Pakistan in England/Scotland 2006

[RoboRocks]

Even though Pakistan could be inocent.
They could of settled this at the end of the game instead of risking forfiet
I though it was a stupid thing to do from Darell Hair but I feel Pakistan had a test match to win here.

 

[Eddie]

I voted Straus England man of the series..always looked in great touch, played some important innings.

I was aamzed to see the Pakistan run aggregates..on 3 batsmen had over 100 runs in the whole series...

Whilst england had 5 batsman with 350 run aggregates..(including last test)

 

[barmyarmy]

Well I respect your opinion and rating but as far as the man of the series is concerned it is Mohammad Yousuf. He lead the Pakistani batting from the front and has made big runs almost every innings. Pakistan just lacked the fire power in their bowling otherwise he had provided some good runs in all the innings he has played not only in this series but throughout the year of 2006.

There are usually men of the series, one from each team, and then an overall man of the series which would almost certainly go to Yousuf.

 

[evertonfan]

Well I respect your opinion and rating but as far as the man of the series is concerned it is Mohammad Yousuf. He lead the Pakistani batting from the front and has made big runs almost every innings. Pakistan just lacked the fire power in their bowling otherwise he had provided some good runs in all the innings he has played not only in this series but throughout the year of 2006.

I was talking about England's man of the series, which I think is Strauss. However, the overall man of the series is definitley Yousef.

That's why they've been beating you guys for several years until the past series. :laugh

And this will wake some Australian fans.

It was a joke! Australia are a lot better than England at the moment.

 

[ZexyZahid]

I voted Straus England man of the series..always looked in great touch, played some important innings.

I was aamzed to see the Pakistan run aggregates..on 3 batsmen had over 100 runs in the whole series...

Whilst england had 5 batsman with 350 run aggregates..(including last test)

Very good counting.

Bell, Strauss and Cook have over 350 runs including last Test. Pietersen had almost 350 runs. He was stuck on 347 runs. So that makes four batsmen with 350 runs (and above) aggregates. Collingwood has 324 runs.

Pakistan had three batsmen with 100+ aggregates in Mohammad Yousuf, Younis Khan and Inzamam-ul-Haq. But you forgot to add Imran Farhat, Kamran Akmal and Faisal Iqbal as the 100+ aggregates. (including this Test). Hafeez was stuck on 95 runs.

And first match, if the ODI series go ahead, will be a Twenty20 match on 28th August. That's something to look forward too.

 

[ali_ed2001]

I expect some Afridi fireworks in 20/20 and odi's

 

[barmyarmy]

"ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed also spoke to umpire Darrell Hair by phone from Dubai.

"Following these meetings the umpires decided that, having made the decision to award the match to England, to change that decision would not be in keeping with the Laws of Cricket. The ICC backs the decision of the umpires.

"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."

I can see this one dragging on and on. When are they going to do the presentation as well? I can just imagine the part where they present commemerative medallions to the umpires...

 

[evertonfan]

I can see this one dragging on and on. When are they going to do the presentation as well? I can just imagine the part where they present commemerative medallions to the umpires...

I reckon they'll scrap it to be honest and all of the player of the series business will be done behind closed doors. It's such a shame really.

 

[barmyarmy]

I reckon they'll scrap it to be honest and all of the player of the series business will be done behind closed doors. It's such a shame really.

I'd agree with you except as far as I'm aware they can't as Npower are the sponsors and the presentation ceremony is as much/more for them as for the players.

 

[evertonfan]

I'd agree with you except as far as I'm aware they can't as Npower are the sponsors and the presentation ceremony is as much/more for them as for the players.

It would be very hard to shed some good light on the umpires though, which coud ruin a perfectly good presentation. Maybe they should give out all the awards and do all the interviews, but give the umpires the medallions privatley.

 

[barmyarmy]

@ cric craze - choose one England player only and I'll take away your selection from the other. You can't choose two players from the same team.

 

[Gunner786]

Pakistan has been charged
What will their punishment be now that they have neen charged with the ICc not giving a toss about the evidence or stating a reason?
a truly disgraceful and outrageous decision by the ICC

Fourth Test awarded to England after umpires deem Pakistan to have forfeited match

Brian Murgatroyd

August 20, 2006

The fourth Test between England and Pakistan has been awarded to England after umpires Billy Doctrove and Darrell Hair deemed Pakistan to have forfeited the match.

