what do you think who is right and who is wrong pakistan-team or darrel hair.?

Question

this question is regaring the oval-test between england and pakistan

Answer 1

First of: It´s a very good question.

And as far as the Oval-Test is concerned I think nobody deserves to be patted on back proudly, and neither of them is absolutely wrong. I personally think that Pakistan shouldn´t have protested even if they have not tempered the ball, and if they did it they should returned to take the field within 15 minutes. So the match wouldn´t have been abandoned or forefeited. They could have also talked about it later after the end of the Test-match or after end of the day. But if Pakistan has tempered the ball, then they should be punished severely. And as far as Darrel Hair is concerned ICC shoud take an action against him because something is fishy as it looks when he comes out as an umpire in matches including South-Asian teams. Imran Khan´s remarks for Darrel Hair were just about right (Calling him a Mini-Hitler). Because i read an a article, and there was written that "The Hair-And-Sub-Continent saga actually started from the in year 1992 in which he gave 8 LBW decision against India at Adelaide". (Click on the 1st link below to go to the scorecard of that match). And not only India and Pakistan he is also against the Sri Lankans. Once upon a time Murli was bowling in Australia. and Hair gave 8 no-balls because he thought that his bowling-action wasn´t right.

Click on 2nd link to read an article regarding some bad decisions by Hair and Docrtove.

Answer 2

am afraid my dear...v r using very polite words for the blooody jerk daryl hair...hes so cruel and evil...he is a black spot on the game...definately he took money for all this....but IC thinks that only the players and specially aisan players can cheat and umpires are angels....huh...but look what IC is doing...and look what ex australian players are saying...it sall recism i am afraid....ICC might ban inzi for 8 matches...for putting the match to an end...but they might overlook what the umpires did..they are seeing the end mo re closely than the means.....it has 2b asked from that blody cheat that whom did u c tempering the ball....and if u dint se anybody then y th hell did u award penalty runs....and even then when u saw paki team not coming outta ground...u shud have gone 2 inzi and told him that well..if u dont come..i will award it 2 englanad...but he didnt do any of the above...coz he never wanted to,,,,he wanted the same what happened.....and sorry 2 comment on simon taufel's comments that he knows the aws better than any1....had that been the caase...he would not have given inzi run out in faisalabad as that was a complete matter of law..............HATE HAIR

its definatley daryl hair at fault....had temparing been the case inzi would have used 2 fast bowlers instead of kaneria on the other end....do u expect kaneria 2 reverse swing th ball? when cook got out...ball wis with Hair...and just 3 ovrs later he found the ball tempered...the point is that when cook got out...ball was rversing...y didnt the bloody hair se at that time that something has been done2 the ball....it is quite possible that he himslf did it...what pakistan did was just a result of hair's decision..therefor before deciding why pakistan pulled outta match...ICC must look into hair's matter...if he is proven guilty ..pakistan is automatially free of charge!!!

Answer 3

Darrel Hair may have certain credits to his name, like having a thorough knowledge of the rules of cricket.

But why did he break with convention in not discussing the issue with the alleged perpetrators?

Why didn't he consult the referee? Was it 'cos he was a Sri Lankan - Ranjan Madugalle?

One recalls what Dr W.G. Grace did when he was given out: he refused to go; "Do you think this crowd has come to watch you umpire or me bat? I aint going, you may." The game continued.

Pakistan, don't emulate Grace! Hair - you think you're important like that umpire a hundred years ago!

Make no mistake, this could build up into something as bad as the bodyline controversy. There's something fishy about the way this guy acts. The evidence is building up.

Answer 4

Well as for what I have read from Newspapers Darrel was wrong when he put the penalty on Pakistan.

Answer 5

might want to Andrew Strauss sue him for giving him out at the same time as he wasn't? it really is all all the way down to the umpire's judgement. also absence of information isn't data of absence.... he took the decision depending on the state of the ball. also they could ought to sue both umpires, no longer basically Hair. i think in the journey that they did that that they had be ejected from the ICC - sport has its own regulations and they govern (with the help/assent of common regulation) the moves taken through those in the game. that is really very uncommon, and oftentimes basically situations of both own damage or the position there is sturdy data that an injustice has been executed. besides, in the journey that they sued, Pakistan might want to, in this variety of case, ought to prepare totally they did not intrude with the ball (and the inability of information of the opposite on the cameras does no longer represent sturdy data). which will be hellishly perplexing to prepare.

Answer 6

As far as ball tempering issue concerned DH should provide strong evidence. none of the 26 cameras have shown such thing.

Inzi's way to protest was bit controversial.

He should have won the match and then protest against umpire,s decision

But we support Inzi.

Answer 7

I did'nt see the match. But as I heard from others Darrel is wrong.

Answer 8

if inzi had really tampered the ball then pakistan is wrong

Answer 9

INZI did the right thing.

Answer 10

THAT'S MILLION $ QUESTION.
ICC WILL FIND THE ANSWER.
BUT,
THE CURRENT CULPRIT IS INZI.
FOR BREAKING THE MATCH AWAY.