Well actually those guys may aswell have tampered after what I read about Mohammad Asif, take those Pakistani Cricket players, and give each them a slap. The image they're giving to the Cricket world. zMario, you shouldn't be talking atm.
Oval Test result 'to be changed'
- Thread starter Owzat
- Start date
Insomniac
Title Recipient
Then why bring up those umpiring decisions which are not the same as the one that I mention?
Ban Sureshot for being offtopic
Then why bring up those umpiring decisions which are not the same as the one that I mention?
Ban Sureshot for being offtopic
http://www.planetcricket.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1153271&postcount=74
You brought up umpiring mistakes (note; I'm not including the Oval debacle
), I was pointing out that every other umpire in the existence of the game has made bad decisions relating to on-field appeals, etc.
Check and mate
Insomniac
Title Recipient
Those are not normal caught behinds and LBWs.http://www.planetcricket.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1153271&postcount=74
You brought up umpiring mistakes (note; I'm not including the Oval debacle
One is a CLEAN BOWLED decision. 2 Others are completely undefendable decisions.
Highlander999
ICC President
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2006
- Location
- London
Get over it?
Mistakes happen and this is just silly throwing phrases around like corrupt and biased, when there is no actual evidence of him accepting bribes etc and it is just appearing childish
Mistakes happen and this is just silly throwing phrases around like corrupt and biased, when there is no actual evidence of him accepting bribes etc and it is just appearing childish
Insomniac
Title Recipient
Tom -
How is this an innocent mistake? There IS actual evidence of him asking and offering from the ICC $500,000 to step down and admit that he was wrong.
smssia0112
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2005
It says in the ICC rules that Hair has the power to call a game off if a team refuses to take the field when he tells them to. It says that the umpires have the power to penalise a team 5 runs if they are believed to have tampered with the ball. As for bias, you have highlighted a few bad decisions which prove nothing. Every umpire makes mistakes, and Hair has the best record of all the ICC umpires in terms of correct decisions. How on Earth would he get to the top if he was biased against two countries for the past decade?
aus5892 added 1 Minutes and 7 Seconds later...
Yes, because he wanted to avoid the controversy and wanted some retirement money. It may not look great, but it's hardly worse than what the ICC do on a regular basis.
Insomniac
Title Recipient
Dean - I have highlighted BIG decisions. These decisions are not decisions that you use technology for. How the hell can you stop a clean-bowled from square leg? Where does it say in the rules thats allowed?
How can you penalize a batsman without giving him a warning for suppousedly running on the pitch although he was NOWHERE near it.
How can you give a batsman out for getting out of the way of a throw from a bowler?
These ARE not BAD decisions. If they are bad decisions, then Darrell Hair would never had made it past the first-class scene.
Tell me Dean - why was Hair banned from umpiring in matches with Sri Lanka?
Tell me right now. Exactly WHY?
zMario added 0 Minutes and 52 Seconds later...
So he wants to accuse a team of ball-tampering, so he gets a free $500,000?
Highlander999
ICC President
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2006
- Location
- London
This does sound a bit like the kettle calling the pot black. Pakistan aren't exactly the most controversy free team, now are they? It's a good month when one of there players isn't involved or arrested for assault, drugs etc.
If the umpire thinks the keeper took the bails off with his gloves, it can be a simple mistake to make as the gloves of the keeper can very close to the stumps. I even pointed out that I've been involved in games where it has happened. I've seen it on TV aswell.
Your evidence is for him being biassed against Pakistan is weak. If it weren't the PCB would have used it to their advantage.
Because they threatened to pull out of any matches he was umpiring in, he wasn't 'banned'.
He admitted his wrong-doing by offering his resignation in the letter. The $500,000 was for loss of earnings for the money he would have earned from the rest of his contract. Compensation settlement/buying out his contract, whatever you want to call it.
He has served his punishment. I am now happy to see him back behind the stumps. I'd certainly have him over some other current umpires. Bowden and Harper for instance.
The fact the man received death threats is an indication of how utterly ridiculous the over reaction was/has been.
Last edited:
smssia0112
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2005
Bad umpiring is always the complaint, there have been some pretty bad decisions going against all countries, Australia was robbed of the Ashes by Billy Bowden but we don't go around crying bias. Everyone gets bad decisions, calling someone biased without any basis (bad decisions are not evidence of bias) simply because he's white and Pakistan get a bad run from him is ridiculous. Once again, if Hair was completely biased against Pakistan he would never have
IIRC Hair was suspended by the ACB (as they were known back then) from Sri Lanka matches to avoid further controversy and outcries from the Sri Lankan Cricket Board and the ICC, not to mention the fact that they had no choice because Sri Lanka were going to refuse to play if he umpired.
So now you're creating a ridiculous analogy of precedents. Hair certainly didn't do the whole thing for money. He is a very courageous umpire who is willing to apply the laws as he sees them without fear of controversy. I see him as one of the few people out there who are standing up against the raging politics in cricket.zMario said:
So you think a team tampering with a ball in a Cricket match against England is politics?
Imagine that a umpire was Pakistani and he accused the Aussies of ball tampering in a Ashes series, I know Ponting is likely to continue the match, but what would be the fans reaction... I’d like you know? are you guys that good..
Imagine that a umpire was Pakistani and he accused the Aussies of ball tampering in a Ashes series, I know Ponting is likely to continue the match, but what would be the fans reaction... I’d like you know? are you guys that good..
sohum
Executive member
I think the efforts to justify Darrell Hair's "settlement" are badly placed, especially given it was under-the-table and not really any sort of formal compensation method.
smssia0112
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2005
Are you really that ignorant that you think politics haven't been waging their war against Hair because he pulled them up? It's politics that scares umpires from making decisions they feel are correct such as a ball tampering incident.
As for if we were accused, I imagine we'd be upset, but there'd be no excuse for refusing to take the field. We'd make a formal complaint, and I can tell you as sure as anything that we wouldn't be pulling the race/bias card out of our pockets, regardless of who it was.
aus5892 added 1 Minutes and 0 Seconds later...
It was certainly misguided, but I don't think it was as bad as some people make it out to be. I'm not justifying it, but if he felt his job was under threat then asking for some settlement money wouldn't be an unfair reaction. Maybe I am justifying it.
sohum
Executive member
Well, to use your own argument on you, Darrell Hair should have followed the correct procedure to get compensation--i.e. moving the court against the ICC. Asking for an under-the-table settlement definitely wasn't the correct protocol to follow if he felt his job was under threat.
