PDA

View Full Version : Darrell Hair Saga: Bangladesh Pledges Support to Pakistan


Sillypoint
August 22, 2006, 01:44 PM
BCB has pledged support to Pakistan. Here's the link to the BBC website:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/england/5275414.stm

Quote: "The Bangladesh Cricket Board, meanwhile, has pledged support to Pakistan while India officials say the ball-tampering issue "cannot be ignored". Indian board secretary Niranjan Shah told the BBC: "We will hold a meeting on it once we get adequate details from the International Cricket Council."<!-- E BO -->

I am wondering whether BCB should have better off by following the 'wait and see' policy - we not only have to have a good relationship with Pakistan board but also with all other nations in terms of cricketing relationships. While I personally feel sympathetic to the Pakistani team in this case - but I thought the BCB should have been more cautious in making any statements right away before the matter is heard at the ICC hearings.

Notice how diplomatic the Indian Board have been? Did the BCB hold any meetings like the Indian cricket board? I am curious to know how the decision was made. Any body with information? Was the BCB president the sole decision maker? Were we forced to make a statment by any one? Sometimes we have to take sides - but could we not have waited till the storm was over? This may sound 'shuvidabadi' - but who doesn't love to get some 'shuvidas'??

sadi
August 22, 2006, 01:50 PM
Good point. Why take any sides? People love to give us hard time anyways. Its just better to be neutral since noone asked for our support. Gordov shala ra. Sob kichute kotha bolte hoy.

cricman
August 22, 2006, 01:51 PM
It's better to back people in your neighborhood and make friends sans India, u see having good a relationship w/ PCB and SLC will establish more tours on all levels, Test, ODI, FC , List A, 20/20, 6 side, etc.

It doesent matter how nice you are to the BCCI, becuase unless your Australia you usally don't get much in return

Tigers_eye
August 22, 2006, 02:01 PM
You may be right on getting the statement too early, however, on this ball tempering issue when there is no witness, no video evidence by now I am not sure he (hair) can backup his decision. Forfieting the match is a secondary issue (it is the after math of hair's action) and ball tempering is the main issue here.

I am sure SKYtv has already rerun thousand times to make sure if they can find any evidence. Especially Tresco and Fletcher must have requested a copy and trying to help Hair's case.

I like the fact BCB did not hesitate to issue the statement. I know what the outcome will be on the hearing already. Simple, Inzamam guilty for not bringing his troops after lunch thus gets ban. Pakistan appealing on this and the appeal date will be after the ODI is over. Now the ball tempering hearing I am not sure how can they charge Pakistan since there is no evidence. Thousands on the stand and millions on TV didn't see anything. I would love to see ICC banning Inzy for that. Then the real game would begin which would end up in court. and the ODI series would be cancelled then.

Umpire'er iccha holo ar bollo "tora chala cheat". change the ball. When Jones and co. started to do reverse swing as early as the 35th over in the ashes series. This ball was 54 overs old. Naturally it can reverse swing.

sadi
August 22, 2006, 02:13 PM
I just think we shouldn't get involved in this mess so early when other test playing countries are taking wait and see approach. We can have our individual opinions but it is different when a board comes out with a statement. Anyways, I totally understand your point. I think Pakistan has done the right thing so far and umpire Hair has made a big mistake.

betaar
August 22, 2006, 02:28 PM
I knew our board would do such a stupid thing of taking side.

We need to learn how to be silent and be diplomatic in what we say. ICC provides the bread and butter for upcoming cricketing nations like ours, we need to choose our words correctly before we make a friend into a foe. We also need to stop jumping on the band wagon whenever there is an issue between one of our neighbouring country and ICC. None of our neighbours would come in our rescue or even to support if we are to ever pick a fight against ICC.

People are way to emotional in Bangladesh and the Cricket Board is no exception.

al Furqaan
August 22, 2006, 02:40 PM
I knew our board would do such a stupid thing of taking side.

We need to learn how to be silent and be diplomatic in what we say. ICC provides the bread and butter for upcoming cricketing nations like ours, we need to choose our words correctly before we make a friend into a foe. We also need to stop jumping on the band wagon whenever there is an issue between one of our neighbouring country and ICC. None of our neighbours would come in our rescue or even to support if we are to ever pick a fight against ICC.

People are way to emotional in Bangladesh and the Cricket Board is no exception.

i agree...even tho one should speak up when its right.

hopefully, we can get a test series with pakistan now

:lol:

CTazim
August 22, 2006, 02:42 PM
Hair raised our hair several times.. So, I think Hair is a pathetic excuse for a Cricket Umpire.. and YES [Edited]

FaridpurChicago
August 22, 2006, 03:01 PM
I dont see anything wrong taking Paki side because we are not making anyone foe here except Hair. No single board is taking side with Hair. Hair is our foe anyway. We might get some more matches with Pakistan.
I have an easy way out if Inzy is banned. Pak should immediately schedule the same number of matches with BD as it will be handed to Inzy.
May Allah make my wish real. Amin.

AsifTheManRahman
August 22, 2006, 03:11 PM
the ball tampering issue is the PCB's (and ICC's) problem. i don't think we should've meddled with something that doesn't concern us. unfortunately, amader bangladeshider onner bepare naak na golale bikal 4tar shomoy chorbijukto gorur goshto diye daale bhejano thala bhorti kore khawa bhaat hojom hoy na :)

our cricket is at a stage where kotha kom bole kaj beshi korata oti joruri. unfortunately, amader playerra to beshi kotha koy e...ekhon abar boardero baar barse. kaamer belay shob patla paykhana.

anyways, ei bochor ki 3ta test asha kora jaay tahole? :p

zia
August 22, 2006, 03:26 PM
I read somewhere that the reason we are supporting Pakistan is because they have supported us in the past. What a logic! It was better to wait and then make a statement based on the facts of the issue. By walking out Pakistan definitely made a mistake. There is a better way to protest-always.

kalpurush
August 22, 2006, 04:58 PM
I read somewhere that the reason we are supporting Pakistan is because they have supported us in the past. What a logic! It was better to wait and then make a statement based on the facts of the issue. By walking out Pakistan definitely made a mistake. There is a better way to protest-always.

It is a right and bold decision by BCCB. We should stand by our fiends in needs(in terms of cricketing relationship). Mr. Devil Hair could not show/present any evidence of ball tempering but accused Pakistan to do so. He is very well-known as a Asian hater from 1992 and continued his form with consistancy(unlike Ashraful and Aftab!). In moral ground, supporting PCB is the right thing which we did.

kalpurush
August 22, 2006, 05:04 PM
You may be right on getting the statement too early, however, on this ball tempering issue when there is no witness, no video evidence by now I am not sure he (hair) can backup his decision. Forfieting the match is a secondary issue (it is the after math of hair's action) and ball tempering is the main issue here.

I am sure SKYtv has already rerun thousand times to make sure if they can find any evidence. Especially Tresco and Fletcher must have requested a copy and trying to help Hair's case.

I like the fact BCB did not hesitate to issue the statement. I know what the outcome will be on the hearing already. Simple, Inzamam guilty for not bringing his troops after lunch thus gets ban. Pakistan appealing on this and the appeal date will be after the ODI is over. Now the ball tempering hearing I am not sure how can they charge Pakistan since there is no evidence. Thousands on the stand and millions on TV didn't see anything. I would love to see ICC banning Inzy for that. Then the real game would begin which would end up in court. and the ODI series would be cancelled then.

Umpire'er iccha holo ar bollo "tora chala cheat". change the ball. When Jones and co. started to do reverse swing as early as the 35th over in the ashes series. This ball was 54 overs old. Naturally it can reverse swing.

:up: :up: :up:

Unlike many of us you stand high in moral ground. A good soul.

kalpurush
August 22, 2006, 05:18 PM
I knew our board would do such a stupid thing of taking side.

We need to learn how to be silent and be diplomatic in what we say. ICC provides the bread and butter for upcoming cricketing nations like ours, we need to choose our words correctly before we make a friend into a foe. We also need to stop jumping on the band wagon whenever there is an issue between one of our neighbouring country and ICC. None of our neighbours would come in our rescue or even to support if we are to ever pick a fight against ICC.

People are way to emotional in Bangladesh and the Cricket Board is no exception.

And you might be too practical my friend! Our neighbours supported us when we needed it most to get the Test Status. It is our moral duty to support our neighbours if they are right. ICC is run by Devil Hair and Co. and we will never get anything from them whether it is due or not. ICC is there to serves a specific group of countries anyway.

israr
August 22, 2006, 05:23 PM
Just hoping that Pakistan will cancel the ODI series against England and come back for a hastily arranged one-day series with us before the Champions Trophy.

kalpurush
August 22, 2006, 05:27 PM
It's better to back people in your neighborhood and make friends sans India, u see having good a relationship w/ PCB and SLC will establish more tours on all levels, Test, ODI, FC , List A, 20/20, 6 side, etc.

