|
Reply:
Hair banned from officiating i
Replied by( Noman)
Replied on (4/Nov/2006)
Darrell Hair, the Australian umpire who accused Pakistan of ball tampering during the Oval Test in August against England this summer, has been banned from umpiring in internationals
Hair banned from officiating in internationals
Siddhartha Vaidyanathan in Mumbai
November 4, 2006
|
Hair's fate has been confirmed © Getty Images
| |
Darrell Hair, the Australian umpire who accused Pakistan of ball tampering during the Oval Test in August against England this summer, has been banned from umpiring in internationals. The announcement was made by Percy Sonn, the ICC president, at a press conference in Mumbai at the end of a two-day ICC meeting.
"The board has discussed this matter with great sincerity," said Sonn, "and gave lots of attention to it and they've come to the conclusion that they've lost confidence in Mr. Hair. They've given instructions to the management to discuss Mr Hair's future with him. In think I we owe Mr Hair the courtesy of allowing his future to be discussed by him with our management before we go anywhere further in the matter. He shall not be allowed to officiate in any future international games until the end of this contract."
However, both Malcom Speed, the CEO of the ICC, and Sonn made it clear that there was "no issue" about the result of The Oval Test. "With regard to compensation, there is a claim by the ECB against the PCB. That is unresolved. It may end up being referred to the ICC disputes resolution committee but at this stage there's been no request for that to happen."
Both also confirmed that the future of Billy Doctrove, the other umpire involved the Oval drama, was secure adding, "The executive board didn't discuss Doctrove".
It was widely rumoured yesterday that Hair's future was in doubt, when a reliable source at the ICC leaked the news to a TV station in India. "The Asian bloc comprising India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh tabled a motion at the meeting that Hair be taken off the panel," the source said. "The motion was put to vote and was passed by a 7-3 majority. The four Asian nations plus South Africa, Zimbabwe and the West Indies voted against Hair. England, Australia and New Zealand wanted him to continue."
Pressure from the four-nation Asian bloc has seemingly forced the ICC's hand and Hair will no longer be permitted to officiate in internationals involving any full member side. Speed revealed that he's spoken to Hair last night, after the decision was taken and added that they will make an effort the protect Hair's interests. "I've said it a number of times that I hope we can find a way for Darrell to umpire," he said. "The board has resolved that they don't wish Darrell Hair is appointed to umpire international matches. I spoke to Darrell yesterday after the decision was made. I told him about it and he was very disappointed. David Richardson, who is the ICC General Manager of Cricket, and myself will speak to Darrell over the next few days and talk about what it means to him.
"ICC has a number of lawyers on staff, who're well aware of our legal position," he continued when asked if the ICC had considered the legal recourse that Hair might consider. "It's correct that Hair is contracted till March 2008. But we need a little time to discuss the matter with him, to protect whatever interests he has."
Speed also made it clear that this wasn't a decision taken at the spur of the moment, confirming that the board had considered the issue in detail. "The ICC board - which consists of 13 representatives from the member countries - was presented with a very detailed paper that rain into 15-20 page. The board certainly had lot of information before it when it started procedure yesterday. They had two hours of discussion on the issue. As it was reported the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) had lodged a formal charge under the ICC code of conduct. That was also considered by the board. This was no knee-jerk reaction. The board had a good deal of information in front of it as is the case of any decision on the board."
Siddhartha Vaidyanathan is staff writer of Cricinfo
© Cricinfo
Reply:
Imran Khan calls for action ag
Replied by( Noman)
Replied on (30/Sep/2006)
Pakistan's cricket legend Imran Khan on Thursday called for action to be taken against Australian umpire Darrell Hair after Inzamam-ul-Haq was cleared on ball-tampering charges.
