Pakistan faces ball tampering allegation during 3rd test against England

[Miraz]

Final Breaking News at 10:25 PM
The fourth Test between England and Pakistan at The Oval has been forfeited as an England win, after a joint statement between the ICC, ECB and PCB.

[Orion]

Serves those Pakistanis right. They gave away a game they were winning.

[cricman]

Pakistan is most likely to cancel the ODI series and go back to Pakistan ASAP. Inzy did the right thing Hair is hopefully all but done from umpiring.

[babubangla]

International Cricket Council

Certificate of Appreciation

Presented to

Darrell Bruce Hair

For your umpiring service to ICC from 1992 to 2006.
Your contribution to international cricket reflect great credit upon yourself, ICC, Cricket Australia and the Umpire Community.

Signed
Malcolm Speed
Chief Executive
ICC

[Sovik]

pakistan should cancell odi series

[Hatebreed]

What a silly incident.. has it even been proved? If not, I hope this is the end of Darell Hair, and Pakistan should go home.

[Bancan]

i think the umpire did see sumthing. pakistan has been charged with following

"The issue of a charge or charges to be laid against Pakistan under the ICC's code of conduct will now be dealt with at the earliest possible opportunity. Pakistan has been charged under level two of the code of conduct, 2.10, which relates to changing the condition of the match ball."

[Rabz]

well, darrell always had something against the sub continentals..nothing new with that...

damn.. one breaking news after another...

etogula bhanga chura khobor hoye gelo..ar ami ghumaitesilam !!
dhett!!

i usually would never support Pak, but guess they r on the right here.
if Darrel the idiot can not produce any hard evidence, i think the paks should catch next flight and go back home. teach them english a good lesson as well.

[thebest]

Sydny it was not ECB's fault. So pak should not return. But I find one interesting thing. SKY with 26 cameras failed to spot one pakistani temparing with balls.
[quote] I am commentating here for the Sky television, and we have here a most high profile team of commentators and around 26 cameras that catch every moment of the action all the time throughout the day. Not one did catch a Pakistani fielder or a bowler tampering with the cherry.
It was therefore a subjective decision, not backed by any evidence, as neither was it witnessed by anyone nor caught on the camera [/quote} by Ramij Raja
Just to remind that ball was 55 over old and KP was hitting mercilessly. so there is every possibilty tht it was worn out naturally.
Listen to Dicky Bird's view .

[crickwizard]

This umpire is the worst of a kind. He has number of examples that were deliberate against most of the South Asian teams. If you have not followed his career, search Google with keyword 'Worst Umpire Darrell Hair" and see the result. Should be severely punished if can't provide evidence of ball tempering for the sake of keeping Cricket sprit alive

[Hatebreed]

In the end, what counts as evidence? The "eye witness" (i.e. umpire), or television footage?

If there is no evidence produced, clearly the umpire is being subjective on pure assumption.

I find it hard to believe no one except this guy has supposedly seen a Pakistani player do it. Even when Shahid Afridi tampered with the ball (in England's tour of Pak) amidst a little firebomb incident, the cameras (Sky tv) still picked him doing it and guess what, so did the batsman.. how ironic!

[imtiaz82]

Darrell hair is well known for his anti south asian stance, be it Srilanka or Pakistan. He is the same umpire who was involved in the Muralidharan incident. Such racist umpires should be banned from International cricket.

[Sovik]

inzamam did the right thing. none of the 26 cameras picked any images that the ball is being temperd

[Tintin]

Even when Shahid Afridi tampered with the ball (in England's tour of Pak)

Afridi danced on the wicket. That is a little more explicit than this

[Rabz]

Originally Posted by thebest
Sydny it was not ECB's fault. So pak should not return. But I find one interesting thing. SKY with 26 cameras failed to spot one pakistani temparing with balls.

mate i know ECB is not, its more like a spur of the moment comment. but
they r the innocent by-stander of the whole situation. after refunding 40% of 4th day and all of 5th day's ticket, the ECB has already lost £ 400,000. and would probably set to loose more if the some fans turn thier back on the remaining Paki games.

its a total shame what happened. let us wait and see what happens next.
the drama has just begun.

[Miraz]

An umpire should not take subjective decision without any evidence. He should know, if he is wrong, he is making a grave mistake in every respect by accusing a team with a serious allegation simply based on assumption.

If he had seen anyone tampering the ball, he should have mentioned the specific name and brought specific charge against him.