It doesent matter how nice you are to the BCCI, becuase unless your Australia you usally don't get much in return

You said it.:up:
India took his stands as a betrayer as usal. No new surprize package!

israr
August 22, 2006, 05:36 PM
Yes Pakistan, we're there with you.

SMHasan
August 22, 2006, 08:14 PM
There is no evidence that Pakistan did the ball tempering so why this mess? ICC has been very stupid over the years and now they are acting like a dead body. Idiots. They have no control over this game now a days.

PoorFan
August 22, 2006, 08:49 PM
"The Bangladesh Cricket Board, meanwhile, has pledged support to Pakistan while India officials say the ball-tampering issue "cannot be ignored". Indian board secretary Niranjan Shah told the BBC: "We will hold a meeting on it once we get adequate details from the International Cricket Council."

<!--StartFragment -->There is NOTHING except few words on BCB in that news, no mention 'who', 'when' even 'what' exactly was the 'statement', all he/she tried to state on BCCI. Neither I see any news on this matter on BD news paper. So I doubt a lot this BBC report on BCB.

But I don't like if they ( BCB ) made any 'statement' on this issue, even if they had to then they should have made it very specific, on which part they support Pakistan and which part they don't. In my opinion, 'ball tempering' and 'refusing to play' is out of question, but 'match officials' should have handled the situation better for 'greatest interest of cricket' and 'audience'. ( something like that )

Rabz
August 23, 2006, 12:25 AM
i think the BCB statement is a counter-reaction to that of the Indian one.
Everybody expected the Asian gang to rally behind Pakistand and India, being themselves, had to drop a bombshell, inspite being right on thier own capacity.

So, it became quite imminent on Bangladesh's part to take a stance. With SL and India already voicing thier opinion, we didnt wanna sound like a chicken hiding at the back. as our great leader G W says, "Either you r with ur, or against us".
Everybody knows BD would be behind Pak and its not a big surprise. But by coming out and supporting in public, BCB wants to show that they are by no means a scarred bunch and are decisive in their opinion.

Countries like SA, Aus or WI does NOT need to make an statement. they r already an established power in the game and every body knows who they would gang up, except WI, who needs to be on the Asian side for the future of their own game developement. ( eg, tri-nations in Malaysia is a promise made by India when they voted for us for the WC 2011. now gettin $1M per game.)

I think voicing our support was a good thing. We r one of the elite Ten and even though we dont count much, we need to show we r no backbencher.

It also reflects the widen gap between Bangladesh and Indian Cricket Board, which im happy to see cuz our admins r not spineless beggers to go and support India in every cause.

Who knows, may be BCB can cook something up with PCB in the future. Cuz its quite clear India is not interested at all.

Thunder
August 23, 2006, 12:32 AM
Pakistan had ball tempering issues when they visited England last time. This time when they were accused of the same doing, with no evidence, its okay for them to stand up and restore their pride a bit.

Inzamam is trusting all their players with full of heart but not all their players are trustworthy. I can remember in a recent series where Afridi caught on video tampering with the pitch and when he was caught, he said "he dont know why he did that!" to the enquiry commision.

Can you trust those players who dont know what they are doing...? :eek:

imran78
August 23, 2006, 12:35 AM
good decision by the BCB to support PCB. We need to strengthen our ties with Pak and SL and back them whenever they need any kind of backing. With all the flack BD gets about its test status and the two-tier system cropping up every now and then we need boards who will back us when we need it. and BCCI doesn't give a rat's *** about BD cricket, so no need to support them.

By the way, how many test/ODI's involving BD has Hair stood in? were there any controversial decisions against us?

thebest
August 23, 2006, 12:38 AM
Why BCB has to voice it out ? Everybody knows whose side we would be in time of voting. BCB should be more diplomatic. I did not read any SL board support on this issue though we all know where they would go. That should have been our approach.
Why we (ie Bangladesh, India) have to take a stand on every issue. Even ECB a party involve in the incident has not issued anything. So as ACB (Hair is representing ACB). Lobby should just shut up and do some lobbying for getting us some match. But if he did it for getting some match from Pakistan, I do not agree with it. We are making enemy which is not worth.
India talking about 'ball temparing' or 'rule of officials' a joke to me. did not Dravid and tendu got caught by camera for for temparing or did not India and SA played a test match without ICC approved match refererry.
If Hair is 'mini Hitler' then this Shah guy is a 'mini Bush'

imran78
August 23, 2006, 12:43 AM
Why BCB has to voice it out ? Everybody knows whose side we would be in time of voting. BCB should be more diplomatic. I did not read any SL board support on this issue though we all know where they would go. That should have been our approach.


wrong. SL has already pledged their support to PCB.

thebest
August 23, 2006, 12:55 AM
wrong. SL has already pledged their support to PCB.
Is it. Can you provide me the link. All I saw former SL players supporting Pak team decesion. Ranatunga voiced his opinion, but it was not from his official position, but more on personal note.

bengaltiger
August 23, 2006, 01:00 AM
bangladesh cricket board did the right thing. the pakistani cricket board has always been loyally supporting b'desh cricket. when it's time, you return the favor and show your ally your support...

imran78
August 23, 2006, 01:07 AM
Is it. Can you provide me the link. All I saw former SL players supporting Pak team decesion. Ranatunga voiced his opinion, but it was not from his official position, but more on personal note.

same link which says BCB backed PCB. last line.

edit: LINK (http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=cricketNews&storyID=2006-08-22T143843Z_01_DHA290832_RTRIDST_0_SPORT-CRICKET-PAKISTAN-PROTEST-BANGLADESH.XML)

Sauron
August 23, 2006, 01:13 AM
BCB should have shut up and waited for the evidence to be presented.

Personally I feel that Hair is wrong and devious. So does a lot of cricket followers. Obviously the BCB pres feels the same way. But when it comes to stating official position, this is premature ejaculation. Someone needs to put a cap on him.

PoorFan
August 23, 2006, 01:16 AM
good decision by the BCB to support PCB. We need to strengthen our ties with Pak and SL and back them whenever they need any kind of backing. With all the flack BD gets about its test status and the two-tier system cropping up every now and then we need boards who will back us when we need it. and BCCI doesn't give a rat's *** about BD cricket, so no need to support them.

By the way, how many test/ODI's involving BD has Hair stood in? were there any controversial decisions against us?
<!--StartFragment -->I agree with the first bold part of your comment, but can not agree with the later. Backing up PCB on this incident WILL be a 'participate in a losing game'. This 'backing up' PCB will not a worth of help us in 'n tier system' debate, rather will harm us significantly, since we are making 'enemy' out of NOTHING concerened with us, IS ICC and rest of western nations. Besides who is talking about support BCCI here ( in your comment )? We are suggesting NOT to confront ICC and other western nations, wich is not related to us, and nobody asking to support BCCI anyway.

How can you support PCB on Mr. Hair's exclusion from elite panel or not letting him umpire Paki match or other subcontinent match, NOT even experiencing any match officiated by Hair, or never officially complained to ICC ( by BCB )? You must have something strong ( evidence ) as your backup, when you intend to support someone in a situation like this.

Showing 'sympathy' to PCB is enough I think.

Shafin
August 23, 2006, 01:27 AM
They did it right,and i read that Lobby said it.

Sillypoint
August 23, 2006, 02:28 AM
Quoting Ashghar: "I told him (Shaharyar) that we are with Pakistan as they had supported us on many occasions," Asghar told the reporters.


"I have gone through the whole incident and found nothing wrong in Pakistan's reaction."



The first part of his argument seems redundant silly to me. He could have just uttered the second sentence and pledged his support.




In international cricket politics BCB's logic may be this: How much we try to appease the 'Shada chamras' they will never be happy with us or back us in times of need - so let's provide our backers (Pak) unconditional support to ensure their unconditional support for us. Otherwise our condition will be like: Amo gelo chalao gelo.



Now let's see Lobby bringing the Pak team to play some tests (but please no more Pak coaches).

PoorFan
August 23, 2006, 02:51 AM
Inzamam hearing postponed

Cricinfo staff
August 23, 2006
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=170 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=10>http://img.cricinfo.com/spacer.gif

</TD><TD class=photo>
<TABLE cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=2 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=photo>Inzamam-ul-Haq: more time to prepare his defence <NOBR>© Getty Images</NOBR>

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

According to a report on BBC News, Inzamam-ul-Haq's disciplinary hearing, originally set for Friday, has had to be postponed because of a family illness suffered by the ICC's chief match referee, Ranjan Madugalle.
More to follow.