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan's cricket legend Imran Khan on Thursday called for action to be taken against Australian umpire Darrell Hair after Inzamam-ul-Haq was cleared on ball-tampering charges. Imran welcomed Inzamam's acquittal and dismissed the ICC decision to ban Inzamam for four ODIs matches on a charge of bringing the game into disrepute after The Oval Test fiasco last month. "I welcome the acquittal of Inzamam and the team of ball-tampering charges. Pakistan have been cleared of very serious allegations of cheating," Imran said. "The other offence is quite minor and I think the punishment is also minor." Pakistan forfeited the fourth Test at The Oval after refusing to take the field after tea on the fourth day in protest at the decision of umpires Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove to penalise them five runs for ball tampering. Imran, who branded Hair a "mini-Hitler" in a newspaper column after the Oval Test, added, "Now the next question is what to do with the man who created the whole controversy at the first place. If Inzamam is cleared of ball-tampering allegations, now clearly some sort of action should be taken against the man who was responsible for such serious allegations. "That allegation caused the big incident where Pakistan ended up forefeiting the match," Imran added. Former Pakistan captain Ramiz Raja agreed that the ICC needed to take action against the umpire. "The ICC need to pull up their socks and take a firm decision now on Darrell Hair," he said, adding that he thought Pakistan should appeal against the verdict. "Pakistan's lawyers now would be arguing that if he was not guilty of ball tampering, why has he been handed out a four-match ban punishment? I think this case is not over yet and Pakistan should contest this decision aggressively because they are in the right," Ramiz insisted. Wasim wants PCB to appeal against ban ISLAMABAD: Former Pakistan greats rounded on Darrell Hair on Thursday, demanding his removal from the Elite Panel of umpires after the ICC adjudicator cleared Inzamam-ul-Haq of ball-tampering charges. "I think it would be advisable and sensible for the ICC to now drop Hair from the Elite Panel of umpires. He has now become too controversial a figure," former Pakistan captain Javed Miandad said. "I don't think Hair will now be in a position to umpire any future international matches confidently. He is going to be under pressure and every decision of his can be challenged," Miandad added. Hair told a news conference at the ICC hearing that he still wanted to carry on umpiring. Miandad said the four-match ban on Inzamam was an expected one given the seriousness of the issue. "I was expecting a ban of more matches. But it is good the ball-tampering charge has been dropped," he said. The PCB and Inzamam said on Thursday that they will not appeal the four-match ban, although former pace bowler Wasim Akram said they should. "When the ball-tampering charges have been dismissed then why the ban," he said. "Pakistan were only reacting to a false accusation of being cheats," he said.
Reply:
Hair had been withdrawn from t
Replied by( Ghost)
Replied on (28/Sep/2006)
Darrell Hair cut a lonely figure when he was brought to face the world's media at The Oval seconds after an ICC spokesman had revealed that he had been withdrawn from the Champions Trophy on
Darrell Hair cut a lonely figure when he was brought to face the world's media at The Oval seconds after an ICC spokesman had revealed that he had been withdrawn from the Champions Trophy on "safety and security" grounds. Hair made clear from the off that under ICC regulations he was unable to answer any questions relating to incidents during the Oval Test or the hearing itself - not that it prevented several attempts to do so from the media. "I think the last few weeks have been quite trying on everybody," he said. "The Code of Conduct is there to be applied, it's been applied, I'm bound my own code of conduct but it's good to have it over." With regards to the offer to resign in the aftermath of the Oval row, he admitted that "it may well have been an ill-advised thing to do at the time, I think I've already admitted that." But he took a swipe at the ICC's decision to make the letters public. "I believe [such things] should remain confidential. We learn lots of things from the things we do in life. I still believe that those matters should be kept confidential. It's something that's part of the ICC Code of Conduct hearing and I've explained why I can't discuss that." Asked if the decision to penalise Pakistan was wrong, he gave a rueful smile. "My contract at the ICC clearly states that I must umpire to the best of my ability ... all I will say is I'm out there doing my best. I'm not here to defend any decision. I umpire matches in good faith. I do it to the best of my ability." "I've umpired since 1985 and from the day I started umpiring my career was in the hands of other people. People make assessments on my career on a ball by ball basis. If other people who have always made those decisions consider I'm good enough to still umpire, I will continue." He was asked if he would umpire in England as he was on the ECB's reserve list - that drew a big grin from him and he admitted that he was unaware of that. "I've umpired in the Championship for the last two years luckily without the publicity that we have here. If I'm available I'll do it, I'd love to." He also brushed aside suggestions that he had effectively put himself out of the equation for umpiring some countries. "That will be up to other people to decide whether it has damaged my relationship with any other team around the world."
