BS: Pakistan forfeit test match

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 03:11 AM

LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 04:01 AM

WLD, wrong!! The answer is for match officials to grow some balls and face up to their true reponsibilities (which Hair and Doctrove clearly did in the game in question!), and for cheating bastards (of all nationalities - we have our share of them here in the UK) to be expelled sine die from whichever sport in which they take part.
S:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 05:15 AM

Well SJ, I could agree with that in principle but while I do believe the decision for Pakistan to forfeit the game was correct, the ball tampering/cheating issue to me is far from clear at the moment.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: ard mhacha
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 12:16 PM

Why didn`t someone get the former England captain Michael Atherton to give his opinion, after all, Mike had the experience, didn`t he do a bit of cheating by doctoring the ball with a pocketful of dirt.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 05:14 PM

Your on the ball ard mhacha, spot on.

now I reckon cork will win the all Ireland hurling, AND THEY WILL DO IT WITHOUT ANY BALL TAMPERING, just call for the bold thady quill.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 06:32 PM

nice to see you back ard, where you been?

I really think though, it would be a good idea to have a sort of free form sports - where everybody was allowed all the drugs they wanted, and ingenious ways of bending the rules were tolerated with a sly chuckle, perhaps with the exception of where they endangered other players.

then all the nice guys could go on question of sport, and the other lot could on they think its all over.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: John O'L
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 07:32 PM

...then all the nice guys could go on question of sport, and the other lot could on they think its all over.

I think we need some kind of regulatory body or code of definition to work that one out, wld

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 06:03 AM

Guest Jon - read my other post, I'm not making a judgment on whether they did or did not tamper with the ball. What I'm saying is that, if match officials in other sports took their lead from those in cricket, we wouldn't have to watch e.g. the nauseating spectacle of footballers screaming in simulated agony, rolling over and over and over, and demanding a card be shown for a foul that never actually took place.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 06:12 AM

Sorry, SJ - I'd not connected the previous post. I agree with you there.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: ard mhacha
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 07:35 AM

How many Test players walk now when the umpire fails to spot an outside edge?, not too many, if any, all those days of sportsmanship have gone.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 08:25 AM

Ard, I would agree the game has gone shall we say more "professional". Perhaps that should add to reasons for not wanting umpiring to be dictated to by "player power"?

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 08:41 AM

Jon - no problem!

Ard - all the more reason for the match officials to (a) know and fully understand the laws/rules of the game, (b) apply those laws/rules to the letter and (c) have the balls to refuse to allow the players to intimidate them. Achieve those three and the unsportsmanship will be reduced to the minimum because miserable cheating shits won't be allowed to get away with it.

BTW - what the feck does an Irishman know about cricket? LOL! Only joking, Ard!

S:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 08:41 AM

I would have thought it appropriate that deliberate cheating should result in forfeture - even if established after the event from recordings. I have particularly in mind Maradonna's handball - his team should have been retrospectively disqualified as soon as the facts were established.

At present, it seems to me, it remains a matter of speculation whether ball tampering did in fact take place, but the refusal to play allowed only one consequence.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 09:20 AM

Granted, most men used it back in his era, but it seems to me Freddie Trueman always had a LOT of Brylcreem in his hair, & with that sort of 'floppy' hairstyle he sported at one point, was always running his finger through his hair to get it out of the way.

He cant have been the only one, but the more I think about it, the more it seemed that his hairstyle & everything was contrived to enhance that little trick!

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 09:23 AM

Oops, couple of typo's in there

I meant 'running his FINGERS through his hair' of course

& 'the more it SEEMS' not seemed....present not past tense.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: ard mhacha
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 09:57 AM

When the governing bodies in Cricket begin to use the technology which is available, then we shall see the end of cheats, it is there , so why not use it.

StrollingJohnny away back in the early 1960s I was at the Oval one blistering summers day and seen Ken Barrington grind his way to a 50, it took him all of two hours, I was good enough to get on to our works team in London, how fit I was then, don`t look back.

Captain Birdseye what an epic awaits us, Cork v Kilkenny in this years All-Ireland Hurling final, it is a shame that some poor souls on this Thread won`t be as priviliged as us, can any game compare.

Hope you are well, Weelittledrummer.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 10:43 AM

Happy days Ard!

BTW, the match officials, at least in international cricket, do use technology - hence the third umpire with a TV screen and hi-motion to check for edges, carries, bump balls etc. They have at least made a pretty good start - you have to ask yourself why the powers that be in football don't do the same - is it because they're scared stiff of the over-paid nancy-boys who play the game?

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: ard mhacha
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 12:07 PM

Sorry, I was referring to the biggest bug-bear in Cricket,LBW, how long and many are the arguments when the Umpire gets it wrong, that contraption they use on TV4 is marvellous, if they ever make use of it, the Umpires lot will be so easy,they will will only be concerned with the dirty ball boys.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 01:43 PM

well I never did like sportsmen.. have you noticed they always get more goes than anybody else when you go bowling, or playing skittles. they are too competitive for normal life. it follows that this is something they develop on the sports field, and it completely takes over when they are playing at a really high level.