© Cricinfo

-----------------------

<!--StartFragment --> No way now Pakistan can pull back from the ODI series! Things getting more interesting ...

istiak
August 23, 2006, 04:32 AM
For the very first time i am supporting Pakistan in this issue, but BCB made a childish decision to back PCB so early, when it was not at all necessary. I don't think we have so bad relation with Hair than SL

ahms
August 23, 2006, 08:41 AM
Well, BCB's action was unprofessional, more like blind support. Nothing wrong in supporting PCB when it is right cause. BCB could have presented it nicely.
In this Saga, there is two parts to it. 1st part, "Ball Tampering" and 2nd part "protest related to ball tampering". Inzamam is wrong in 2nd part. Umpire did what he suppose to do. It is like given him chance to exploit his authority to the max. No body in right mind can support PCB was right in that sense.

Haven't I said that, I also wish to point out, without any shred of evidence to say that team is gulty of doing such thing, is biased and prejudice action nothing less. It does say much about him (Hair). It is same old story, white vs. non-white supremacy. I wish to see ICC, remove such umpire. He is not fit to umpire any nation. Know that his action will not be any different to BD compare to a white team.

I agree with Imran Khan, Inzamam's approach was wrong, he should have objected on the field instead. But main culprit is Hair.

sadi
August 23, 2006, 09:06 AM
First of all, it was too early to show support to any side. Second of all, the way Lobby said it was totally ridiculous. Pakistan supported us so we are supporting them. It kinda show Bangladeshi mentality where we support somebody blindly without even thinking whether he is right or no. I am not saying Pakistan has done anything wrong and I totally support what they are doing, but it was not professional from BCB's part to say it like that.

akabir77
August 23, 2006, 09:42 AM
there we go India supported icc so from now on bd will be ganged up by all ump black or white, remember ashoka? Well we get that ump from kenya out from the list he will favor us as got the room but other than him...

al Furqaan
August 23, 2006, 10:47 AM
personally, i applaud BCB decision, tho i agree worded as "we help em cuz they helped us" is dumb...and wrong.

but as far as evidence, what more evidence do you need except for the fact that 26 freaking cameras don't confirm the allegations. not 1 camera, not 2, not even 25...but 26!!!!

if the glove doesn't fit, you must aquit. this is a simple case of racism...and perhaps, just perhaps anti muslim sentiment showing up in umpiring and cricketing fields.

mhferdaus
August 23, 2006, 11:05 AM
personally, i applaud BCB decision, tho i agree worded as "we help em cuz they helped us" is dumb...and wrong.

but as far as evidence, what more evidence do you need except for the fact that 26 freaking cameras don't confirm the allegations. not 1 camera, not 2, not even 25...but 26!!!!

if the glove doesn't fit, you must aquit. this is a simple case of racism...and perhaps, just perhaps anti muslim sentiment showing up in umpiring and cricketing fields.

Man, this humpire got against Sri Lanka too. I think this humpire has got inferior complexity that is why he behaves so dakat like.

Carte Blanche
August 23, 2006, 12:50 PM
No matter how bad our cricket is, we'll always be elite in terms of chamchami.

Miraz
August 23, 2006, 12:50 PM
I am absolutely behind BCB. We should work with our friends not the opponents/enemies. Apart from India, BCB is the second country after Srilanka to support PCB. BCCI should have supported PCB but I guess they have their own agenda as they are now the 'Big Brother' of world cricket.

And, when you support your friends its always better to support in the fisrt instance. No need to play the waiting game. Everyone must understand if we gain something from ICC, that will come through the strength of the Asian bloc and definietly not through the favour of Aussie/English bloc.

Tigers_eye
August 23, 2006, 12:55 PM
I am absolutely behind BCB. We should work with our friends not the opponents/enemies. Apart from India, BCB is the second country after Srilanka to support PCB. BCCI should have supported PCB but I guess they have their own agenda as they are now the 'Big Brother' of world cricket.

And, when you support anyone its always better to support in the fisrt instance. No need to play the waiting game. Everyone must understand if we gain something from ICC, that will come through the strength of the Asian bloc and definietly not through the favour of Aussie/English bloc.
:up:
Especially knowing that you are making the correct decision and there was an injustice done (no evidence).

betaar
August 23, 2006, 02:14 PM
And you might be too practical my friend! Our neighbours supported us when we needed it most to get the Test Status. It is our moral duty to support our neighbours if they are right. ICC is run by Devil Hair and Co. and we will never get anything from them whether it is due or not. ICC is there to serves a specific group of countries anyway.

You missed the point buddy, not speaking our mind would not make us an enemy of Pakistan rather it would have saved us from being an enemy of ICC.
<O:p
Now speaking of standing by our friends who helped us:
I am not too sure how much help Pakistan provided to our cricket infra-structure, but as far as test status goes, I think it was Mr. Dal Mia from <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/ /><st1:country-region w:st=<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = " /><st1:country-region w:st="on">India</st1:country-region> that played a significant role in helping BD for the test status not <st1:country-region w:st="on">Pakistan</st1:country-region></ST1:p. And later both the Paki and SL provided their support for BD, but they all (India, SL, Pak) did it so they have one more voting power in ICC from the Asian side to fulfill their own agenda……it’s all politics my friend….no emotions were attached as far as our neighbors were concerned.<O:p</O:p
<O:p
And look at the way our neighbors since treated us……Pakistan with the help of our own board member made sure we get a crappy coach like Mohsin Kamal, where as India has never willing to host us for a series. Though <st1:country-region w:st="on">Pakistan</st1:country-region> host us couple of years ago but do you not remember how they treated our players as 2<SUP>nd</SUP> class citizen giving them the economy class seats while they themselves enjoyed the First Class seats traveling from one city to another?<O:p</O:p
<O:p
In reality, our neighbors don’t really give a damn about us……they are all talk when they are touring our country…..they all suffer from the same superior complex as the other half of the ICC members. I know other countries criticizes about our test status every now an then, but we should also consider their help in our cricketing development.... for example Cricket <st1:country-region w:st="on">Australia</st1:country-region>.

My point is, if we are to be treated the same way by every nation that suffer from the superiority complex then we would rather make friends (or in this case not make any enemy) with some one who actually would be more beneficial to our progress (like ICC or Australia). <O:p</O:p

Navarene
August 23, 2006, 02:51 PM
Very well put, betaar. Nothing should be emotionally treated in this corporate world and neighbors like India or Pakistan should be no exception all together...be it in cricket or politics.

Tigers_eye
August 23, 2006, 02:58 PM
The fact of the matter is Hair had no proof. He went by with his hunch (because it was premeditated. Fletcher had already visited with the umpires on the morning of the incident and had a talk). Hair didn't let the captain (Inzi) know of his suspition either. Because in his mind a seed has been planted. I understand the umpires are the law in a match. I also understand for the good of the game one should not question the decision of an umpire but then again when you see ponting screaming at umpires, Lara snatching the ball out the umpires hand and throwing away, and no punishment awarded, one must ponder where is the spirit of the game then? What would a sane person do when he is called a cheat? The label of a cheat without evidence jeopardizes the integrity of the game itself. Why play the game when being innocent and still getting penalized for nothing? How would it sound if a mod calls a BC member a cheat/liar without any proof? The attack becomes more personal. The Umpires have to maintain a standard and not side sides just like our Mods.

The way ICC is acting, I know now for sure they will ban Inzi. That was the whole reason to postpone the Friday hearing. May be Madugalle's family-member is sick for real. But I find it hard to believe at this stage. Just so that ECB can make some money out of the ODIs and pakistan have no chance of boycotting the ODIs. ICC (Mr. Speed) have already rejected to the Pakistani written request of not having Hair in the future matches invloving Pakistan. That should give a fair indication what ICC will say after the hearing. They will stand by their man Mr. Hair.

No matter how much we want to please the ICC or Cricket Australia or BCCI, one must stand for dignity and honesty. In this case support Pakistan because there wasn't any evidence. I applaud Lobby for getting a supporting statement out so quickly. However, I wish he had refrained himself from saying, "I told him (Shaharyar) that we are with Pakistan as they had supported us on many occasions," to the reporters.
The second line was fine and should have been enough. "I have gone through the whole incident and found nothing wrong in Pakistan's reaction."