© Cricinfo
Reply:
Inzamam-ul-Haq has been cleare
Replied by( Ghost)
Replied on (28/Sep/2006)
Inzamam-ul-Haq has been cleared of charges of ball tampering after an ICC Code of Conduct hearing at The Oval, but has been found guilty of the charge of bring the game into disrepute and ba
Inzamam-ul-Haq has been cleared of charges of ball tampering after an ICC Code of Conduct hearing at The Oval, but has been found guilty of the charge of bring the game into disrepute and banned for four ODIs. He said that he would not appeal against the ban. "I have considered their evidence honestly and fairly given very carefully," the spokesman said, reading out the findings of Ranjan Madugalle, the senior ICC referee. "My duty is to call and give my own judgment. On the second charge - bringing the game into disrepute by refusing to play - I find Mr Ul-Haq guilty in that on two occasions he led a protest against the umpires by failing to come on to the field of play at the relevant time. I take the view, subject of course to any further submissions Mr Gay [Inzamam's lawyer] may wish to make, this is a Level 3 charge - a ban of two or four Test matches and/or between four and eight one-day international matches. "As to the appropriate penalty for the offence of bringing the game into disrepute, I am satisfied that this is a Level 3 matter. Mr Ul-Haq has been found guilty of deliberately refusing to come onto this pitch on two occasions, as a protest against the umpires, so interrupting play. I take into account m uls expression of regret and apology and I take into account all the other surrounding and mitigating circumstances. I decide that Mr Ul-Haq should be banned for four one-day matches with immediate effect. M ul you have the right of appeal on given written notice to the ICC legal counsel within 24 hours as Mr Gay will no doubt advise you." Inzamam himself told Pakistan TV: "The whole nation has supported our decision. This was a mtteer of respect for our team and country. We fought for what we thought was right. Team's reputation in the past hasn't been great and so this was important. It was important to register our protest becuase if we didn't then it wouldn't have gotten this far even and now it has been proved we are not guilty of ball tampering. This is a victory for Pakistan. "I had an idea that I would face some sort of ban. This is the most lenient ban and I will not appeal against it." "We are very satisfied," Shahriyar Khan, the PCB chairman, said as he left the ground. "We feel the whole process is very fair." Abbas Zaidi, the PCB's director operations, told Cricinfo: "We have just been told that Inzamam and the Pakistan team have been acquitted of the ball tampering charges. This is excellent news for us as it vindicates our stance all along that we weren't guilty of ball tampering." Inzamam has 24 hours to decide whether he wants to appeal. If he does not, the ban will rule him out of Pakistan's opening matches in the Champions Trophy in India.
© Cricinfo
Reply:
Umpires disagreed over timing
Replied by( Ghost)
Replied on (26/Sep/2006)
Pakistan's defence against the charges of ball tampering and subsequent forfeiture of the Oval Test against England will rely heavily on the initial disagreement between Darrell Hair and Bil
Pakistan's defence against the charges of ball tampering and subsequent forfeiture of the Oval Test against England will rely heavily on the initial disagreement between Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove, the two on-field umpires, over the changing of the ball, Cricinfo has learnt. Hair and Doctrove changed the ball in the 56th over of England's second innings at on the fourth afternoon. Hair then awarded England five penalty runs, indicating that the ball had been tampered with. But Cricinfo has learnt that Doctrove, as written in his match report on the incident, was initially of the opinion that the umpires allow play to carry on for a few more overs to help identify the cause of the change in the ball's condition. Eventually, though, Hair is thought to have reasoned that if both umpires were in agreement that the condition of the ball had been altered then they should change it immediately. Doctrove then agreed and the ball was duly replaced. Legally, this development has no effect on the case; the fact that both umpires consulted and eventually agreed on the final action means that they have acted in accordance with Law 42.3, on ball tampering, which states that umpires shall change the ball "after consultation." But Pakistan's lawyers, DL Piper, are expected to seize upon this initial difference in opinion to argue that Hair had acted in haste. "This is a key aspect of the defence and it is a strong point in favour of Pakistan that the tampering charges are unjustified," a source pointed out. As no specific incident was highlighted and no individual accused, Inzamam-ul-Haq, as captain, faces the charge on behalf of the team. Backed up by the lack of any incriminating video evidence though it isn't required, definitively proving any misconduct becomes additionally problematic, as the source pointed out: "It is difficult for the ICC to prove ball tampering unless they actually catch someone doing it." If the ball tampering charge is not proven, then Pakistan are likely to argue in favour of dropping the second charge against Inzamam, of bringing the game into disrepute by refusing to play. Pakistan's contention will be that one led to the other, that they were first falsely accused and thus had no choice but to protest. It has also emerged that Mike Procter, the ICC match referee, failed to inform Pakistan of their forfeiture soon after the decision had been taken by the umpires in the afternoon. "Hair instructed Procter to tell Pakistan that they had forfeited the game in the afternoon. Procter failed to do so and officially, much later at around 10 pm, did they learn that the Test had been forfeited," claimed the source. The ICC has refused to confirm or deny these revelations. A spokesman told Cricinfo that "Ranjan Madugalle will look at all the evidence provided to him by various parties and make a judgment based on that." Osman Samiuddin is Pakistan editor of Cricinfo
