Game of Cricket in a soup on ball Tampering!

[shailendra]

...Ok, for those of you who have not heard about the controversy yet (believe me you shall!)...Here is a quick update:

Pakistan lost the third test match against England after having forfeited it (for the FIRST time that has happened in the game of cricket, that a game was awarded to the opposing team after one team forfeited it for not showing up!)..........

Why? Because of the umpire deciding that there was some foul play and that the ball had been tampered with! (Not for the first time in the history of the game, folks)...except that Pakistan, the team accused of the crime,(as in the past too) decided to act all hurt on the apparent 'accusation' and never came out back again to play after the tea break!.....

So there you have it....

Also it would not be a far stretch to say that accusation, and counter-allegations are flying thick and high, with the game of cricket being the apparent loser in all these proceedings!
Now I am no fan of the Pakis as it is, but the fact that the game has always relied on the sacred rule that right or wrong the Umpire is the ultimate authority on the decision making, was broken by the pakistan team, and that makes them the guilty party in my books....

ok, before you all jump to conclusions and accuse the team even furthur (be my guest actually), but here are some points to consider:

# Did the Umpire really see anything wrong with the ball? (the Australian Umpire Mr hair has been controversial in the past with the South Asian cricketing countries)
# If the Umpire felt there was foul play, why did he not pull up the player he felt was the bad guy tampering with the ball, rather than putting a whole team to shame?
# When he asked for a ball change (after deciding it was tameperd with) and awarded five penalty runs for England, why did Inzamam not protest right there and then?
# Even if they as a team knew of being not guilty of that accused crime, why decide to show their anger in an unprofessional manner and decided not to come back out again after tea break?
# Wouldn't it have been wise to go thru the proper channels of continuing the game and lodge a protest with the match refree at the end of the match?(which ironically by the way, Pakistan was on the way to winning outright!)
# What about the thousands of spectators that paid to see the game (not to mention the million of TV viewers) that were left high and dry?

That and lot more questions no doubt are making the rounds even as we speak and apparently the ICC has called for a ban and a hearing on Inzi, the paki captain. (supposedly Prez Musharraf has also sent in his support to the team and expressed anger at the way his Country's team/captain etc. is being maligned by the ICC)

All in all, it is the most controversial time in cricket, where the whole tour could get called off, not to mention the bad name it brings to the overall gentlemanly game of Cricket everywhere!

....and then also just like someone said,'For Pete's sake, it is just Cricket!'....

Your say?

[sunnysangwan]

This has brought a huge disregard for the game especially when such a powerful team and such an experienced umpire are involved.
Anyways, this is what I came across as well while delving deeper into the matter
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/5273582.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/5273582.stm)



Sangwan

[VPannu]

I dont know whats wrong with Darrell Hair, but definitely there is something? Is he some kinda racist or what? He was in limelight sometime ago when he ruled out that Murali's action is suspected. I guess he has some kinda hatred for the players from subcontinent,this time Pakistanis were at the recieving end.Cricket has always been a controversial game.Something comes up every 6 months or so.

[raj2rif]

...# Did the Umpire really see anything wrong with the ball? (the Australian Umpire Mr hair has been controversial in the past with the South Asian cricketing countries)
# If the Umpire felt there was foul play, why did he not pull up the player he felt was the bad guy tampering with the ball, rather than putting a whole team to shame?

A thief is one who is caught. There are two facts those needs to be considered. Firstly, the ball had been tempered with. Secondly, the English team would not have benefitted by that, so it is only the Pakistani team that would have done so. The skipper is accountable for all players action and hence umpire rightly spoke to the Skipper. The problem is that the Umpire was suppose to warn the team before awarding the penalty of 5 runs. Hence Umpire is guilty of this fact.

The Skipper, if felt that it is the question of his intigrity, then he should have put up a written protest when the penalty was awarded and continued with the game as usual. The fact that he showed anger when the ball was changed, points the finger at him knowing the fact that the ball was tempered with. The reverse swing was invented by Pakistani bowlers and hence it may be an accepted norm in Pakistan to temper with the ball to get the reverse swing. Shahid Afridi's statement about ball tempering may be of some value to people who have interest in the game. I think both umpire and Skipper are at fault in this. Inzam was probably instigated during the tea interval may be by his own team mates of being too soft or even spineless. That may have infuriated him to not to take the field. Remember, Younis Khan has made it no secret that he wants to lead Pakistan. What better opportunity to lead a team in World Cup, if Inzy gets sacked or banned.