Sillypoint
August 23, 2006, 03:57 PM
It is still not clear to me if the statement made by Lobby was his personal view or that of BCB (and thus of Bangladesh). The Reuters report was printed (hubuhu) by Daily Star and there was not such news in the major Bangla newspapers. Someone please let me know if I am wrong or missed it. Where exactly and under what circumstances did he make these comments?

So I am still wondering if the comments made by Ashgar Lobby to the reporters (?)were his "personal comments" from the top of his head when approached by reporter(s) from Reuters or is it that of BCB? Can Lobby's comments be considered as official BCB comments?

I am still of the opinion that BCB should have come up with an official statement (either supporting Pak or not) - and in the process some silly comments could have been avoided. The way our Board works is unprofessional. Maybe Lobby is thinking more about election than cricket - but such unprofessionalism hurts are bad.

zia
August 23, 2006, 03:57 PM
Look at the Indian's. So MATURED.

Niranjan Shah, ICC Secretary said it all :
" 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.’

Ubiquitous
August 23, 2006, 04:27 PM
Oh come on.. the "we support them cause they support us" (mentioned a couple of posts back) is such a bad reason to support anyone on such an issue as ball tampering, specially when there is the very plain, simple reason that there is no evidence whatsoever that any such tampering has taken place! We're not talking about the colour of the jerseys in the next tournament or something that we need to find who our "friends" and "enemies" are.. its a simple matter of Hair being so wrong its just plain dumb.

Beamer
August 23, 2006, 09:46 PM
Nicely put betaar.

I have a feeling that ICC won't budge and would keep Hair in the elite panel to show that they won't be dictated to. At the same time, Hair officiating in a match with Pak, SL and India ( to certain extent ) are almost slim to none. That leaves us among the Asian bloc, and ICC would love to appoint Hair in a game just to prove that they haven't budged by making him stand in a game involving an Asian country.

shaoun
August 23, 2006, 10:36 PM
pakistani bowlers were blamed for tampering with the bowl many times before. so this is nothing new for them. i dont know how much it will favour us by supporting pakistan.i think bcb should have just stayed quiet in this matter. i know one thing is for sure neither india nor pakistan is a friend of bangladesh.

kalpurush
August 23, 2006, 10:43 PM
No matter how bad our cricket is, we'll always be elite in terms of chamchami.

Sorry, couldn't agree at all! We are playing good cricket and we stand up for a right reason, not chamchami.

kalpurush
August 23, 2006, 11:07 PM
[quote=zia]Look at the Indian's. So MATURED.

Niranjan Shah, ICC Secretary said it all :
" 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.’



It's like "wait, let me get the result, I will tel you then who has won!" Very silly and
SELFISH atitude.

jabbar
August 23, 2006, 11:40 PM
Who cares what BCB thinks. This is a matetr between PCB and teh ICC. Not even England have anything to do with it, let alone BCB. Any BCB "statements" are immaterial and only relevant for political reasons. I suspect PCB doesn't give a rats a** what we think, and will continue their level of competition with us in teh future. Rather than playing political games, BCB should focus on improving the domestic competition, and building the international class players so they can play better,in order to increase intl. cricket compeition involving bangladesh.

ZunIAD
August 24, 2006, 12:56 AM
I agree the fact that we need a good relationship with our neighbours, even if they are right or wrong. Look at the western countries backing themselves up consistently and we are trurning our backs on each other. When Brett Lee was reported for chucking in NewZealand in 2001 series, this matter was never properly investigated and in a few months time it was simply forgotten. Where as in Shoaib and Murli cops the accusiation like anything from western media. One thing makes me sad is that no subcontinent countires backs each other, where as in western countries do. I know that Pakistan and India are scums and will never back us up, neither will they back each other up. Doesnt mean we should as well, set them an example and do what is right. We are all third world countries and times havnt changed much, it is still rich dominating the poor. When poor sticks togather it just makes harder for the rich to make the rules that take advantage out of. Imagine there was a similar bowler like murli in Australia, do you think media or even official have any thoughts of him being a chucker? i doubt it.

PoorFan
August 24, 2006, 02:49 AM
Woolmer on verge of quitting

Cricinfo staff
August 24, 2006
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=170 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=10>http://img.cricinfo.com/spacer.gif




</TD><TD class=photo>
<TABLE cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=2 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=photo><NOBR></NOBR>




</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>



</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Bob Woolmer is on the verge of resigning as Pakistan coach, according to a report in today's Daily Telegraph. The article also says that Zaheer Abbas, the team manager, is also prepared to walk at the end of the series.

The paper claims that Woolmer told the respected journalist Mihir Bose that he was at the end of his tether and that his "relations with Zaheer and captain Inzamam-ul-Haq have descended into acrimony".

While the team has presented a united front in the last four days, behind the scenes Bose reports that all is far from well. Inzamam is said to have lost faith in the coach and believes that he is briefing the Pakistan Cricket Board behind his back, while Woolmer is angry at Zaheer's "lack of focused leadership" during the crisis.

Bose says that the Pakistan dressing-room on Sunday was "a confused and angry place where there was a lot of shouting and different advice being thrown at Inzamam". He continues that language difficulties meant that Inzamam was not immediately fully aware of what his side was being accused of, and that the realisation of the seriousness of it all only became clear when he returned to the dressing-room.

Woolmer apparently gave two or three options to the players, but none included refusing to resume after the interval. "I am not sure how much of what Woolmer said was understood by Inzamam," a source said. "Inzi decided the team would not go out."

Thereafter, relations have deteriorated by the day.

© Cricinfo

Click here (http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/engvpak/content/current/story/257666.html)

-------------------------------
<!--StartFragment -->That's what I thought and said in other thread, Inzi didn't fully considered about afterwards. Now it seems even Paki management weren't fully aware of possible 'out come' of that situation, as well as lack of leadership. I wont be surprised if it's become totally a 'mismanagement' of Paki side at the end.

Stories behind this incident are coming out slowly and becoming more clear.

jabbar
August 24, 2006, 03:34 AM
I agree the fact that we need a good relationship with our neighbours, even if they are right or wrong. Look at the western countries backing themselves up consistently and we are trurning our backs on each other. When Brett Lee was reported for chucking in NewZealand in 2001 series, this matter was never properly investigated and in a few months time it was simply forgotten. Where as in Shoaib and Murli cops the accusiation like anything from western media. One thing makes me sad is that no subcontinent countires backs each other, where as in western countries do. I know that Pakistan and India are scums and will never back us up, neither will they back each other up. Doesnt mean we should as well, set them an example and do what is right. We are all third world countries and times havnt changed much, it is still rich dominating the poor. When poor sticks togather it just makes harder for the rich to make the rules that take advantage out of. Imagine there was a similar bowler like murli in Australia, do you think media or even official have any thoughts of him being a chucker? i doubt it.

You are partially correct. I don't think Australia and England, or Australia and Aouth Africa ... oh, heck, Australia and the rest of teh world, get along that well. Do you think England would come in to bat for Lee if he was suspended for chucking? Nope. And Aouth Africa? Forget it... However, they do not actively try to pull each otehr down, which is good. So far, BD and India have shown similar fortitude, and have not spoken against Pakistan in any way. As far as I can see, they have behaved quite supportively (so far).

jabbar
August 24, 2006, 03:37 AM
Woolmer on verge of quitting

Cricinfo staff
August 24, 2006
<table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="170"><tbody><tr><td width="10">http://img.cricinfo.com/spacer.gif




</td><td class="photo">
<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2"><tbody><tr><td class="photo"><nobr></nobr>




</td></tr></tbody></table>



</td></tr></tbody></table>

Bob Woolmer is on the verge of resigning as Pakistan coach, according to a report in today's Daily Telegraph. The article also says that Zaheer Abbas, the team manager, is also prepared to walk at the end of the series.

The paper claims that Woolmer told the respected journalist Mihir Bose that he was at the end of his tether and that his "relations with Zaheer and captain Inzamam-ul-Haq have descended into acrimony".

While the team has presented a united front in the last four days, behind the scenes Bose reports that all is far from well. Inzamam is said to have lost faith in the coach and believes that he is briefing the Pakistan Cricket Board behind his back, while Woolmer is angry at Zaheer's "lack of focused leadership" during the crisis.

Bose says that the Pakistan dressing-room on Sunday was "a confused and angry place where there was a lot of shouting and different advice being thrown at Inzamam". He continues that language difficulties meant that Inzamam was not immediately fully aware of what his side was being accused of, and that the realisation of the seriousness of it all only became clear when he returned to the dressing-room.

Woolmer apparently gave two or three options to the players, but none included refusing to resume after the interval. "I am not sure how much of what Woolmer said was understood by Inzamam," a source said. "Inzi decided the team would not go out."

