BS: Pakistan forfeit test match

Subject: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 01:29 AM

There are two issues here and each one is totally seperate.

The first one - Tampering with the ball

The second - The refusal of a team to continue the game, when asked to.


Its very important people do not merge the two issues.

In relation to the rules related to the second issue, the umpires were perfectly correct in accordance with the rules of cricket. Pakistan refused to continue the game after tea. The umpires waited the statutory 2 minutes and then declared that the Pakistan team by not being ready to play have therefore forfeited the game.

The ball tampering has nothing to do with that decision.

Whatever or however the Pakistan team think about the original decison, they do not have the right to stage a protest and refuse to continue the game at the appropriate time. If you let that happen, you may as well throw away the rules and not bother with umpires.

I have no opinion concerning the ball tampering. That is for the Umpires to deal with. They obviously felt for some reason that the ball was tampered with. I am sure the investigation will come up with what happened.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: John O'L
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 02:01 AM

While it was unbelievably stupid behaviour from the Pakis, I think it may also have been a bit pedantic of the umpires to refuse to withdraw from their decision. Cricket's the loser.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 02:13 AM

The umpires are in charge and are expected to work to the rules.

It applies to both teams.

Without knowing what the umpires saw, its not really possible to comment on the decision of ball tampering.

Pakistan know the rules of cricket and they should have known that if they were not on the pitch to start play, then they risked forfeiting the match.
Irrespective of what they felt about the ball tamporing decision, under very strict rules of conduct, they should have continued the match and then complained at the end of the day to relevant decision makers.
Instead, by refusing to continue with the match, they put the umpires under prssure to apply the necessaty rules. Tne umpires are in charge, not the cricketers. Under the circumstances the umpires were correct and a[pplied the rules correctly.

Disapointing, yes to all cricket lovers, as the remainder of the match is lost.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: John O'L
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 02:28 AM

I agree Villain, the umpires have to maintain their authority, but they do so at the expense of their credibility when both teams want to play on, but are not allowed to. As you pointed out in your first post, the match being called forfeit has nothing to do with ball tampering, it's for a twenty-minute tantrum. A bad call IMO.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 02:29 AM

Sorry didn't do my proof reading and spell check

The umpires are in charge and are expected to work to the rules.

It applies to both teams.

Without knowing what the umpires saw, its not really possible to comment on the decision of ball tampering.

Pakistan know the rules of cricket and they should have known that if they were not on the pitch to start play, then they risked forfeiting the match.
Irrespective of what they felt about the ball tampering decision, under very strict rules of conduct, they should have continued the match and then complained at the end of the day to relevant decision makers.
Instead, by refusing to continue with the match, they put the umpires under pressure to apply the necessity rules. Tne umpires are in charge, not the cricketers. Under the circumstances the umpires were correct and applied the rules correctly.

Disappointing, yes to all cricket lovers, as the remainder of the match is lost.

Another very good point here is that the captain of Pakistan should have protested at the time of the ball tampering decision and asked it to be referred to the necessary authorities. He should have also said to the umpire that they were continuing the match under protest.
Maybe he did.

Cricket is not like football where the players think they are in charge.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 02:41 AM

>>As you pointed out in your first post, the match being called forfeit has nothing to do with ball tampering, it's for a twenty-minute tantrum. A bad call IMO<<

Bad call or not, what are you expected to do as an umpire when a team decides they are going on strike. You can of course mediate, but in this particular instance, the umpire is enforced to carry out the rules, not make their own rules.

The bad call is from the Pakistani team who refused to come out and continue with the game when the umpires were ready.

If it proved that the umpires were correct about the ball tampering, where does that leave the Pakistani team.
I just hope for the good of the game, that the umpires have some concrete evidence to support their decision.

At this moment in time, it is unfair to do a witch hunt on the umpires, until all the facts are known.

Who are we to beleive at the moment, without the complete facts at hand.