I sometimes play scrabble with this bloke who is one of the best in England. He knows all these idiotic words with just consonants that no one EVER uses. However he let me win, last time I played with him. I bet you never get a footballer or cricketer who even lets his kids win.

Not too bad Ard, waiting to see a surgeon about the old ticker. depressing prospect - if he says he can help - its a day out with the bloke who demonstrates the JML cutter slicer grater on your innards.If he can't help, well the huffing and puffing will probably get worse. Still, no use in moaning about it. Its been a good summer.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 01:52 PM

I couldn't believe the amount of air time BBC Radio 4 devoted to this bit of irrelevant trivia the other day. It's about time that players and fans of 'Boring Game' got a life!!

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 02:40 PM

Gotcha Ard! Yes, I agree the use of a 'Hawkeye'-type of software would be of great assistance in LBW decisions, although I have to say that I'm astonished how frequently the umpires and Hawkeye agree - the umpires seem to have a pretty high accuracy rate.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 05:16 AM

I think cricket is rather like chess.I used to like some of the1960 entertaining cricketers like Bomber Wells,and Henry Horton who had a stance like [someone shitting on a sooting stick].and theimmortal Brian Johnson with his [thebowlers Holding the batsmens Willey].

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 08:15 AM

and then there was the occasion when bomber was batting no 11 for gloucestershire, with charlie cook at no 10,cook got fedup with wells idiosyncratic running, and said for god sake bomber, call please. so next time a run was scored bomber shouts out tails.now cricket was entertainment in those days and players walked. and everyone realised it was just a game, the playing of the game and the craic were the important things.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 08:25 AM

its probab;y your fault - all those bloody e numbers you put in the fish fingers, we're all on edge these days and we want to win.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Elfcall
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 08:39 AM

Captain B

T'was Sam Cook - and there is also a story that when both Sam and Bomber were injured and batting with runners that all 4 ended up at one end!

Elfcall

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 10:24 AM

he was C Cook, Cecil[sam] Cook, my apologies,there was another occasion when sam was badly hurt and losing blood after tasking a knock,as the rest of the team gathered round, Milton said never mind sam its only worthington e your losing.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 11:36 AM

It's getting very strange... Darrell Hair offered to resign as an umpire in exchange for $500,000,. I'm not sure what to make of that.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 01:00 PM

According to ICC chief exec Malcolm Speed, "He was seeking to find a solution that was in the interests of the game." I suppose Hair's fans in this thread might believe that. How jolly decnet of him not to put his own interests first!

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 02:21 PM

I suppose you are right but one thing that gets me is the figure involved. I must admit I haven't the first clue as to what might constitute a say (I'm not sure what to call it or really accept what I'm about to call it) "reasonable settlement" but it still seems to me a sort of outrageous (could it even be taken seriously?) figure.

I think I'll remain baffled and wait to see what the outcome is.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 02:37 PM

the game has fallen into total dis repute.if iwas living in tunbridge wells, I would be disgusted .I suggest we all take up watching hurling and GAA football .
   yours DickMiles disgusted of cooragurteen, ballydehob.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Den
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 02:46 PM

I recently read that Martin McGuinness is a cricket fan. Its a funny old world. How are you Ard? I was just over in the ould sod. Had a great time.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 03:15 PM

As to the story above about Hair's offer to resign for $500,000, a test cricketer on Radio 4 this teatime said that that was probably about the amount Hair could expect to earn from umpiring in the next four years. As (unlike footballers) age and infirmity would probably not rule him out of the game for some years to come, it seems a reasonable offer.
Apparently it was made directly to the ICC and intended to be a confidential agreement.
Not so much "give me a bung and I'll keep quiet", as "I'll retire as long as it doesn't cost me too much"

CHEERS
Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 03:20 PM

Thanks Nigel, I think that at least clears my thoughts with regards to the amount up.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 03:43 PM

But Nigel, if such a claim was ever tested at litigation, the circumstances of Hair's retirement (including any contribution he may have made to it himself) and his potential to earn alternative income would have to be valued in determining the "remedy".

No wonder he was demanding a speedy result - ie the dollars in his bank account by the end of August! - and was hoping the proof of his derangement might be kept secret. (How did he think the ICC could chuck half-a-million dollars away without telling anyone?)

Hair knows he is finished in international cricket and was looking to walk away with four years' pay for doing nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 04:33 PM

hang on, theres two umpires that made a decision,what about the other umpire, why shouldnt he be finished in the sub continent as well, why is everyone assumingthat billy octrove had no part in this.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 05:09 PM

I'm not assuming anything with regards to the ball tampering incident, although it is perhaps fair to comment that Hair's offer has increased my doubts about Hair and not the umpire who did not make the offer.

The only bit I feel convinced on is the decision following Pakistan's protest was the correct one. That is based purely on my understanding of the law and a wish that "player protests" do not become a feature of the game even if they have been treated in a manner that is later shown to be wrong. That is not to say that I believe Pakistan might not have good reason to feel aggrieved (or for that matter that I feel convinced that the umpires' decision regarding the ball tampering might not have been founded).