This is utter stupidity in the name of guts and and upholding the spirit of the game.

[Tintin]

If he had seen anyone tampering the ball, he should have mentioned the specific name and brought specific charge against him.

I am not sure whether anyone would pull up the seam right infront of the umpire. If the the ball shows obvious signs of tampering, that should be enough.

[Mr-Cricket]

ICC charges Inzamam
From correspondents in Dubai, UAE
August 21, 2006


THE International Cricket Council (ICC) charged Pakistan captain Inzamam-ul Haq with bringing the game into disrepute after his team forfeited the fourth Test against England at the Oval.

An ICC spokesman Jon Long said the charge was brought forward by the umpires.

“There are two charges brought forward by the umpires, one for changing the condition of the ball and the other for bringing the game into disrepute,” he said.

Reuters

[Mr-Cricket]

Originally Posted by Mr-Cricket
An ICC spokesman Jon Long said the charge was brought forward by the umpires.

There's no stopping Darrel Hair. Or the ICC for that matter.

May well be the most stubborn Umpire/Organistation on the planet.

[Mr-Cricket]

Inzamam faces eight-match ban Cricinfo staff August 21, 2006 http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/engv...ry/257357.html Eight match ban. Right. And Hair will get off scot free I presume? It's actually quite humourous if you think about it for long enough.

[Fazal]

Originally Posted by Tintin
I am not sure whether anyone would pull up the seam right infront of the umpire. If the the ball shows obvious signs of tampering, that should be enough.

I don't think so. That may be enough to change the ball, but not enough to call that ball have been tampered intentionally. By awarding 5 penulty runs and refused to explain, Hair pretty much did that: without explaining who did that, when they did that, and the proof that whoever did that. And there lies the controversy and premature end of a fine game.

Now someone can bring up some rule # x.y.z from the book try to spin to support what Hair did, but to normal cricket fans, who have some grey matrial in their head, knows who messed up this fine game in the first place. Its the ego of that []. There is no iff or butts in that, we just need to use our commen sense to conclude that.

[Miraz]

Originally Posted by Fazal
I don't think so. That may be enough to change the ball, but not enough to call that ball have been tampered intentionally. By awarding 5 penulty runs and refused to explain, Hair pretty much did that: without explaining who did that, when they did that, and the proof that whoever did that. And there lies the controversy and premature end of a fine game.

Now someone can bring up some rule # x.y.z from the book try to spin to support what Hair did, but to normal cricket fans, who have some grey matrial in their head, knows who messed up this fine game in the first place. Its the ego of that []. There is no iff or butts in that, we just need to use our commen sense to conclude that.

I second you.

This is utter stupidity in the name of guts and and upholding the spirit of the game by Darrel ( ) Hair.

[thebest]

Tintin you are quite right. But can I kindly remind you that there were 26 cameras covering every inches of field for the whole period. All the instances where team were find tampering with ball was caught by camera not by umpires. In one of the game, the umpire was Dicky Bird. In cricinfo article on readers view one ask the question whether Mr Hair can even apply the law on ball temparing. I am quoting for you

Law 42.3 states that in "the event of any fielder changing the condition of the ball unfairly ..." Who was the fielder? And if there was none identified, how was the law correctly applied?

Application of law does not mean reading by book, but by spirit of law.
Mr Hair I think very much irritated that Pakistan officialy lodged complain againest him and his officiating in this test. So he was just trying to show who is the boss. And Mr Docrave, he is as uncompetant as our Mahboob.
By the way, cricinfo fail to mention Artherton's dirt in the pocket ball temparing

[Tigers_eye]

Mr. Hair could have handled it a little better.

1. When you charge someone for cheating, don't you have to let the person/party know that they are cheating or they cheated?

2. In the locker room when the umpires walked in to see if the Paki palyers were coming out or not, did the captain have no right to ask the questioned what he asked? The question was why the ball was changed and why they got penalized? A simple question but the answer of Mr. Hair was, I don't have to answer that here. or something to that nature. You are penalizing without evidence and you are can't answer the simple question? What strong charecter he has?

Hair should be banned from Intl cricket cause he thinks he is the law and does not have to explain his audacious behavior.

Now this 8 match ban is a joke. What would a board do if our Mahabub did that?

[Sovik]

i think ACC should make a stand and back inzamam. he has done the right thing. He was accused of cheating and facing 8 match ban.