If the Pakistanis are not cheats then I hope swift retribution is made against the umpires, but until the case is proven, the umpires are in charge and theerfore are correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 03:41 AM

Jonathan Agnew's view on the BBC site.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 04:38 AM

I thought they were allowed to rub the ball, as long as they didn't pick the stitches out.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 04:41 AM

Funny how people who get caught out doing naughty things always try to deflect the guilt onto someone else... chap at work made a very expensive mistake last week.. he then spent 3 hours ranting about a work practice that would take an additional minute or two and would have picked up this mistake before the cheque could be issued the following day. He managed to make a £80,000 mistake and tried to blame it on the Area Director!

It's similar to this argument over the game mentioned above. One side got caught doing a bad thing and they have done their best to make it someone else's fault, creating a bigger issue than the original error.

Although.... in the interest of fairness, what nationality were the Umpires?

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 04:57 AM

One side got caught doing a bad thing

Not really Liz. As fa as I know, no evidence (including tv cameras) has been found to support the ball tampering charge.

I agree with Pakistan forfeiting the match for not returning to the field of play and feel it would be awful for cricket to allow such protests but I don't think the ball tampering business itself is quite as clear as you are making it sound.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 04:58 AM

Theses are the rules about the match ball

The match ball - changing its condition
(a) Any fielder may
(i) polish the ball provided that no artificial substance is used and that such polishing wastes no time.
(ii) remove mud from the ball under the supervision of the umpire.
(iii) dry a wet ball on a towel.

(b) It is unfair for anyone to rub the ball on the ground for any reason, interfere with any of the seams or the surface of the ball, use any implement, or take any other action whatsoever which is likely to alter the condition of the ball, except as permitted in (a) above.

(c) The umpires shall make frequent and irregular inspections of the ball.

(d) In the event of any fielder changing the condition of the ball unfairly, as set out in (b) above, the umpires after consultation shall
(i) change the ball forthwith. It shall be for the umpires to decide on the replacement ball, which shall, in their opinion, have had wear comparable with that which the previous ball had received immediately prior to the contravention.
(ii) inform the batsmen that the ball has been changed.
(iii) award 5 penalty runs to the batting side. See 17 below.
(iv) inform the captain of the fielding side that the reason for the action was the unfair interference with the ball.
(v) inform the captain of the batting side as soon as practicable of what has occurred.
(vi) report the occurrence as soon as possible to the Executive of the fielding side and any Governing Body responsible for the match, who shall take such action as is considered appropriate against the captain and team concerned.

(e) If there is any further instance of unfairly changing the condition of the ball in that innings, the umpires after consultation shall
(i) repeat the procedure in (d)(i), (ii) and (iii) above.
(ii) inform the captain of the fielding side of the reason for the action taken and direct him to take off forthwith the bowler who delivered the immediately preceding ball. The bowler thus taken off shall not be allowed to bowl again in that innings.
(iii) inform the captain of the batting side as soon as practicable of what has occurred.
(iv) report this further occurrence as soon as possible to the Executive of the fielding side and any Governing Body responsible for the match, who shall take such action as is considered appropriate against the captain and team concerned.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:04 AM

But as far as I understand it Villian, the only evidience that exists is the umpires opinion based on the condition of the ball?

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:08 AM

And here are the rules related to the result of the match.

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.

(c) If action as in (b) above takes place after play has started and does not

constitute a refusal to play

    (i) playing time lost shall be counted from the start of the action until play

       recommences, subject to Law 15.5 (Changing agreed times for

       intervals).

    (ii) the time for close of play on that day shall be extended by this length

         of time, subject to Law 3.9 (Suspension of play for adverse conditions

         of ground, weather or light).

    (iii) if applicable, no overs shall be deducted during the last hour of the

          match solely on account of this time.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:14 AM

Guest Jon
Until it has been investigated and a decision made, I don't think anybody is in a position to really say what went on.

Until such times, the umpires decsion is final.

The worst thing possible is for the umpires to have cheated. It would be a first time I think. As I say, I just hope that the umpires have a good basis for the ball tampering, becuase its not nice to be called a cheat if you are not.

However as in all sports you have cheats.

Les

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:17 AM

About the umpires

Before the match, two umpires shall be appointed, one for each end, to control the game as required by the Laws, with absolute impartiality.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:19 AM

Until such times, the umpires decsion is final.