Over all, I think Pakistani team should have acted more maturely. Should have lodged a protest and continued playing the game.


# When he asked for a ball change (after deciding it was tameperd with) and awarded five penalty runs for England, why did Inzamam not protest right there and then?
# Even if they as a team knew of being not guilty of that accused crime, why decide to show their anger in an unprofessional manner and decided not to come back out again after tea break?
# Wouldn't it have been wise to go thru the proper channels of continuing the game and lodge a protest with the match refree at the end of the match?(which ironically by the way, Pakistan was on the way to winning outright!)
# What about the thousands of spectators that paid to see the game (not to mention the million of TV viewers) that were left high and dry?

That and lot more questions no doubt are making the rounds even as we speak and apparently the ICC has called for a ban and a hearing on Inzi, the paki captain. (supposedly Prez Musharraf has also sent in his support to the team and expressed anger at the way his Country's team/captain etc. is being maligned by the ICC)

All in all, it is the most controversial time in cricket, where the whole tour could get called off, not to mention the bad name it brings to the overall gentlemanly game of Cricket everywhere!

....and then also just like someone said,'For Pete's sake, it is just Cricket!'....

Your say?[/quote]

[shailendra]

Yes, racist or not, biased or not...fortunately-unfortunately the Umpire's decision is and should be always binding....

Continuing on the ongoing controversy; seems like the International Cricket Council has refused a request from Pakistan to stop umpire Darrell Hair from standing in future matches involving their team. Their Chief executive has said in no uncertain terms that all appointments for the Umpires are made without fear or favour.

ICC also said it was "hugely regrettable" that the game at The Oval, in which Pakistan had the upper hand, did not end with a "great finish in front of a full house," but reiterated that on-field umpires were the "sole judges of fair and unfair play, the ultimate arbiters" as "enshrined in the laws of cricket" and that in this instance, the decision made by Billy Doctrove and Darrell Hair to award the match to England was the correct one under the laws."...

Period!!! (eat your heart out, Pakistan and Musharraf!)

[VPannu]

Very true indeed "Umpire decision is final" ,as we all have said.But I also feel that an executive shouldnt exercise his/her authorities or power in an unlawful manner.As Mr.Tavathia has pointed out that Darrell Hair could have given PAK team a warning and then a penalty, if the act was repeated.
Like Hair,PAK team also has bad history of ball tampering otherwise there wouldnt have been any fumes without fire.Such things, done at international level, arent good for any game or sport,be it cricket,football or hockey or whatever.

[shailendra]

Well yeah absolutely...
...and I am sure the inquiry by ICC (where both the Pakistan Captain and the Umpire are gonna have to be present) is gonna look at all the aspects as to where the rules were not follwed, and by whom....

Frankly though let me tell you things don't look too good for the Pakistanis, the whole scenario considered, as my best guess is that a long standing experienced Umpire like Hair probably followed all the protocols when delivering the penalty judgement!!!... after all the umpire's don't really call a round table conference before judging/warning/changing or awarding anything on a field of play, except of course the very obvious quick word with the captain...[and the pictures show that Inzi was right there when the ball change was called for, of course it having already tampered with and no point using it to continue the game after just a warning....and/or even when the five runs (geez, five runs!) were awarded to the English team for the same issue!]...

Anyways, without spinning our wheels here I guess we shall have to just stand by and watch, the game is definitely dented on it's reputation, no doubt............................

[shailendra]

....By the way a little bit of history on the Ball tampering scandal,....as i said earlier this is not the first time that such an incident has happened. There are other times when this had become an issue, where even our greats Tendulakar and Dravid were found guilty and fined by the ICC for altering the condition of the ball in the last five years.

Dravid was fined 50% of his match fee after cameras had caught him unwittingly shining the ball with fragments of an energy candy he was chewing after it had stuck to his finger during a one-day match against Zimbabwe in 2004. :p

And Tendulkar was handed a one-match suspended ban and fined 75% of his match fee for "acting on the ball" in the second Test between South Africa and India in Port Elizabeth in November 2001. The punishment handed out by ICC match referee provoked such an enormous backlash in India, that the refree was forced to clarify that Tendulkar had been charged for "removing grass from the ball but not having informed the umpires". :eek:

....and for that mattere even former England captain Mike Atherton hit the headlines with the "dirt in the pocket" scandal in 1994, when he was caught rubbing dirt on the ball against South Africa at Lord's, so really it has not been just an Asian prerogative!