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 03:02 AM

But John, what about the England protest after John Snow's entanglement with a spectator? If sanity can prevail once, why not again? Considering how long the talks went on afterwards, I think we can safely assume the ICC was keen for the game to proceed, and were thwarted by the intransigence of the umpires (or perhaps jus one of them). TheEngland camp, presumably, were happy to take the forfeit.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 04:42 AM

Yes i agree hairs decision was strange, but we dont know how much pressure he has been under ,has he received   threatening anonymous letters etc, whatever. the umpires have a right to change the ball if they believe its been tampered with, and the pakistanis made the wrong decision in delaying their return to the field.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 05:07 AM

Darrell Hair must surely be totally discredited after the latest revalation that he offered to resign for half a million US dollars, kept secret of course.

eric [ and I hate cricket ]

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Paul Burke
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 06:12 AM

The latest revelations make Hair look at best like a dangerous nutcase, and at worst having set the incident up for gain. He may have followed the rules to the letter, but any umpire who was trying to solve a problem without unnecessary confrontation would have called the captains together to discuss the state of the ball, and would have gone to almost any lengths to continue the test.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 06:24 AM

To be honest, Peter, while I do remember John Snow, I know nothing of the incident you refer to.

---------
Re the emails, I see they now have the exchanges here on the BBC site.

In all this speculation, I find Hairs opening:

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. [snip]

And the reply:

From: Doug Cowie
To: Darrell Hair
CC: David Richardson
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006
Subject: Re: The way forward.

Darrell, Your offer may have merit and is acknowledged and under discussions with ICC management.

Your timeframes seemed impractical at first glance even if agreement were achieved on the suggestion.

Will discuss this further tomorrow,
Doug

Interesting. Although Speed later got involved and said to Hair.

"The matters raised by you concerning your future employment are entirely inappropriate. There is a clear process that is to be followed and it is in place."

I do wonder what might have happened and would love to know what the initial converation between Hair and Cowie was and who did the initial suggesting that leaving may be the best option.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 08:15 AM

I repeat there were two umpires involved.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 08:29 AM

And the point of you repeating yourself is?

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 08:49 AM

that everybody is focusing on hair. why/ .why not doctrove.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 09:14 AM

I can't speak for any of the others but my focusing on Hair has to do with corresponace that doctrove to the best of my knowledge has nothing to do with.

Another reason why one might focus more on Hair is that he has been involved in controversy before and Pakistan had not wanted him to umpire. This does alter the fact the decision was made by both umpires but it does contribute towards feeings and speculatitive opinions regarding this issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 26 Aug 06 - 10:00 AM

Whats more the feckin ICC said they will continue to emply him and give him the appropriate guidence, he should have been sacked forthwith, not for the ball tampering fiasco but for his outrageous offer.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 02:17 AM

Jon

The incident with John Snow was at the Sydney Cricket Ground in the 1970s when Snow was grabbed by a spectator near what is now the Bill O'Reilly Stand and Illingworth took the England team from the field.

After long discussions , probably a quick cup of tea and a yarn, the England team came back on and sanity prevailed .I was there that day (on the Hill) and nobody thought that a forfeit was in the offing.

Hair could have called the 3rd Umpire in to discuss the delay with Inzy and perhaps sanity would have once again prevailed. Who knows? It might have been worth a try anyway.

AD 1943 in Australia

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: Terry K
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 03:57 AM

All of the fault lies with the ICC. The umpires are employed by the ICC to ump the match in accordance with the laws, which is exactly what they did. The umps don't have any alternative - it is not within their job description to agree to waive the laws if they choose to.

Any appeal process would not involve the umps, but should have been made directly from the Pakistani team hierarchy to the match referee (not the 3rd umpire), who is the official representative of the ICC. That office clearly failed to deal with the matter at the time, with all the resulting confusion and controversy. Darell Hair has been the object of criticism since then, mainly because of the ICC's failure to clarify the situation. I think he has a claim against them, but that is a different matter.

In an ideal world, the ICC should have had an announcement made to the crowd immediately the match was forfeited, and to say that they were considering whether or not to uphold the forfeiture - if in fact they really were considering that. That way it would have been clear that the umpires' actions were clearly correct and would have taken the umps completely out of the firing line.

As to the ball tampering, surely the umps knew that their joint decision would be inflammatory, and that they would get a lot of stick out of it. So why would they volunteer for all the trouble unless they had some reason - what else was in it for them?

cheers, Terry

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: The Sandman
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 07:16 AM

the spirit and laws of the game have to be upheld.
David Gower has written a very sensible article in the sunday times.[mind you i think its a crap paper]which is worth looking at.

Subject: RE: BS: Pakistan forfeit test match
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 27 Aug 06 - 07:34 AM

Thanks Guest. There seems to me to be quite a difference between taking the team off because of what sounds like the violent action of a member of the crowd and an action taken because an umpiring decision concerning (I suppose I'll call it) "the normal events of a game".

While I take it both of these events did constitute refusal to play, IMO one set of circumstaces was rather more negotiable than the other.