Agreed.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Paul Burke
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:31 AM

The ball tampering allegation appears to have been unfounded- unless they have a new invisible way of doing it. The umpires seem to have been precipitate in interpreting a late return to the field as a final refusal to play.

Hair has a history of dubious decisions, particularly against Asian teams. I can't help wondering if he has some issues there.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: John O'L
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:37 AM

Sure, I don't argue that point, I just think the match should have been allowed to go ahead when it became apparent that Pakistan had had their little hissyfit and were ready to play. There should always be room for umpires to think on their feet.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:38 AM

LTS
The umpires were

Billy Doctrove from Dominica

Darrell Hair from Australia (who is disliked by the Pakistani's because he has been involved in other instances with them)

One thing I have to say about Hair is that he is a stickler for the rules and is not prepared to be intimidated by players. Good on him. I only hope he hasn't got too personal and done something he might regret.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: John O'L
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:38 AM

Sorry Paul, I cross-posted.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:46 AM

OK John, what about the pakistani's doing as they were told and getting onto the pitch for the start of the match after tea.
If you condone what they did, then all authority will be taken away from the umpires and then we will get the debacle that we have with footballers who seem to think that they can rule referees.

If it is proven that Hair was out of order for the ball tampering affair then he should be sacked as an umpire. Until then.

Pakistan will be hit for refusing to continue play when required, which is a bit like player power breaking the rules. You just can't let players rule the roost.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:58 AM

Absolutely 110% correct Villan. The alternative is the kind of mayhem we see at football matches, where players blatantly cheat and intimidate the match officials.

The plain and unadorned facts are that:-

1) The umpires stated that they believed the ball had been tampered with, and awarded England five penalty runs.

2) From that point on, they followed the laws of cricket absolutely to the letter.

3) They refused to be intimidated by Pakistan into reversing their decisions.

Shame that football referees haven't got the same kind of courage.

S:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: John O'L
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 06:19 AM

Over-regulation can spoil a game as much as weak refereeing/umpiring. I don't know what's been going on in European football, but it seems to be something that has you all pretty concerned that it will spill over into cricket.
From what I read about it on the Cricinfo site, it seems like the sort of thing that should have been talked through before it got to the stage of forfeiting the match.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Paul Burke
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 06:30 AM

Nasser Hussain, Mike Gatting, Angus Fraser and Dicky Bird think the umpires were mistaken in this case.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 06:51 AM

Ask yourself why there are umpires John O'L

As far as I know Hair asked the Pakistani skipper if he was coming out, and I think the answer was no.
Hair then went to the wicket with the English players and presumably announced play, then allowed 2 minutes, but play didn't commence becuase the opposition had refused to come out. He then applied the rules as an umpire should.
What do you think he should have done, crawled back to the dressing rooms and pleaded with them.

I think not. Your authority has then been taken away.

An umpire is there to interpret the rules, not to be a psychologist.

All players will back each other against the umpire if they can get away with it, especially if they haven't umpired themselves. Its alright listening to the player/reporters of Sky, but has an umpire put their point of view yet. Its all loaded one way.

As an ex umpire at village cricket level LOL, I know just what it is like when you have to make decisions with players who will try and get away with anything if they can.

Sometimes I have to wonder why umpires do the job. Technology is constantly trying to make them look idiots.

I remember once umpiring at a match in the Black Country.
The wicket keeper was a tough old nut, who stood right up to the fast bowlers. I wondered why he stood up right on the stumps, until I had to make a stumping ruling.
What this guy did, was touch the wicket with his pads so that the bails dislodged whilst he was collecting the ball. Becuase it was so fast and becuase as an umpire you had to process so many things in the flash of a second, a poor umpire would have given the batsmen out.
I gave not out, and the wicketkeeper asked me why he wasn't out. Its not up to the umpire to explain, but I did explain that he had dislodged the bails before catching the ball and striking the wicket.
After that he didn't try it again, becuase he knew I had twigged him.
Afterwards I found out that was a trick he used and was very succesful with it too.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 07:01 AM

Paul
Non of these people were in charge and who knows what they would really have done under the circumstances. Its easy with hindsight.