Well, on an ending note and in short: the scenes at The Oval with what happened with the Pakistanis and the Umpire Hair (no 'Hair' is his real last name, not that Inzi tampered with the Umpires crowning glory or anything! :D ) will of course be indelibly etched as one of cricket's darkest days, but it is unlikely it will be the last time such controversy of ball-tampering will rear its ugly head.....

[puneetsheoran]

Have been away from a computer for a while and hence missed the post. Now, A lot has already been said about the controvesy already. I would just like the following:

With 26 camera's zooming in on the field not much is missed on the field these days. Before charging a player the umpire needs to have seen something. If Darryl Hair saw someone tamper with the team then by all means go ahead and charge them- the indiviuals in question. No proof has been brought forward so far so the Pakistani team can feel a little hard done by.

What followed was entirely Pakistan's fault as they did the wrong thing. They should have gone straight to the match referee (what is this guy getting paid for ?? - anyone?) and lodged a complaint through the proper channels. By refusing to take the field they held at ransom the paying public and also brought the game in disrepute.

Let's see what ICC does about this. Only time will tell.

[shamshermalik]

"Bad achha badnaam boora." They started the ball tempering to get reverse swing now are facing the consequencies. But given the situation and the way the pakistani team reacted I think there is something fishy. If they were true they should have objected there and then.

[puneetsheoran]

ICC have made public an email from Darrell Hair where he had offered to retire/stand down for a one off payment of USD 500,000. So far the ICC has stood by Hair's side but surely this needs to be investigated as well. Copy of email attached below:

From Darrell Hair
Sent Tuesday 22nd August 2006
To Doug Cowie
Subject The way forward
Doug,
Just to firm up what we discussed earlier this evening. I appreciate the ICC may be put in a untenable position with regards to future appointments and having taken considerable time and advice, I make this one-off, non-negotiable offer.
I am prepared to retire/stand down/relinquish my position on the elite panel to take effect from 31st August 2006 on the following terms:
1 A one-off payment to compensate the loss of future earnings and retain a payment over the next four years which I believe would have been the best years I have to offer ICC and world umpiring. This payment is be the sum of [US dollars] 500,000 - details of which must be kept confidential by both parties. This sum to be paid directly into my account by 31st August 2006.
2 ICC may announce the retirement in any way they wish, but I would prefer a simple 'lifestyle choice' as this was the very reason I moved from Australia to settle in the UK three years ago.
3 No public comment to be made by me as to possible reasons for the decision.
4 This offer in no way precludes me taking legal action and/or instigating libel suits against various sections of the electronic and print media for comments made either previously or in the future.
5 This in no way precludes me taking civil action (and exercising my rights as a resident of the UK in any court of law and by any other avenue open to me) against any organisation or persons currently part of ICC and in particular, members of the Pakistan cricket team and the Pakistan Cricket Board.
I reiterate this is a once only offer and if I fail to obtain your agreement I shall continue to be available under the terms of my current contract till March 31 2008 to fulfil umpiring appointments as and when ICC sees fit in any country at any time in any series or matches involving any affiliated teams.
I would also insist that my ongoing contracted employment continue in its current form until such time as an ICC performance assessment deems me to be no longer able to perform the duties to the high class expected of an international umpire.
Would you please let me know at your earliest convenience of your acceptance or otherwise of this offer.
Sincerely,
Darrell Hair

[raj2rif]

The email by the umpire to retire is interesting. It looks to me that some one is asking for ransom.
I would say let the inquiry panel decide on the guilt of the person. If found guilty of racism, then he needs to be sacked rather than given a golden handshake. If he is innocent, then he must continue to fulfil his contract as usual.
I hope the guy is not taking the system for a ride.

[VPannu]

If he is innocent, then he must continue to fulfil his contract as usual.
I hope the guy is not taking the system for a ride.
Yes I think so.He has found a loophole in the system.But a better way to get rid of him (without paying a single cent) is that never invite him to officiate in any one dayer or test.In a layman's language "Hukka paani band kar do uska"