Hair sacked from ICC Panel

[andrew_nixon]

He'd lost the confidence and respect of most the teams.

Exactly. He's been incompetent for years now, and I'm surprised anyone actually voted to keep him on the panel.

 

[manee]

They may have simply voted to even up the votes, if they were on the fence. I think it is quite obvious that he had to go.

 

[sohum]

This reminds me of when the World Cup was given to the subcontinent. The same cries of "who is running cricket" came up; quite baseless. Each test-playing nation has an equal vote, and there are more non-Asian countries than Asian ones. So it is obviously not a case of the "Asian bloc ruling cricket".

And if Hair in fact did rule correctly in the Pakistan incident, that suggests that either the ICC rules are inconsistent or that the verdict from the ICC is unfair. Why would the ICC justify either of these cases, especially in a fiasco that caused them to lose much face.

 

[aussie1st]

Had to happen this case was always Hair or Pakistan with the loser facing problems, once the ICC ruled in favour off Pakistan he had no hope of continuing his umpiring career.

 

[manee]

Without a doubt, Pakistani cricket is in ruins now, Hair's sacking is a small consolation for them.

 

[nightprowler10]

Without a doubt, Pakistani cricket is in ruins now, Hair's sacking is a small consolation for them.

I think we've been in situations that were almost as bad if not worse, just the timing totally sucks.

 

[manee]

Captain banned, your best fast bowling prospect banned for a year and your top opening bowler too, that is bad enough. If the ICC had turned on them over the Hair issue, Pakistan maybe have even lost their test status.

 

[Gunner786]

its weird how they didnt give the umpiring jobs to the best umpires for the most high profile series on at the time

simon taufel and one of the other umpires should have been umpires

billy doctrove is one of the worst umpires there ever has been

 

[rickyp]

just because they are the best umpires doesnt mean they have to umpire the best series. They have families too and im fairly sure they wouldnt mind some time off to see them

 

[smssia0112]

Exactly. He's been incompetent for years now, and I'm surprised anyone actually voted to keep him on the panel.

He's an umpire, he doesn't need respect or confidence, and as for him being incompetent, what makes him incompetent? That he follows the rules, he is the only umpire who does so in world cricket, I would easily vote for him as umpire of the year.

Yes, that is what I was trying to say. Without respect and with a scandal written all over his name, how can he continue to umpire in high publicity matches.

Why not? He did it after No-balling Murali, for years even.

This reminds me of when the World Cup was given to the subcontinent. The same cries of "who is running cricket" came up; quite baseless. Each test-playing nation has an equal vote, and there are more non-Asian countries than Asian ones. So it is obviously not a case of the "Asian bloc ruling cricket".

They have a lot of influence, they bring a lot of money to cricket and a lot of countries don't like to disagree with them, the ICC even moreso.

There a dozen more posts I could quote and argue with, but it hardly surprises me that the Asians agree with it, as for countries voting against the decision as 'sitting on the fence', why wouldn't Australia vote against it, or England or New Zealand for that matter? They all see through Pakistan's whingeing about racism. The one I'm surprised with is South Africa, clearly they are influenced by the Asians.

All I can say is, when will all of you wake up and realise that the more Pakistan do wrong the more they try and point the finger and blame someone else? Whether they were guilty of ball-tampering or not, Darrell Hair AND BILLY DOCTROVE TOO (there were 2 umpires believe it or not, one of whom is black, big gasp maybe he is racist too and hates his own race) made a decision, you don't need footage of something to suspect it, Police arrest people without evidence all the time if they are suspected of doing something then acting is necessary, and then Pakistan did the wrong thing and wasted the game, before Hair decided enough was enough, and then because somethign went against them they called together the Asians and blamed someone else, and the ICC had to bow to the pressure of their biggest moneymakers. You know it's true, and if you don't then you should open your other eye.

 

[Outlaw91]

Very harsh on HAir. He was just following the rules and he got sacked for it. The ICC are all afraid of punishing the cheating Pakistanis. (note: I am only refering to the Pakistanis who cheat not all of the Pakistanis)

 

[Adarsh]

I don't think that people feel that Hair is particularly racist (some do), but it's just that he's made a lot of big, very controversial decisions, which haven't been good for cricket.

 

[Sureshot]

Very harsh on HAir. He was just following the rules and he got sacked for it. The ICC are all afraid of punishing the cheating Pakistanis. (note: I am only refering to the Pakistanis who cheat not all of the Pakistanis)

Well Shoaib and Asifs tests were done under the PCBs own jurisdiction (I can't think of the right word atm) so the ICC can't intervene iirc.

 

[zimrahil]

Whether they were guilty of ball-tampering or not, Darrell Hair AND BILLY DOCTROVE TOO (there were 2 umpires believe it or not,

This has really bugged me through all out of this - both umpires had to agree the ball has been tampered with. I accept Hair might have been the senior umpire but nothing would have happened without Doctrove's consent yet he has come out of all this totally unscathed :

 

[sohum]

Now, the only accusations of racism are coming from the people who think the Asian bloc had something nefarious under their sleeves, with regards to Hair's removal. Pakistan's whole stand during the incident was not that Hair was targeting them because he was racist. Their stand was that he had disrespected their country and their cricketing feats by accusing them of ball-tampering without any evidence (and I can safely conclude this after the ICC's investigation).

Now, if Hair did in fact follow the rules to perfection, how come he came out on the wrong side of the ICC investigation? As I said earlier, the ICC admits that Hair was wrong in his decision, and they may have also subtly admitted that their rules are not comprehensive.