Th rules are about the game, not the people who want to watch it.

Irrespective of who is to blame for the ball incident, I blame Pakistan, for not doing what the umpire asked of them in terms of getting the match started again.


Instead of blamimg the umpire, ask yourself, why didn't the Pakistanis get onto the field and start the match as they should have done - they are not in charge.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Walrus
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 08:11 AM

While I appreciate that emotions would be running high, the Pakistani team should have asked that the disputed ball be set aside for further study, continued to play and then, if they believed they were wronged, complained like hell to the relevent authorities.

On the field of play, the Umpires *must* have the last word. If you think the decision is wrong, play on and complain afterwards.

W

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: John O'L
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 08:53 AM

Villain, clearly you are correct, and I can't argue any point you have made, but I still think that forfeiting a match is an extreme and unfortunate result which might have been avoided with just a little more communication than there seems to have been.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 11:46 AM

The views of Nasser Hussain, Mike Gatting, Angus Fraser and Dicky Bird seem horrifyingly venal.

Can someone point us to the facts of Hair's previously contentious work?

Surely the ball was put aside, since a new one was selected by the captains.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 01:28 PM

Well it looks like the authorities are still insisting that the ball was tampered with and the captain of Pakistan is in the bubble and squeek.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/5269906.stm

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:21 PM

Alec Stewart on the situation

Meanwhile, former England captain Alec Stewart said it was vital the one-dayers do go ahead to ensure "relations between England and Pakistan are not damaged".

Stewart, now an ambassador at Surrey following his retirement two years ago, was among the crowd at the Oval who witnessed the incredible drama unfold, ending the final Test prematurely.

"It was a very bad day for cricket - I've never seen anything like it," Stewart added.

"All I'll say is that you should accept the umpire's decision - that's what you're brought up to do.

"I have sympathy with the umpires because they have made their decision believing what they have done is right, like them giving a catch behind or an lbw."

Stewart also believes both the England and Wales Cricket Board, who staged the Test, can learn to improve their communication skills from this incident.

"We had 24,000 people there and thousands more watching on television and the disappointing thing was that nothing came out," he said.

"There was no information to let people know what was going on and why, they were having to second guess."

Surrey and the ECB have already acted to automatically refund 40% of the price of yesterday's ticket and a full refund for the 12,000 people who bought tickets for Monday.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 06:08 PM

My sympathies are with Pakitan entirely. To accuse a team of cheating, while the game is in progress, is not remotely comparable with an lbw decision, as someone claimed above.

If such a serious accusation can be resolved by awarding a mere five penalty runs, then that itself is a nonsence. In many sports cheating would mean disqualification, or at least that the offender be dismissed from the field.

In this case it would seem that Pakistan were accused - and found guilty - on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. The match was being filmed by 21 television cameras, and all the indications today are that not one of those cameras picked up any untoward behaviour. The ball in question, in the course of its 56-over life, was hit beyond the field of play on several occasions and at least twice landed on concrete terracing after travelling more than 100 metres. It would be a brave adjudicator who could say such a ball had been tampered with illegally if there turns out to be no witness or film evidence.   

Certainly the Pakistan protest was misguided and immature, but it can hardly be a surprise that they were incensed. It would not have been unreasonable for the umpires to reflect, and cut them some slack. If forfeiture of the match was as straightforward a matter as Villan suggests it was, why could the authorities still not say at 10.30pm lat night whether the match was over?

Was it really beyond the parties involved to resolve the matter to more positive effect, in all those hours of negotiation? My guess is that it will turn out to be the bloody-minded intransigence of umpire Hair, as demonstrated before, that's at the root of this matter.