Thereafter, relations have deteriorated by the day.

© Cricinfo

Click here (http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/engvpak/content/current/story/257666.html)

-------------------------------
<!--StartFragment -->That's what I thought and said in other thread, Inzi didn't fully considered about afterwards. Now it seems even Paki management weren't fully aware of possible 'out come' of that situation, as well as lack of leadership. I wont be surprised if it's become totally a 'mismanagement' of Paki side at the end.

Stories behind this incident are coming out slowly and becoming more clear.

This is just Woolmer distancing himself from Pakistan's recent indiscretions. He's clever - not including himself on the bandwagon that put the game into "disrepute" - so he escapes ICC punishment.

Ubiquitous
August 24, 2006, 03:56 PM
This is just Woolmer distancing himself from Pakistan's recent indiscretions. He's clever - not including himself on the bandwagon that put the game into "disrepute" - so he escapes ICC punishment.

Can the ICC actually punish coaches?

bengaltiger
August 24, 2006, 04:00 PM
Woolmer on verge of quitting

Cricinfo staff
August 24, 2006
<table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="170"><tbody><tr><td width="10">http://img.cricinfo.com/spacer.gif




</td><td class="photo">
<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2"><tbody><tr><td class="photo"><nobr></nobr>




</td></tr></tbody></table>



</td></tr></tbody></table>

Bob Woolmer is on the verge of resigning as Pakistan coach, according to a report in today's Daily Telegraph. The article also says that Zaheer Abbas, the team manager, is also prepared to walk at the end of the series.

The paper claims that Woolmer told the respected journalist Mihir Bose that he was at the end of his tether and that his "relations with Zaheer and captain Inzamam-ul-Haq have descended into acrimony".

While the team has presented a united front in the last four days, behind the scenes Bose reports that all is far from well. Inzamam is said to have lost faith in the coach and believes that he is briefing the Pakistan Cricket Board behind his back, while Woolmer is angry at Zaheer's "lack of focused leadership" during the crisis.

Bose says that the Pakistan dressing-room on Sunday was "a confused and angry place where there was a lot of shouting and different advice being thrown at Inzamam". He continues that language difficulties meant that Inzamam was not immediately fully aware of what his side was being accused of, and that the realisation of the seriousness of it all only became clear when he returned to the dressing-room.

Woolmer apparently gave two or three options to the players, but none included refusing to resume after the interval. "I am not sure how much of what Woolmer said was understood by Inzamam," a source said. "Inzi decided the team would not go out."

Thereafter, relations have deteriorated by the day.

© Cricinfo
The english media trying to spin things around and show the pakis as the guilty ones? Read this:

Woolmer denies rift
Osman Samiuddin
August 24, 2006


Bob Woolmer, the Pakistan coach, has dismissed as "baseless" reports in a leading British newspaper that there was a rift between him and Inzamam-ul-Haq, the Pakistan captain. And though he admitted he had considered resigning in the immediate aftermath of the Oval Test, he told Cricinfo that "was no longer the case."
Woolmer was reacting to a report in The Daily Telegraph which alleged that not only was he on the verge of resignation, but also that "Woolmer's relations with Zaheer and captain Inzamam-ul-Haq have descended into acrimony," since the chaos that enveloped the Oval on Sunday.
"I won't deny that I considered resigning and I did very seriously," Woolmer said. "I enjoy coaching cricket and I missed that over the last few days. I am very unhappy about the general situation as well, but as far as resigning is concerned, that is no longer the case."
Since the forfeit, all manner of rumours, speculation, allegations and contradictions have emerged from the Pakistan camp. Woolmer denied at least one - that there was a rift with Inzamam. "Inzi and I are absolutely fine. We have had misunderstandings in the past and we had a sort of misunderstanding on Sunday. Until I have a complete grasp of the Urdu language these things may occur but as things stand now, we are fine. We are getting on well and want to do whatever we can for Pakistan cricket."
It is yet to emerge what exactly occurred during and after the tea break on the fourth day of the Test. Reports suggest that a few options were discussed as to a course of action, including protesting on the field or going back to the hotel. Woolmer refused to comment though he stressed "it wasn't a confused and angry place as is suggested. I was 100% behind Inzamam and the team though and supported whatever decision they took. Advice was offered but in the end we all supported Inzamam's stand absolutely. I am the coach and my job is to offer support to him - whatever decision he would've taken I would have supported him."
Too many questions, however, remain unanswered. With growing suspicion and criticism in Pakistan that their board has bungled their way through this crisis, the questions will keep coming until exactly what happened that day becomes clear.

Source:

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/engvpak/content/current/story/257688.html

Ubiquitous
August 24, 2006, 04:05 PM
Until I have a complete grasp of the Urdu language these things may occur but as things stand now, we are fine. We are getting on well and want to do whatever we can for Pakistan cricket.

Ooh, how I'd like to see a Dav say that he'd like to have a complete grasp of Bangla to make sure "misunderstandings" don't happen...

Sillypoint
August 24, 2006, 04:09 PM
Has the ICC ever punished any umpires? Why are these people above the law?

rudro
August 25, 2006, 02:07 PM
Now that Hair is asking money to opt out, I think he might have done something not allowed by the law.

6alltheway
August 25, 2006, 02:14 PM
It's better to back people in your neighborhood and make friends sans India, u see having good a relationship w/ PCB and SLC will establish more tours on all levels, Test, ODI, FC , List A, 20/20, 6 side, etc.

It doesent matter how nice you are to the BCCI, becuase unless your Australia you usally don't get much in return

even if they are wrong?

now im not saying pakistan are wrong but BCB should have adopted the wait and see policy before delacring any support.

BangladeshFan
August 25, 2006, 05:42 PM
i think umpires like hair should be punished. the conditions of that ground and pitch makes the ball rough up quite quickly. hair without giving any warning to inzi penalised them. now pcb is challenging him to bring any evidence which i dont think he can. and the funny thing is now hair has really pulled out his hair by offering resignation for money.

bcb has done the right thing. if icc is blind enough to say hair is right, we should take the stand against it. that is more to do with forcing hair out than supporting pcb.

Faisal
August 25, 2006, 06:29 PM
hair asking for only $500,000 then he will quit. lol now it looks funny.

kalpurush
August 25, 2006, 08:37 PM
hair asking for only $500,000 then he will quit. lol now it looks funny.

Is it Zimbabwe Dollar? Then I am ready to double it up!:D

SMHasan
August 25, 2006, 09:31 PM
Is it Zimbabwe Dollar? Then I am ready to double it up!:D

hehehehehehe...

bengaltiger
August 25, 2006, 11:29 PM
Is it Zimbabwe Dollar? Then I am ready to double it up!:D
hehe, and i will contribute to this fund, one less weird umpire...

Shafin
August 28, 2006, 02:04 AM
No matter how bad our cricket is, we'll always be elite in terms of chamchami.
This is not Chamchami,this is support for friends.

ZunaidH
August 28, 2006, 05:58 AM
Pakistani cricket team is probably the worst in the world in their ethical standards of playing the game. The team is almost motivated by the phrase "If I can't win honestly, I will cheat." They disgrace cricket almost every other match. I, personally, would be very happy if Inzamam is banned for a good year or so. To support my point, I would like to list a few incidents from the past:

1) Afridi messing with the pitch on a recent outing in Pakistan against England. While nobody is looking (he thought) he is trying to get away with cheating. School boy like frivolity and ethics of a "pocket-mar."

2) Selim Malik and the crew banned for life for "match-fixing". Didn't the captain have his skin in the game too?

3) Rashid Latif cheating aganist Bangladesh in Multan. Therefore, rightly gets his career curtailed.


I have a few more to list. But I feel the point is clear. Every game Pakistan plays is a potential disgraceful act in the field. I say, ban them from international cricket for a good while and reward Darrel Hair for making such a bold stance.

Z.

PS. The guys in Bangladesh Cricket Board who abruptly suported Pakistan whole heartedly should be stripped off their position. MY take on this: they are former Rajakar. Where are the lynch mobs when you need them?

nasifkhan
August 28, 2006, 06:19 AM
i was just waiting for it.....why it took so much long time to say the word "Razakar' ?

