wrote:
    August 22nd, 2006 at 10.55 pm

    Shock! Horror! Breaking news! Ovalgate continues in Germany.

    Cook bowled tomato and mozarella, caught behind by second daughter at wash machine, refuses to walk from kitchen.

    Daughters later accused of bowl tampering.

    Inzamummy then refused to emerge from living-room after tea to assist in washing-up.

    First daughter later accused of hair-washing. Ring in bath produced as evidence. ICC official comments, “It looks like a normal bath to me.”

    Decision to be taken on Friday when Mum flies to C&G final leaving teenagers with prospect of no clean plates.

    Sorry, every, but just could not take this so seriously anymore. ;)

  • Jess wrote:
    August 22nd, 2006 at 11.09 pm

    Brilliant, Wraye :lol:

    And I’m sure the kids will survive…

  • Mani wrote:
    August 23rd, 2006 at 12.38 am

    haha.. hilarious.. like that is some surprise.. india wouldn’t back pakistan on saying 2+2 is 4…
    on the other hand pak would definitely have backed india if they faced a similar situation.. india loves to suck up like nobody’s business..
    they might think this might win them some favour from hair.. haha.. wait till he penalizes tendulkar for being a midget and giving him head before wicket..

  • Mani wrote:
    August 23rd, 2006 at 12.39 am

    before people get on my case… i was just joking above.. i have no problems with india not backing pk.. they don’t want to get involved in a problem that doesn’t involve them.. quite understandable..

  • JII wrote:
    August 23rd, 2006 at 9.47 am

    I cannot think of anybody other than George W. Bush supporting Pakistan on anything. Maybe, ball tampering is one of the jehadi techniques they are taught in their madrassas to be used against all kafirs palying cricket.

  • suraj wrote:
    August 24th, 2006 at 2.15 am

    My question is did BCCI have to take a stance at this stage?? Not questioning their decision but their stance that we will always support any umpire that ICC likes can put them in a quandary.

    JD & co. had in the past refused to go along with umpires (rightfully so) from ICC and if such a situation arises again, why put yourself in a soup already???

  • suraj wrote:
    August 24th, 2006 at 4.59 pm

    So now the update is that BCCI was misquoted- all they wanted to say was that they don’t want to take sides even before a decision is made.

    Makes more sense to me now

    • Comments

    Receive email updates on new comments


    « Opinion divided on whether Hair should resign | Main | What are your favourite cricket books? »