The umpires made their decision in accordance with Law 21.3* when the Pakistan side failed to emerge from the dressing rooms after the tea interval.

This followed the umpires' awarding of five penalty runs to England during the second session of the fourth day after alleged interference with the match ball by the fielding side.

Subsequent to the umpires' decision to award the match to England, a series of meetings took place to try and arrive at a situation that was in the best interests of the match and the game of cricket.

Those meetings involved match referee Mike Procter, the two captains Andrew Strauss of England and Pakistan's Inzamam-ul-Haq, umpires Doctrove and Hair, England Head Coach Duncan Fletcher and Pakistan Team Manager Zaheer Abbas, the Chairman of the England & Wales Cricket Board (ECB) David Morgan and Shaharyar Khan, the Chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) and ECB Chief Executive David Collier.

ICC Chief Executive Malcolm Speed also spoke to umpire Darrell Hair by 'phone from Dubai.

Following these meetings the umpires decided that, having made the decision to award the match to England, to change that decision would not be in keeping with the Laws of Cricket. The ICC backs the decision of the umpires.

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.

The ECB has undertaken to provide a 40 per cent refund to all spectators who purchased tickets for the fourth day's play and a full refund for the 12,000 spectators who pre-purchased tickets for Monday's scheduled fifth day.

* Law 21.3 reads: "Umpires awarding a match

(a) A match shall be lost by a side which

either (i) concedes defeat

or (ii) in the opinion of the umpires refuses to play

and the umpires shall award the match to the other side.

(b) If an umpire considers that an action by any player or players might constitute a refusal by either side to play then the umpires together shall ascertain the cause of the action. If they then decide together that this action does constitute a refusal to play by one side, they shall so inform the captain of that side. If the captain persists in the action the umpires shall award the match in accordance with (a) (ii) above."

 

[irottev]

(b) If an umpire considers that an action by any player or players might constitute a refusal by either side to play then the umpires together shall ascertain the cause of the action. If they then decide together that this action does constitute a refusal to play by one side, they shall so inform the captain of that side. If the captain persists in the action the umpires shall award the match in accordance with (a) (ii) above."

I wonder if that happened at all. Because the team seemed willing to still play to me.

Pakistan has been charged under Level two of the Code of Conduct, 2.10, which relates to changing the condition of the match ball.

That is absurd. There is still no proof of it and if Pakistan say they didn't do it and refused to come out then I would certainly think they they didn't do anything to it. It isn't the crowds fault, I agree with Beefy's comments about the pathetic communication with the crowd. Now the ECB pays for the fact that they were misinformed and they lose out. not good for cricket at all.

Anyway, this issue is neither teams fault. Pakistan can't be blamed for refusing to come out after being called cheats. This whole team and country's pride was dented. It isn't Englands fault either and I am sure that both teams and the paying spectators would rather of had the game completed.

As for Man of the Series my vote goes with Yousef. Strauss had a fantastic series also (and his captaincy was pretty good) but you can't really top Yousef. Even though he was on the losing side he had an amazing series.

Anyway. On to the ODI series. So long as it still goes ahead, which it should do. Then it should be a good one. Lots of power players in both sides. England still probably lacking in the bowling department. We will see if they have improved since last time.

 

[scorpion_rulezz]

Mike Atherton's opinions on Sky are scathing of Darrell Hair, saying his decision lacks any historical context and that they lacked common sense. "It's bound to inflame things. It would have been best to leave it to the end of the day. He's not a man to back down. He's a stubborn character, a strong character.. so even though Pakistan said they were willing to come back out after the bails removal/apparent forfeiture you could imagine him sitting in the dressing room refusing to come out.

 

[DJ Ager]

I think it's a really sad day for cricket, and I feel Daryl Hair is to blame.

It is probably not even true that Pakistan tampered with the ball, and from my view they were right to protest, whether the sit in was the right way to go about it or not. Theen when they were ready to play, Hair took it into his own hand to forfeit the game, with barely consoulting with the Pakistan team.

Hair has ruined a good Test match by:

-accusing Pakistan of cheating, when the ball was probably scuffed from the sixes hit. They were winning the game, why would they cheat?

-and then taking matters into his own hands and forfeiting the Test match, without giving Pakistan a chance to carry on with the game. The protest was a short statement and not saying that they were refusing to play.

He has ruined the final Test of the summer, and given a bad end to the summer.

He has had problems with Pakistan before, and they have called him to be removed from the panel, and he also no balled Murali.