© Cricinfo
Reply:
Handle with care: ‘Us’ vs ‘The
Replied by( Noman)
Replied on (24/Aug/2006)
Handle with care: ‘Us’ vs ‘Them’ fight is set to explode
Pradeep Magazine August 22, 2006 Is the cricket world in danger of getting torn asunder by a new global order that is increasingly getting polarised in stark shades of black and white? If the South African withdrawal from the tri-series after a bomb blast in Sri Lanka left the host nation fuming, Pakistan's having to forfeit the Test against England due to a perceived or real slight by umpire Darrell Hair has put the ICC in a bind. On the face of it, the South African withdrawal and the Test being granted to England after Pakistan did the unthinkable by not taking the field are perfect decisions that can't be faulted. But, in a world that is becoming more and more polarised along the lines of religion, without having sorted out the problems of racism, there is a danger of cricket too becoming a victim of the politics of hate and prejudice that is sweeping the world. This fight between 'us' and 'them' and the 'civilized' and the 'uncivilized' world now has the potential of tearing into the roots of a world cricket order that, at best, is a fragile one struggling to put its house in order. Who can forget the Black and White split post the Mike Denness affair, after he suspended six Indian players, including Sachin Tendulkar, for ball tampering in South Africa in 2003? Mercifully, the whole issue was amicably resolved in the end with India's financial clout playing a major role in humbling 'white' pride. The danger as of now seems far greater to me. In a surcharged atmosphere, where passengers can have two fellow passengers off loaded from a plane just because the poor guys were speaking in Arabic, the Pakistani cricket team, which has always suffered from being 'unfairly treated in England' over the years, can legitimately claim to be victims of one man's prejudice against a whole race (in this case, Hair). One need not scoff at this feeling of being victimised, as there is a history of teams from the subcontinent being treated unfairly by the White world. Ask Muralitharan, ask Sourav Ganguly, ask any Pakistani player and ask any fan from this part of the world how he feels about the other side of the world. The answers will in most case be, 'cheated'. It is for this reason that the ICC needs to tread very cautiously in whatever follow-up action they take in Pakistan's case. Justice should not only be done, but should be seen to be done. Fortunately, ICC's new president, Percy Sonn, who, as a Black lawyer was at the forefront of South Africa's struggle against apartheid, understands this feeling of victimisation and the centuries of 'White prejudice' better than most. It may be a difficult task even for him, but for the sake of cricket's unity, it has to be done.
Reply:
Wasim Akram's responsescript
Replied by( Ghost)
Replied on (23/Aug/2006)
Wasim Akram's response
Former Pakistan captain Wasim Akram said on Monday that controversial Australian umpire Darrell Hair should be removed from the elite panel of umpires by the ICC for his prejudices against the Asian teams and particularly against Pakistan in the Oval Test. "He has a poor track record against the Asians and is known for creating unnecessary controversies," Wasim maintained. He lashed out at the ICC for its toothless approach towards major issues of world cricket and said it was just a dummy body which revelled in making money and preparing tour itineraries. "They are not going to take any action against the umpires no matter they they do on the ground," Wasim said. Holder of a world record 502 wickets in the ODIs, Wasim said Inzamam's stance of dressing room protest after tea break against Hair's decision was not the best way to go about things. "Pakistan team should have protested in a different manner rather than not coming onto the ground after tea. Whatever happens, the game has to go on," said Wasim. Ex-chief selector Hasib Ahsan said if ICC had any courage they should blacklist Hair for his biased attitude towards Pakistan. "PCB's top brass who were present in London should have handled the controversy in a more tactical manner," he said. Former Test fast bowler Sarfraz Nawaz was candid about the saga and opined that Inzamam's team was not exactly blameless in the whole issue. "The game should have continued,'' he said. ''I fail to understand why Inzamam chose to protest after the tea interval and not at the time of the Hair objection?" Another ex-Test paceman Jalaluddin said the Pakistan team should have played on. "Umpires have the right to change the ball and Pakistan players should have controlled their emotions," Jalal said. "We see lots of wrong decisions during a match, but does the player walk out or protest?"