Villan says Hair is disliked by the PAkistanis. I think it would be fairer to say they have no confidence in him as an umpire. But if Villan was really intending to be fair, he might have gone on to say that Hair has crossed swords with several teams - India, Sri Lanka and New Zealand also having filed complaints against his decisions. So far the ICC have defended Hair through every crisis he's created. But with any luck, he's stood in his last test.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 07:32 PM

Hair is a good umpire over the years yhere have been weak one,s who have not had the ball,s to stand up to some teams.In the world cup the referee should have awarded the Italian soccer player 10 points for his dive not a free kick

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: John O'L
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 07:58 PM

No Easy Answers:

"The bare facts are this; a Test match has been forfeited for the first time in the history of international cricket and Pakistan once again stands accused of ball tampering. It is tempting, as the feedback from our readers reveals, to accuse the umpires of bias, but by doing so, we run the risk of judging both by their past history. If we are to do that then we must also acknowledge that, historically, Pakistani bowlers have also been previously found guilty of ball tampering. To do either is wrong and the decision must be assessed in isolation."

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Mr Happy
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 08:01 PM

The whole thing's a loada balls!

Any sensible rules would dictate-'if the ball's b**GG*red- then use common sense- use a new one!- like they do in tennis & other ball games.

********

also - IMHO - I think another example of today's trendy Muslim Bashing!

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 01:31 AM

From what I can make of the two umpires decision (It wasn't just Hair), the dramatic chnage of the ball occurred between 18 balls that were delivered.
It would seem that only one four was scored in those 18 balls and nothing else occured that would make the ball chnage so dranatically, apart from tampering.
I guees it wouldn't be difficult for Sky to have a look at those 18 balls and see if anything unusual occurred that would flaw the umpires (notice I say umpires and not umpire) judgement.
I think there is no doubt the condition of the ball changed dranmatically in those 18 balls to make the umpires come to their decision.

I suppose that the two umpires have been instructed not to comment until all investigations are over.

>>Inzamam could be banned for up to four Tests or eight one-dayers when he appears at an ICC hearing on Friday.<<

Now why would ICC do that unless they are absolutley sure that ball tampering occurred? I suppose we will get to know more on Friday. It would certainly IMHO be aesier for ICC to back the Pakistani's than back the umpires if the evidence is in any way flawed.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: John O'L
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 01:49 AM

As I understand it Inzamam has been charged with ball-tampering and another unspecified charge, presumably relating to the team's failure to take the field.

Interesting. Everywhere I look everyone is saying there is no evidence, but if the ICC is laying charges they must surely have something.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 03:18 AM

What a load of bollocks... it's only a game!

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 08:28 AM

Its just not cricket any more,of course the rot started when batsmen stopped wanlking, but what a delightful game with all those positions like silly mid on, square leg,fine leg, silly point. who but an idiot would field at silly point.bowling a maiden over something I havent been able to do for a long time.
   I blame W G grace .he was the one who first refused to accept an umpires decision and said the crowd have come to see me bat, so im not out.
    umpires word is final , both umpires are neutral, both umpires were involved in the decision, havent certain previous pakistani test bowlers been found guilty of cheating, umpires are only human but if a team has a track record, of course it can affect an umpire,IM SURPRISED ANYONE WANTS TO BE AN UMPIREOR A REFEREE.next thing is some idiot will issue a fatwah to the umpires.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 08:46 AM

Stop wanlking - which letter do you want to remove CD - is it the n or the l :-)

I used to field at silly point, when required. Specialist position. Used to love fielding in the point area or Cover/cover point/extra cover. Always preferred point though.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 08:47 AM

I see Mark Waugh is defending the umpires.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 10:31 AM

Whether the umpires were correct in their decision that the ball had been tampered with is NOT the point at issue, PeterK.

The Pakistan team and officials had several avenues open to them by which to protest that decision, and they chose the very worst one - to try to take the game out of the umpires' hands by (a) refusing to re-start play at the appointed time not once, but twice and then, (b) when the umpires had dropped the bails (thereby declaring the match finished) coming out on to the pitch in an obvious attempt to blackmail the umpires into restarting the game.

Now we hear they are continuing their attempted blackmail by threatening to pull out of the one-day series, thus hitting out at a completely innocent England team, officials and supporters. It stinks.

BTW, personally I don't believe the ball was tampered with, and I totally understand why the Pakistanis felt aggrieved, but their actions are totally out of order and tantamount to the same kind of anarchy that's utterly ruining our other national game, football.

S:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 11:11 AM

Until we know otherwise we have to accept, that the umpires had good grounds for their decision. their have been problems with umpires before, I have a recollection that the pakistani team objected to david constant some years ago.But the system is much fairer these days in that you have umpires from many different countries, WHO ARE LESS LIKELY TO BE BIASED. my misspelling should have been walking not wanking.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 11:26 AM

'scuse me LTS....whats this: "IT'S ONLY A GAME" nonsense???

*G*

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 11:26 AM

Then there was arthur fagg, former england test player, and then test umpire,who refused to take the field in 1973 after the west indies had disputed one of his decisions.Umpiring is a thankless task, if we want quality umpires they have to be paid well and they must be allowed to have the final decision, any questioning of decisions should be done in private and afterwards, umpires performances should be monitored and checked periodically and they should be assessed as to whether they are good enough to continue as test umpires but this should be done away from the media            in private and with decorum and dignity.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Rasener
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 12:06 PM

And the very worst thing is that they the Pakistani's are now deciding who will or won't umpire any future matches when they are playing.
Under those circumstances Hair would umpire every match until they stop such threatening behaviour. Its not acceptable.
Incidentally I would hold the same view if the tampering was against England. The umpires are in charge not the players.
I don'tlike cheats and blackmailers fullstop.

Although this is not the subject of thsi thread, I am totally against Rooney ever becoming captain of England. He is a thug and is the very worst example of what football is about these days. Hemight be a bloody good footballer, but is a disgrace in setting a good example to youngsters.

A statement from Hair

Australian Darrell Hair, the umpire at the centre of the forfeited Oval Test, maintains he was correct to penalise Pakistan and award the game to England.
And he dismissed criticism of his past performance officiating Asian teams.

"People who know me know I would not take action unless I really thought it was necessary," he said.

"I have umpired quite a lot in the sub-continent and when the ICC have asked me to do a job I try and do it to the best of my ability."

Hair told Brisbane's Courier-Mail: "I stand by what I have done, but if anything comes out at the inquiry that proves me incorrect I would accept that too."

Just remeber that Billy Octrove was party to the decision about tampering and forfeiting. So why isn't anybody having a go at both of them.

By all accounts, they are two of the very best umpires.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 12:07 PM

Serves the buggers right for cheating!

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 09:01 PM

Interesting stuff on the front page of the Daily Telegraph yesterday (or day before) which I hadn't seen before. The report said Duncan Fletcher had alerted the umpires to the possibility of ball-tampering before start of play on Sunday morning. Suspicions had already been widely voiced in the England camp apparently. Sky camera crew were similarly alerted to focus on the ball as it was passed from player to player, and Trescothick spent a long time watching individual fielders through binoculars.

Former England fast bowler Angus Fraser has responded to the saga by saying that fielding teams always push the boundaries (pun intended) - for instance by sucking sweets in the knowledge that sugar-rich saliva gives a better shine; and by rubbing lip balm into their clothing. (Applying lip balm directly to the ball is prohibited, but rubbing the ball on clothing is allowed.)

Maybe I should just wait till the fat lady has sung.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Allen in Oz
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 01:30 AM

Keith Miller used to argue that if the bowler were permitted to shine the ball, the batsman should have the right to rub it in the dirt !

I was at the SCG when England left the field after John Snow had his jumper pulled by a bloke in front of the Bob stand and the game was allowed to continue after a long period. There was never any question of a forfeit that day but I suppose technically it could have been . It is propoer that cheats do not prosper. The umpires must be allowed to control the game in exact accordance with the LAWS (not rules) of cricket

AD 1943

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 02:57 AM

well I've read through all of this - what a complicated subject!

I think the answer would be to have two games - two sports.

One game where everybody is allowed to do what they like with the ball - have a funny shaped ball, and the fielding team have little kits like manicure sets where they can upick, rub in lip balm, etc to their hearts content. Perhaps have a little unpicking break - now and then.

then another sport where nothing like that is allowed - not even rubbing. And a new ball every six overs or so.

then people could choose which they wanted to see.