Sovik
August 28, 2006, 06:25 AM
I think what bcb did was right. look what is happening between hair and ICC.

thebest
August 28, 2006, 06:26 AM
Dear Mr ZunaidH,
everybody cheats. Why blaming Pakistan only. Pakistan is just following other leads. Let me make some other example.
1. The first recorded instance of ball temparing in test is done by John Lever of England in 1970s. He put Vaseline on ball to get prodigious swing in India. There is no proof that pak tempered the ball at least in this case. Beside Pakistan, India and England also got punishment for ball temparing
2. The only persons who admitted their guilt in Match Fixing is Mr Shane Warne and Mark Waugh. Selim Malik's involvement is not proven in the court of Law. Why conveniently forget those two plus Azhar case.
3. You remember Rashid Latif. Why you forgot Jones of England or our beloved Pilot ?
3. Pitch temparing has been done in SA and Australia by the groundsman.

I kindly request you do not bring politics here rajakar issue and so on. The behaviour of BCB to Bangladesh is simply disgrace. So pro-pakistanies might strike back with those.

Please read the other post which did not support BCB's position on this issue without bringing politics or calling some body's ethical standard. You are not in moral highground. Beside as you are a staff of this forum, you are supposed to make the forum more friendly not to instigate war of words.
Thank You

Tigers_eye
August 28, 2006, 09:35 AM
1st we are not here to discuss who is rajakar and who is not.
ZunaidH,
Do not hate people for their race if you think you are a muslim.

Sovik
August 28, 2006, 09:42 AM
it was not expected from a BC staff

Fazal
August 28, 2006, 12:04 PM
i was just waiting for it.....why it took so much long time to say the word "Razakar' ?

Sorry who is Razaker? Hair or Inzy? Or is it (Abdul) Razzak? But he didn't played the game. Hoc can he tamper the ball?

HawkEye000
August 28, 2006, 12:24 PM
1st we are not here to discuss who is rajakar and who is not.
ZunaidH,
Do not hate people for their race if you think you are a muslim.
I don't think it has anything to do with being a muslim. May be more to do with being a good, rational person.

HawkEye000
August 28, 2006, 12:48 PM
it was not expected from a BC staff

I don't think whatever ZunaidH said was totally illogical.

I think whatever Hair had done on the field was right. He along with Doctrove saw the state of the ball suddenly changing (in a period of three overs when even during that time no boundary were hit). So it had to be an act of ball tampering. As there was no definite video footage of the main culprit, the captain has to be accountable. As for Hair, he lost it later by asking for money to go out of the scene. The ICC should deal with that and may be bar him from officiating in future matches for that act (his emails).

The main thing is ball tampering has to stamped out of the game. Some teams like India, Pakistan and England have quite a record of tampering with the ball while the rest of us suffer (including the Bangladesh team). It's not possible to monitor all the eleven players all the time during a game(through cameras), so whenever the on-field umpires find the ball state of the ball change in an abnormal way (within a short period), they should make the fielding captain responsible. So maybe BCCB should have thought about all these before making any comment on the issue.

Tigers_eye
August 28, 2006, 12:58 PM
I don't think whatever ZunaidH said was totally illogical...

Calling Rajakar for supporting pakistan when there is no evidence and just speculations is logical? You have some fine logic there. Or you may not have any idea what Rajakar means.

HawkEye000
August 28, 2006, 01:07 PM
Calling Rajakar for supporting pakistan when there is no evidence and just speculations is logical? You have some fine logic there. Or you may not have any idea what Rajakar means.

I said whatever he said was not totally illogcal. Some part were logical and some not. I wonder how you had problem getting that.

SMHasan
August 28, 2006, 08:28 PM
I don't think whatever ZunaidH said was totally illogical.

I think whatever Hair had done on the field was right. He along with Doctrove saw the state of the ball suddenly changing (in a period of three overs when even during that time no boundary were hit). So it had to be an act of ball tampering. As there was no definite video footage of the main culprit, the captain has to be accountable. As for Hair, he lost it later by asking for money to go out of the scene. The ICC should deal with that and may be bar him from officiating in future matches for that act (his emails).

The main thing is ball tampering has to stamped out of the game. Some teams like India, Pakistan and England have quite a record of tampering with the ball while the rest of us suffer (including the Bangladesh team). It's not possible to monitor all the eleven players all the time during a game(through cameras), so whenever the on-field umpires find the ball state of the ball change in an abnormal way (within a short period), they should make the fielding captain responsible. So maybe BCCB should have thought about all these before making any comment on the issue.

Can't agree fully because the ball might be damaged by the stands, site screens etc. Not necessarily by any player. I am not a pakistan supporter still I feel that the decision went against them and it was injustice. you can not blame anyone until something is proved.

I think this ball tempering law needs to be changed.

Rabz
August 29, 2006, 12:30 AM
Calling Rajakar for supporting pakistan when there is no evidence and just speculations is logical? You have some fine logic there. Or you may not have any idea what Rajakar means.

i find supporting Pakistan quite appauling to be honest. but again, that is my personal opinion. and yes when some ppl do support them, i might hv called them a rajakar too.
Rajakar means the Bengalis who supported and helped the Pakis during the liberation war, we all know that. and as a Bangladeshi, there could not be any worse than being called a Rajakar.

Lot of our administrations in the govt are those who were open Rajakars during the war! its a shame for us but hey we ( as a nation) hv elected the better of the two worst political parties in the world! what can we do !! after all Nijami is a minister of our country.

sorry dont wanna get into political debate.

kalpurush
August 29, 2006, 01:43 AM
I don't think whatever ZunaidH said was totally illogical.

I think whatever Hair had done on the field was right. He along with Doctrove saw the state of the ball suddenly changing (in a period of three overs when even during that time no boundary were hit). So it had to be an act of ball tampering. As there was no definite video footage of the main culprit, the captain has to be accountable. As for Hair, he lost it later by asking for money to go out of the scene. The ICC should deal with that and may be bar him from officiating in future matches for that act (his emails).

The main thing is ball tampering has to stamped out of the game. Some teams like India, Pakistan and England have quite a record of tampering with the ball while the rest of us suffer (including the Bangladesh team). It's not possible to monitor all the eleven players all the time during a game(through cameras), so whenever the on-field umpires find the ball state of the ball change in an abnormal way (within a short period), they should make the fielding captain responsible. So maybe BCCB should have thought about all these before making any comment on the issue.

Please read this:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=770 border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD width=5>
</TD><TD width="100%"><!--- END OLD SSI: /navigation/TOURS/2006/PAK_IN_ENG/HEADER.html --->Former player extends support to Inzamam
Holding critical of 'first-world hypocrisy'
Cricinfo staff
August 28, 2006
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=170 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=10>http://img.cricinfo.com/spacer.gif
</TD><TD class=photo>http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/inline/content/current/image/257342.jpg?alt=1
<TABLE cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=2 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=photo>Inzamam's disciplinary hearing is scheduled for the end of September and Michael Holding feels that stating cricket laws as absolute is pointless. Every law has room for flexibility <NOBR>© AFP</NOBR>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Michael Holding, the former West Indies fast bowler, lent his support to Inzamam-ul-Haq, saying that Darrell Hair was "insensitive" to have penalised Pakistan for ball-tampering.
"I have absolute and all sympathy with [Pakistan captain] Inzamam-ul Haq. If you label someone a cheat, please arrive with the evidence," Holding wrote in India Today, a leading weekly news magazine. Holding felt that most umpires would have said something to the fielding captain and given the offending team a warning of some kind. "Then if the tampering continued, they would have been totally justified in taking action.
"There is a double standard at work in cricket and this episode has only highlighted it. When England used reverse-swing to beat the Australians in the 2005 Ashes, everyone said it was great skill. When Pakistan does it, the opposite happens, no one thinks it is great skill. Everyone associates it with skullduggery.
"When bombs go off in Karachi and Colombo everyone wants to go home. When bombs go off in London, no one says anything. That is first-world hypocrisy and we have to live with it."
Holding said that seeing the cricketing law as the absolute and final truth was pointless. Every law, he wrote, has room for flexibility. "I read a prime example recently in the British press. It said that by law, you can be fined for parking within the yellow lines in England. If you do that to run into a chemist to buy emergency medicines, a sensible policeman would more than likely tell you about the law but it's unlikely a ticket would be forthcoming."
The executive board of the ICC is scheduled to meet on September 2 in Dubai to discuss the ball-tampering issue further. Inzamam's disciplinary hearing for Pakistan's actions of ball-tampering and bringing the game into disrepute in the fourth Test against England at The Oval will take place around the end of September.
© Cricinfo

Much thanks-
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

thebest
August 29, 2006, 05:10 AM
i find supporting Pakistan quite appauling to be honest. but again, that is my personal opinion. and yes when some ppl do support them, i might hv called them a rajakar too.
Rajakar means the Bengalis who supported and helped the Pakis during the liberation war, we all know that. and as a Bangladeshi, there could not be any worse than being called a Rajakar.