Reply:
A matter of honour, says Inzam
Replied by( Ghost)
Replied on (21/Aug/2006)
A matter of honour, says Inzamam
Inzamam-ul-Haq has confirmed that the Pakistani stance on their forfeited Test at The Oval is a matter of honour, after the match ball was changed by Umpire Darrell Hair midway through the afternoon session. "This game is about more than winning and losing," he told Cricinfo, "it's about respect and countries come first. If someone says to me you are a cheat and Pakistan is doing wrong things, my first priority is to my country." Play was held up for 45 minutes after tea, following Pakistan's initial refusal to take the field, but Inzamam insisted: "We were ready to play. The main issue was not whether we were going onto the field, it was whether the ball had been tampered with or not. "We had lodged our protest and after that we came [down] to the ground as normal as if we are playing. But then the umpires were not coming. It is up to them, and we await the referee's hearing committee." It is not the first time that Pakistan has crossed swords with the controversial figure Hair, and Inzamam was unequivocal in his stance. "This allegation is mean," he said. "He's not saying what his allegation is, he's just saying your guy is cheating. In my personal opinion, TV will show if anyone is tampering. "It's very simple," he continued. "There are 26 cameras there [from Sky Sports] and nobody's picked anything. This hearing will not take place in the [referee's] room, it's on the front of the media, everything is on the media." Inzamam ran through the chain of events in his on-pitch confrontation with the umpires. "They did not warn me," he said, "and then they gave five [penalty] runs. [Hair] did not talk to me, he wasn't telling me when he's changed the ball, he didn't ask me 'can we change the ball?'" The discussion continued when Hair went up to the Pakistan dressing-room to ask if they would be taking the field. "Personally I asked him: 'why did you change the ball?'", said Inzamam, adding that Hair responded that the ball had been tampered with, but then refused to show Inzamam the ball when he was asked, saying that it was in the referee's room. "I said it is in my rights to see the ball," he added, "to show that the ball is doing nothing. I wanted to say it's ok, the condition of the ball has not changed, but Hair says 'It's my decision.'" When asked if Pakistan felt persecuted by Hair, Inzamam responded: "Yes definitely. It's not once [with Hair], it's lots of times, we've already sent a letter before this to the ICC, asking that he does not umpire in Pakistan games. But still he is doing it. The controversy is always there. "It's a big disappointment for me and my team and especially for cricket, the way this game was going. But I don't think we could carry on like this. If someone like this says "cheat" then this game is not on. "There is definitely no problem with the England team," he confirmed, after last night's joint statement had confirmed that both teams had been willing to resume the game. "We know people were coming to watch today and we are sorry the game is not on," he added. "But we are sticking on to our decision because it's not the right thing that is going on." In Inzamam's opinion, at this moment in time the five-match one-day series is not under threat.
Reply:
Pakitan and England fourth tes
Replied by( Noman)
Replied on (21/Aug/2006)
Pakitan and England fourth test drama complete story and result
Pakistan have strongly denied that there was any tampering of the ball during the fourth Test at the Oval, accusations of which eventually led to the forfeiture of the game by Pakistan.
Umpires Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove changed the ball in the 56th over of England's second innings on the fourth day and punished Pakistan with a five-run penalty as a result. Pakistan protested after the tea break by refusing to come out, a decision which eventually led the umpires to forfeit the match in England's favour.
But a Pakistan official told Cricinfo, having inspected the ball, that there was no evidence of tampering. "There was no evidence of any tampering on the ball I saw. It was a 55-overs old ball and one that had been hit into the stands on a couple of occasions by Kevin Pietersen. I can honestly say that it had not been scratched to gain any reverse swing."
The official also questioned the approach of the umpires to the entire incident. "Most umpires would give some sort of prior warning, just have a word with the captain and may be give a warning before taking action. They don't have to but they do. Nothing was said to Inzamam by either umpire until the ball was changed." The official also confirmed that no individual had been named by the umpires and no specific incident was highlighted either.
Sky TV commentators repeatedly pointed out that none of the 26 cameras at the ground had picked up any images which suggested the ball might have been tampered with. On past occasions when players have been charged with ball tampering, ICC match referees have been able to take into account images captured on television cameras. In light of what Sky's commentary team said, it seems unlikely such evidence can be provided.
Ultimately, this is a moot point in any case as the decision on whether the ball has been tampered is down to the umpires. The ICC match referee for the Test, Mike Proctor, is now reviewing the case and his report will be considered by the ICC in the aftermath of this Test. According to an ICC press release, Pakistan has been charged under Level two of the Code of Conduct, 2.10, which relates to changing the condition of the match ball.
|