Darrell Hair reinstated as Test Match Umpire

[Highlander999]

Motion passed

 

[lancashire666]

hes to busy these days watching barnsley win the fa cup lol

 

[0601731]

I will say Bring back Dickie Bird.

how about good old shep???

 

[vaibhav mehta]

He also busy watching Man U lost by some under rated teams..Lol.

 

[Kev]

I'll tell you one thing for sure, if Dickie Bird thought someone was cheating he'd call them on it too. He's a Yorkshireman, they're never shy of telling you their opinions

Do you know what, Hair may have been wrong, but to still take it personally or to still see it as a slight on your country is just petty minded and pathetic. I can forgive people for making mistakes afterall everybody makes them. At least he has the courage to stand by his decisions, something many people dont have.

 

[vaibhav mehta]

Oho So Is this Yorkshire's Character???..lol..

 

[Cricketman]

To him, the marks on the ball were proof. I'm not saying Pakistan did tamper but you can't always catch someone in the act so. You can't go tip-toeing around everyone because you think it might cause a backlash. Hair had the balls to do what he did.

Hair and balls....lol
Immature post but meh

 

[Sureshot]

I'll tell you one thing for sure, if Dickie Bird thought someone was cheating he'd call them on it too. He's a Yorkshireman, they're never shy of telling you their opinions

Do you know what, Hair may have been wrong, but to still take it personally or to still see it as a slight on your country is just petty minded and pathetic. I can forgive people for making mistakes afterall everybody makes them. At least he has the courage to stand by his decisions, something many people dont have.

Good point Kev. The thought of an umpire saying "I thought they tampered with it." and did nothing in the aftermath is horrible.

 

[smssia0112]

IIRC he tried to settle for a largish amount to retire from the game.

Doesn't make usy any less wrong regarding the issue though. The money decision was a poor one, but at the same time it was one that had very little to do with his umpiring and the ball tampering issue.

 

[manee]

I don't really have strong views either way on this topic but...

Hair had a right to call Pakistan up for ball tampering. If he feels that the ball is unfit and has been tampered with, then it is his decision to change it. I think the problem arose at the five penalty runs, because at that point, a simply ball change becomes an accusation of cheating. Perhaps this area of the rules needs to be looked into. Pakistan had no right to stand in protest, since the rule of the umpires should not be disputed by the players. The umpires should have the ultimate power and the players do not have a right on the field to challenge it. If an umpire does something which is clearly out of order, then they will be pulled up for it by the Match Referee or the ICC, the players do not need to act to show their dismay - that is what media conferences are for.

Assuming he was wrong, what difference does it have to a bad LBW decision? It is not as if Pakistan have an innocent history in terms of ball tampering. I have seen footage of both Waqar and Wasim scratching the ball with their nails and Imran Khan has admitted to the act in one of his books. This is not senseless descrimination, this is sensible descrimination. If a team has players who has ball tampered over the past two decades, it is not unreasonable to pay extra attention in case they do in a third.

I think that in televised games, they should have a camera which follows the ball at all times; whether they implant a tiny tracking chip in the centre of the ball or someone has an extremely boring job is irrelevant; it is a necessity these days as the rules stand.

Hair should not have been banned, but realistically speaking, there is no way that he can fully command respect from Pakistan nor can he umpire a game without being under scrutiny and almost stealing the limelight from the players. An umpire needs to be nondescript and this is no longer possible with Hair. I don't think that he should have been reinstated so quickly, perhaps he should have umpired more low profile matches first.

 

[smssia0112]

I'd love the see the prosecution in a court case use an assumption as the basis of their prosecution. See how far you get.

"Well, sir. It looked like they tampered with it."

But he didn't take them to court, he asked for a new run and penalised them 5 runs.

The point is that umpires have the leeway to make a decision and they cannot be reversed. It's one thing if he'd called the game off there and then but he only gave out a small penalty.

I don't really have strong views either way on this topic but...

Hair had a right to call Pakistan up for ball tampering. If he feels that the ball is unfit and has been tampered with, then it is his decision to change it. I think the problem arose at the five penalty runs, because at that point, a simply ball change becomes an accusation of cheating. Perhaps this area of the rules needs to be looked into. Pakistan had no right to stand in protest, since the rule of the umpires should not be disputed by the players. The umpires should have the ultimate power and the players do not have a right on the field to challenge it. If an umpire does something which is clearly out of order, then they will be pulled up for it by the Match Referee or the ICC, the players do not need to act to show their dismay - that is what media conferences are for.