Lot of our administrations in the govt are those who were open Rajakars during the war! its a shame for us but hey we ( as a nation) hv elected the better of the two worst political parties in the world! what can we do !! after all Nijami is a minister of our country.

sorry dont wanna get into political debate.
I support Pakistan cricket team for its flair both batting and bowling. It does not mean I forgive them for their deed in 1971. So calling someone Rajakar is really offensive just he support Pakistan cricket/hocky team or Jansher Khan in Squash
But most of Indian team supporter of Bangaldesh follow your logic. So If I say those support India are agent of RAW or Indian Dalal would you agree? I fail to understand how one could support india after Farrakha, BSF . But i would not say so. Because those are equally offensive. Harbazan hypotinising oppostion by spin or Dravid grinding the opposition , I may not like but u may find that a cause to support.

Anyway, I do not want to change the topic of the thread. As I mentioned in my first post on this thread I think BCB made a mistake, showing his card

Rabz
August 29, 2006, 06:34 AM
I support Pakistan cricket team for its flair both batting and bowling. It does not mean I forgive them for their deed in 1971. So calling someone Rajakar is really offensive just he support Pakistan cricket/hocky team or Jansher Khan in Squash
But most of Indian team supporter of Bangaldesh follow your logic. So If I say those support India are agent of RAW or Indian Dalal would you agree? I fail to understand how one could support india after Farrakha, BSF . But i would not say so. Because those are equally offensive. Harbazan hypotinising oppostion by spin or Dravid grinding the opposition , I may not like but u may find that a cause to support.

Anyway, I do not want to change the topic of the thread. As I mentioned in my first post on this thread I think BCB made a mistake, showing his card

mate..u hv the right to support who ever u want to. its totally ur decision.

and when did i indicated that im an Indian supporter ?? :confused:

FYI, if i LOATHE Pakis, i DESPISE the indians. yes, i am a neighbour hater. sorry Moses, cant follow ur "Thou shall love thee neighbour" motto in this case.

and yes, sorry for the off topic again, but felt like needed to clarify that.

what we talking about again??
oh BCB with Paikka board on that tempering issue.
Surprisingly u will see i supported BCB's action. cuz i felt the pakis got hard done by, which have absolutely nothing to do whether i like them or not.

Just fair dinkum.

thebest
August 29, 2006, 07:05 AM
Sydney,
I never said you are an indian supporter, but i mention that your logic has been heard by me from indian supporter for so many times.
Anyway, in this issue though you do not like Pak team you are supporting BCB and i am going the opposite because I think BCB's act is quite premature. Dont show your card before you see the other hands. SL has a well published history with Hair, so SL can show. But we should not. We should just take a see and watch policy in public. Privately we could convey our support to PCB on this issue.

HawkEye000
August 29, 2006, 02:31 PM
Can't agree fully because the ball might be damaged by the stands, site screens etc. Not necessarily by any player. I am not a pakistan supporter still I feel that the decision went against them and it was injustice.

During that 3 overs(when the state of the ball suddenly changed) no boandary were hit and that's why the umpires put the blame on the fielders with their captain being responsible for whoever attempted to tamper with the ball.

HawkEye000
August 29, 2006, 02:35 PM
Please read this:


You cannot give video evidence for everything and with the current laws of ICC, Hair was going by the law. May be they can change the law if they think the on-field umpires are not the best judges for judging whether a ball was tampered with or not.

kalpurush
August 29, 2006, 11:21 PM
During that 3 overs(when the state of the ball suddenly changed) no boandary were hit and that's why the umpires put the blame on the fielders with their captain being responsible for whoever attempted to tamper with the ball.

The ball was already 51 over old at that time!(excluded "that 3 overs!!").:D

Rabz
August 30, 2006, 01:18 AM
Sydney,
I never said you are an indian supporter, but i mention that your logic has been heard by me from indian supporter for so many times.
Anyway, in this issue though you do not like Pak team you are supporting BCB and i am going the opposite because I think BCB's act is quite premature. Dont show your card before you see the other hands. SL has a well published history with Hair, so SL can show. But we should not. We should just take a see and watch policy in public. Privately we could convey our support to PCB on this issue.

A silent friend in times of need is good for nothing.
BCB wanted to show that they hv a mind of thier own and think accordingly.
Also, by backing Pak publicly puts ICC in a defense mood, as they r aware now that PCB got atleast 2 sure votes behind them. Weak or strong, we r 1 of the 10 that makes up the executive ICC and it matters.Everybody knows who BD would support, but that does not mean we hv to keep quite. BCB did a bold thing coming out and not acting like a chicken hiding under big brothers for mercy. It showed the whole world that we r here to stay and we hv an opinion, which we will are not afraid to be heard.

tell me, when u r in serious danger, would not u want your friends to come forward and stand beside u in public, rather than telling from the back like a coward that im with u.

As the old saying goes, a freind in need is a freind indeed.

Its also a solidarity with SL, as they hv supported our development over the years and played against us back and forth few times. I think since we got the test status, we played highest no of series against them.

kalpurush
August 30, 2006, 12:52 PM
A silent friend in times of need is good for nothing.
BCB wanted to show that they hv a mind of thier own and think accordingly.
Also, by backing Pak publicly puts ICC in a defense mood, as they r aware now that PCB got atleast 2 sure votes behind them. Weak or strong, we r 1 of the 10 that makes up the executive ICC and it matters.Everybody knows who BD would support, but that does not mean we hv to keep quite. BCB did a bold thing coming out and not acting like a chicken hiding under big brothers for mercy. It showed the whole world that we r here to stay and we hv an opinion, which we will are not afraid to be heard.

tell me, when u r in serious danger, would not u want your friends to come forward and stand beside u in public, rather than telling from the back like a coward that im with u.

As the old saying goes, a freind in need is a freind indeed.

Its also a solidarity with SL, as they hv supported our development over the years and played against us back and forth few times. I think since we got the test status, we played highest no of series against them.

Logical and true. :up:

sadi
August 30, 2006, 02:07 PM
I don't mind BCB giving support to whoever they want as long as they do their job properly. They still don't have a tv deal, mirpur stadium is not ready. They have thousand issues to worry about. Nijer kajer thik nai, onner kaje nak golano ki thik?

Ubiquitous
August 30, 2006, 03:19 PM
During that 3 overs(when the state of the ball suddenly changed) no boandary were hit and that's why the umpires put the blame on the fielders with their captain being responsible for whoever attempted to tamper with the ball.

Did the umpires actually inspect the ball 3 overs earlier?

akabir77
August 30, 2006, 03:30 PM
You cannot give video evidence for everything and with the current laws of ICC, Hair was going by the law. May be they can change the law if they think the on-field umpires are not the best judges for judging whether a ball was tampered with or not.
bhai ai threadi deawa achey jey ump doyer ki kora uchit acording to law and what they did so I don't know how you still can say hair was going by the law???
Incase u missed it.
.......
Hair's fault at Oval.

I had come across with a nice explanation on one another Cricket Forum. I will copy-paste some of it here. Those who think Hair did everything by the book think again. One can read the whole article by following the link.

What are those Pakistani’s complaining about? (by Mercenary)
http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/sh...ad.php?t=27309 (http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showthread.php?t=27309)

Denied appeals are an everyday part of cricket but then so is ball tampering we are told. Former England players like Fraser have admitted that it goes on all the time and the England team themselves have been accused that their sweet tooth on the field of play has more to do with the state of the cricket ball than a repetitive case of the munchies! Even players like Atherton, Waqar, Sachin, Akhtar, Dravid and others have had their collars felt for ball tampering in the recent past. What was so different about this accusation?

Well it’s quite simple. In the past umpires have pointed to a specific instance and named a specific individual. In short umpires have been full and frank with the fielding captain by telling him the exact reason, the specific instance and naming the perpetrator. This level of communication has helped to keep the situation in check because the fielding team know the details of what they have been accused of and why!

Aleem Dar said, any other umpire would have handled it better! To put it more simply; the problem wasn’t the awarding of the penalty, it was the lack of communication with the fielding captain about what was being done and why! Also by not singling out an individual or a specific instance of tampering, Hair had implicated the whole Pakistan team of a conspiracy to tamper the ball. This means he called each and every one of them cheaters!! Are you beginning to see why the Pakistan team would feel aggrieved this time and not the previous times?

Despite that insult the Pakistan team stayed on the field until play was called off for bad light. The extended tea break was the perfect opportunity for both umpires to visit the Pakistan team in the dressing room and set the record straight. But did they? No they didn’t!

The Pakistan team quite rightly felt this was neither professional nor acceptable and so they stayed in the dressing room as a form of protest. Are they allowed to do this? Of course they are!

