Oval Test result 'to be changed'

[Insomniac]

Where does it say that Hair was the lone umpire in that Test?

The difference between Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove is this.

Billy Doctrove is incompetent. He is not purposely biased.

Secondly, all those abnormal decisions from Darrell Hair that I posted on the previous page back the idea that Darrell Hair is biased.

Billy Doctrove has happily stood in tests and ODIs with Pakistan, and have seen no problems, other than LBWs and caught behinds not given. But thats down to his own incompetence.

If you read Billy Doctrove's testimony, he states that he listened to Hair because he was the senior umpire (which is true), and just followed his opinion.

 

[Sureshot]

The 'senior umpire' was his false opinion of the situation, 'senior umpires' aren't designated for a match. All Umpires make errors, from the Taufel to Hair, from Harper to Doctrove. Just because he makes them against your team doesn't mean he is biased. You have no proof other than your own biassed opinion.

 

[usy]

such a big issue wow, i'm amazed.

7 pages, the earth got boring.

 

[sohum]

The 'senior umpire' was his false opinion of the situation, 'senior umpires' aren't designated for a match.

Just like senior players aren't designated for a cricket team. However, they still exist. Everything does not need to be designated for a hierarchy to exist.

 

[Insomniac]

Sureshot, are you serious?

Do these look like COMMON ERRORS?

I want to finish this thread off by saying, The Oval test match was theft, commited by a bigoted Australian umpire.

Darrell Hair has over the course of the last NINE years penalized ONE team after Sri Lanka repeatedly in incomprehensible ways.

Turning down PLUMB LBWs and caught behinds was not enough for this man.

Darrell Hair is the ONLY umpire I have EVER seen disallow a CLEAN BOWLED from square leg. The wicket keeper was ABSOLUTELY NEVER NEAR the stumps during this incident
when the ball racked the off stump. (Saqlain Mushtaq v B Lara (?) Pakistan v West Indies, WC 99)

Hair is the ONLY umpire to penalize a batsman for running down the wicket, without EVER giving a warning to the batsman. The fact that the batsman stepped off of the wicket after taking his inital step makes it even more indefensible. (Salman Butt v England, 2nd Test, 2005)

Darrell Hair is the ONLY umpire to give a batsman out AFTER HE HAS MADE HIS GROUND, just for jumping out of the way of a delivery after a bowler (Harmison). It was completely against the spirit of the game, and the LAWS of the game (I thought Hair was a policeman)
(Inzamam-ul-Haq v England, 2nd Test, 2005)

Darrell Hair is the ONLY umpire to make the impossible happen. He is completely corrupt, bigoted, and a CHEATER, that he even managed to make Sir Ian Botham sympathize with Pakistan.

Fact is, Darrell Hair was, and will always be a corrupt cheating lying scumbag.

If you cannot digest the points above, then I seriously do not know what to say. There is COMPLETE video proof of all the incidents above on Youtube.

How can those be SIMPLE errors like caught behinds and LBWs?

Tell me honestly - would Simon Taufel do any of those things in the same situtations? No. Simon Taufel is pure class and has always been.

If you can show me ANY other umpire doing those things to any other team in the same circumstances, then please do so.

zMario added 1 Minutes and 35 Seconds later...

The 'senior umpire' was his false opinion of the situation, 'senior umpires' aren't designated for a match. All Umpires make errors, from the Taufel to Hair, from Harper to Doctrove. Just because he makes them against your team doesn't mean he is biased. You have no proof other than your own biassed opinion.

Senior players exist in the team and are not designated positions.

Just as sohummisra pointed out.

I don't see selectors saying right, we need 8 senior players, 3 junior players.

 

[Sureshot]

Well Darrell Harper turned down a plumb LBW from Monty today. In fact I can think of most Test matches involving a plumb LBW decision being turned down. It happens, doesn't mean it's a deliberate ploy.

As for the clean bowled dismissal, I haven't seen the wicket so I can't comment. However, I have seen situations where the square leg umpire has to call for the 3rd umpire when a batsman was clean bowled. Optical illusion, it happens. I've been in a game at school where the very same thing happened. Our teacher was biassed?

Mistakes happen, doesn't mean he is biassed. No proof, what so ever.

I can understand you being very annoyed and angry about the situation. But it takes two to tango. I'm not saying Hair didn't make mistakes, he did, but so did Doctrove. Doctrove put his input into the situation. It was a culmination of several people making mistakes.

 

[evertonfan]

One of the umpires today turned down a stonewall lbw decision against Neil McKenzie. What an absolute disgrace the state of umpireing is. They are all biased against England, they should all be sacked let's make sure they never umpire Tests against England again. Now let's all go to the dressing room, lock the doors and cry a lot.

 

[m_vaughan]

For once I agree with Matt

 

[sohum]

Some people need to learn how to read. :

Or try answering a point that I have made... about a mistaken allegation of cheating being far more serious and way different from making a mistake while making an LBW or caught behind dismissal. I'm tired of saying it again and again.

 

[PhilD123]

Some people need to learn how to read. :

Or try answering a point that I have made... about a mistaken allegation of cheating being far more serious and way different from making a mistake while making an LBW or caught behind dismissal. I'm tired of saying it again and again.

To be fair, I think Matt's post was more directed towards zMario, who did say about LBW's and caught behinds.

No matter what happened during the day, Pakistan were given a deadline to return to the pitch by, they didn't meet this deadline, and locked themselves in their dressing room, the game starts when the umpire says, not when Pakistan dictate like they tried to do. Therefore it was a forfeiture of the game.

 

[sohum]

To be fair, I think Matt's post was more directed towards zMario, who did say about LBW's and caught behinds.

In which case it was a mix-up of two different things: (1) zMario's (somewhat misdirected) accusations of bias on the part of Darrell Hair and (2) the cheating allegation leading to a protest leading to a forfeiture, etc. It is the equating of cheating with (1) that I disagree with.

 

[Insomniac]

Here's a question - why didn't Billy Bowden and Daryl Harper take off the bails when South Africa were late coming on to the field on Day 2?

Was at least a period of 10 minutes. We came back on the field (after England batsmen) in 7 minutes (timed).

Sureshot - if you can say everything above that I said is an HONEST mistake, then you really have a lot of faith in Darrell Hair because perhaps you know him

Read the running between the wickets one with Salman and the Inzy one.

Seriously, this man has serious problems.

 

[Sureshot]

Some people need to learn how to read. :

Or try answering a point that I have made... about a mistaken allegation of cheating being far more serious and way different from making a mistake while making an LBW or caught behind dismissal. I'm tired of saying it again and again.

None of us have argued that point, Sohum, because there is nothing to argue about it. Hair made a costly mistake.

To raise another huge error from an umpire. Bowden giving out Kasper at Edgbaston.

 

[Insomniac]

None of us have argued that point, Sohum, because there is nothing to argue about it. Hair made a costly mistake.

To raise another huge error from an umpire. Bowden giving out Kasper at Edgbaston.

How many times do we have to say this?

There is a difference between CAUGHT BEHINDS and LBWS and an allegation of cheating.

 

[Sureshot]

Where did I say they were the same? No where. Stop reading things that aren't there.