Assuming he was wrong, what difference does it have to a bad LBW decision? It is not as if Pakistan have an innocent history in terms of ball tampering. I have seen footage of both Waqar and Wasim scratching the ball with their nails and Imran Khan has admitted to the act in one of his books. This is not senseless descrimination, this is sensible descrimination. If a team has players who has ball tampered over the past two decades, it is not unreasonable to pay extra attention in case they do in a third.

I think that in televised games, they should have a camera which follows the ball at all times; whether they implant a tiny tracking chip in the centre of the ball or someone has an extremely boring job is irrelevant; it is a necessity these days as the rules stand.

Hair should not have been banned, but realistically speaking, there is no way that he can fully command respect from Pakistan nor can he umpire a game without being under scrutiny and almost stealing the limelight from the players. An umpire needs to be nondescript and this is no longer possible with Hair. I don't think that he should have been reinstated so quickly, perhaps he should have umpired more low profile matches first.

Fantastic post, really sums up what I'm trying to say.

As for the final point, he was umpiring associates while he was off the panel.

 

[manee]

As for the final point, he was umpiring associates while he was off the panel.

Yes, but not for very long.

 

[sohum]

Doesn't make usy any less wrong regarding the issue though. The money decision was a poor one, but at the same time it was one that had very little to do with his umpiring and the ball tampering issue.

I though the money settling offer came immediately after the ball tampering issue when Hair realized that he had nothing going for him. So how can it have very little to do with the ball tampering issue? Hair wouldn't have looked for a settlement if his place wasn't under question.

Assuming he was wrong, what difference does it have to a bad LBW decision? It is not as if Pakistan have an innocent history in terms of ball tampering. I have seen footage of both Waqar and Wasim scratching the ball with their nails and Imran Khan has admitted to the act in one of his books. This is not senseless descrimination, this is sensible descrimination. If a team has players who has ball tampered over the past two decades, it is not unreasonable to pay extra attention in case they do in a third.

I hope you are not one who complains about South Asians (and especially Muslims and people of Sikh backgrounds) getting extra security attention when entering the US or UK. Because that is essentially what you are suggesting. IMO, that's nothing short of racism, because you are discriminating against their honesty based on their nationality.

 

[manee]

I hope you are not one who complains about South Asians (and especially Muslims and people of Sikh backgrounds) getting extra security attention when entering the US or UK. Because that is essentially what you are suggesting. IMO, that's nothing short of racism, because you are discriminating against their honesty based on their nationality.

Noting a race as suicide bombers and ball tamperers is different. Hair had evidence too. I believe that a lead (the equivalance of the tampered ball) should be followed extremely closely if it is with someone with an extremist muslim background than others - obviously, ideally, all leads should be followed as closely as possible but that is not obviously realistic.

I am not sure what discrimination against those of Sikh backgrounds has to do with selective descrimination but I am always happy to cooperate with authorities to make the process quick and effective. I'd rather be descriminated against, than risk an unsafe flight.

 

[sohum]

Noting a race as suicide bombers and ball tamperers is different. Hair had evidence too. I believe that a lead (the equivalance of the tampered ball) should be followed extremely closely if it is with someone with an extremist muslim background than others - obviously, ideally, all leads should be followed as closely as possible but that is not obviously realistic.

It's just an analogy. And I wouldn't call someone who played 1-2 decades ago for the same country a lead. Also, the ball isn't the lead in this situation, it is the fact that Imran, Waqar and Wasim used to play for Pakistan. Unless your theory is that all Pakistani fast bowlers are ball tamperers, in which case a tampered ball is indeed a lead; but I am sure that is not your theory.

I am not sure what discrimination against those of Sikh backgrounds has to do with selective descrimination but I am always happy to cooperate with authorities to make the process quick and effective. I'd rather be descriminated against, than risk an unsafe flight.

They are essentially selectively discriminating against people with browner skin and facial hair. And the whole point is that the fact that they already have profile set up for their ideal criminal. It is strange to see that all the "randomized secondary check" candidates in the US seem to be non-Caucasian people.

Let me clarify what I see your argument as:

1. Umpire sees tampered ball.
2. Umpire checks nationality of bowling team and finds them to be Pakistani.
3. Umpire makes connection with Waqar/Wasim/Imran.
4. Umpire calls ball tampering on the fielding team.

Now, I'm not suggesting that this is what Hair did, but that is what I read from your argument that Pakistani bowlers should be treated with more suspicion.