But what happens once the Pakistan team choose to take this form of action? Well in that situation the laws place the burden of restarting the match squarely on the shoulders of both the on-field umpires. The law in question is quoted below…

21.3. Umpires awarding a match
(b) If an umpire considers that an action by any player or players might constitute a refusal by either side to play then the umpires together shall ascertain the cause of the action. If they then decide together that this action does constitute a refusal to play by one side, they shall so inform the captain of that side. If the captain persists in the action the umpires shall award the match in accordance with (a)(ii) above.

…according to the laws of cricket the burden now shifts to the umpires. They must get together and liaise with the captain of the side believed to be refusing to return to the field. They must speak to the captain until such a time as they become absolutely sure of the reason for the captain taking this action. This means they need to have a discussion with the captain because you can’t ascertain a cause any other way. Once they are sure of the reason for the action, both umpires are to decide whether this constitutes a refusal to play. If they are in agreement that this constitutes a refusal to play then they must inform the captain, if he persists then the match can be awarded to the opposition.

The problem at the Oval was that after returning from the pitch, Doctrove went to the England dressing room whilst Hair went to the Pakistani dressing room. Now Bell and Collingwood were both ready and waiting to take to the field so the problem was obviously in the Pakistani dressing room. So why did Doctrove go to the English dressing room when the laws required him to join Hair in the Pakistani dressing room? Hair’s job once he arrived at the Pakistani dressing room was to enter into a discussion with the Pakistani captain to ascertain the reason for the action they had taken. Instead (according to those who were there) the conversation went like this…

Hair: Are you coming out?
Inzi: Why did you change the ball?
Hair: I am not here to discuss that.

…now that isn’t a case of following the letter of the law. Hair’s job was not to demand that the team come out and play. His job according to the law he cherishes so much was to ascertain the reason for the action taken. Inzamam was in fact ready to have a discussion with the umpire about the reason for the action taken but it was Hair who was not interested in pinpointing the cause of the action! The lack of Doctrove’s presence also means that the law was not followed correctly because Hair the law requires the presence of and discussion between both of the umpires.

When Inzamam asked Hair for clarification on his decision, it was clear that Inzamam didn’t fully understand what he was being charged with. It then became the umpire’s responsibility to explain the details to Inzamam so that the umpire could then decide whether or not Inzamam’s reason for staying in the dressing room amounted to a refusal to play or to ask the umpire’s to clarify the rules. It’s neither unusual nor unheard of for participants to approach umpires/referees for clarification on the rules in sporting matters and it’s the umpire’s job to provide that clarity. Darrell Hair failed at his job when he refused to provide that clarity to Inzamam.

Even if both umpires had been present and the laws followed to the letter, what was the ECB chairman doing in the Pakistan dressing room? It’s a clear possibility that the Pakistan captain and manager were led to believe that the ECB chief’s presence was fully sanctioned and that they had enough time to restart the match. It’s probable that they felt the English dressing room was waiting for David Morgan’s signal before restarting the match. This would appear to be backed up by the fact that when the PCB and ECB chiefs were giving the thumbs up from the balcony, the Pakistani team returned to the field and were shocked and surprised to see that the match was over.

Hair based his decision to award the match on intuition, sixth sense and preconception. This is against the laws of cricket, fair play, decency and common sense. Therefore the forfeit against Pakistan must be removed and the match either restarted or corrected to mach abandoned due to umpire error.
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->__________________
After the WW II, Dr. Edwards Deming transformed Japan from an imitative nation to an innovative, quality driven nation in four years. He actually asked 5 years from the Emperor but finished his work in four years time anyways. There is hope for Bangladesh, only if we are united and sincere enough to build our nation.

Deming's First Theorem: "Nobody gives a hoot about profits."

original poster: <TABLE cellSpacing=5 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD noWrap>Tigers_eye (http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/member.php?u=1743) <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: postbit_onlinestatus -->http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/images/bc-green/statusicon/user_offline.gif <!-- END TEMPLATE: postbit_onlinestatus --><SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_332789", true); </SCRIPT>
Cricket Legend
</TD><TD width="100%"> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- / sig -->

HawkEye000
August 31, 2006, 10:32 PM
I don't know how you still can say hair was going by the law???
Incase u missed it.

This is what law 42.3 says,

"The match ball - changing its condition
(a) Any fielder may
(i) polish the ball provided that no artificial substance is used and that such polishing wastes no time.
(ii) remove mud from the ball under the supervision of the umpire.
(iii) dry a wet ball on a towel.

(b) It is unfair for anyone to rub the ball on the ground for any reason, interfere with any of the seams or the surface of the ball, use any implement, or take any other action whatsoever which is likely to alter the condition of the ball, except as permitted in (a) above.

(c) The umpires shall make frequent and irregular inspections of the ball.

(d) In the event of any fielder changing the condition of the ball unfairly, as set out in (b) above, the umpires after consultation shall
(i) change the ball forthwith. It shall be for the umpires to decide on the replacement ball, which shall, in their opinion, have had wear comparable with that which the previous ball had received immediately prior to the contravention.
(ii) inform the batsmen that the ball has been changed.
(iii) award 5 penalty runs to the batting side. See 17 below.
(iv) inform the captain of the fielding side that the reason for the action was the unfair interference with the ball.
(v) inform the captain of the batting side as soon as practicable of what has occurred.
(vi) report the occurrence as soon as possible to the Executive of the fielding side and any Governing Body responsible for the match, who shall take such action as is considered appropriate against the captain and team concerned."

So in no way was Hair going against the law when he gave the five run penalty and changed the ball. He didn't have to provide video evidence or pinpoint a player to penalise the Pakistan team. If he and Doctrove thought (after regular inspections) that the ball's state was unfairly changed then they can penalise Pakistan.

HawkEye000
August 31, 2006, 10:38 PM
Did the umpires actually inspect the ball 3 overs earlier?

Yes they inspected, the condition of the ball changed significantly within that 3 overs and the other thing to be noted was that no boundary were hit during that time. Teams like Pakistan, India and England and sometimes other team indulge in this kind of unethical activities and take unfair advantage. There should be no place for ball tampering in cricket and it should be stamped out.

HawkEye000
August 31, 2006, 10:50 PM
---

Tigers_eye
September 1, 2006, 08:38 AM
Post #94:
States,
"The match ball - changing its condition
(a) Any fielder may...

(d) In the event of any fielder changing the condition of the ball unfairly, as set out in (b) above, the umpires after consultation shall

Which fielder did that? All seeing Hair going by the law? Why can't he name any? Why blame the whole team? In the history of ball tampering, show me one instance where the umpire didn't point out the player.

The post also states that,
(iv) inform the captain of the fielding side that the reason for the action was the unfair interference with the ball.

Hair went by the book?
Then why did Inzi ask the question in locker room infront of everyone and Hair asnwering the following:

Inzi: Why did you change the ball?
Hair: I am not here to discuss that.

He lives England. He is settled in England. His wife is British. He oversees county matches. He is basically an English. Putting Hair incharge in matches where England is playing gives England their own umpire in one end. Check out how many plums weren't given on the 3rd Test.
Long live Hair and his controversial umpiring.

zia
September 1, 2006, 11:39 PM
I support Pakistan cricket team for its flair both batting and bowling. It does not mean I forgive them for their deed in 1971. So calling someone Rajakar is really offensive just he support Pakistan cricket/hocky team or Jansher Khan in Squash
But most of Indian team supporter of Bangaldesh follow your logic. So If I say those support India are agent of RAW or Indian Dalal would you agree? I fail to understand how one could support india after Farrakha, BSF . But i would not say so. Because those are equally offensive. Harbazan hypotinising oppostion by spin or Dravid grinding the opposition , I may not like but u may find that a cause to support.

Anyway, I do not want to change the topic of the thread. As I mentioned in my first post on this thread I think BCB made a mistake, showing his card

Though I hate to discuss political matters in a forum like this but just wanted to bring the facts about Pakistan and India in context of Bangladesh.

Pakistanis raped and killed innocent Bengalis where as India gave shelter to Benglis. You might say India had some motives behind supporting Bengalis then I would say the stupid Pakistanis made way for India. Now support whatever country you want ! You decide if you want to becme a Razakar or a raw agent!!

HawkEye000
September 2, 2006, 12:00 AM
(d) In the event of any fielder changing the condition of the ball unfairly, as set out in (b) above, the umpires after consultation shall

Which fielder did that?

According to the law, Hair and Doctrove don't need to pinpoint any fileder. If after frequent inspections they conclude that the ball was tampered with then they just need to change the ball, inform the captain etc.