"Let there arise out of you a band of people inviting to all that is good enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong; they are the ones to attain felicity".
(surah Al-Imran,ayat-104)
Image Not found for user
User Name: Noman
Full Name: Noman Zafar
User since: 1/Jan/2007
No Of voices: 2195
 Views: 2453   
 Replies: 4   
 Share with Friend  
 Post Comment  
NEW DELHI (AFP) - Legendary West Indian fast bowler Michael Holding wants Pakistan absolved of ball tampering charges, saying "first world hypocrisy" was to blame for cricket's present crisis.

"I have absolute and all sympathy with (Pakistan captain) Inzamam-ul Haq. If you label someone a cheat, please arrive with the evidence," Holding wrote in the latest issue of the respected 'India Today' weekly magazine.

Inzamam stands accused of bringing the game into disrepute after his team refused to take the field in the recent Oval Test match against England in protest at umpires Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove reporting them for ball tampering.

The umpires later awarded the match to England, the first instance in the 129-year history of Test cricket that a game was forfeited, triggering the biggest upheaval in the sport since the match-fixing row in 2000.

Holding, now a popular and respected television pundit, wrote it was "insensitive" of the umpires, Hair in particular, to penalise Pakistan for ball tampering.

"Most other umpires would have said something to the captain, given the offending team a warning of some kind. Then if the tampering continued, they would have been totally justified in taking action," Holding wrote.

"There is a double standard at work in cricket and this episode has only highlighted it.

"When England used reverse swing to beat the Australians in the 2005 Ashes, everyone said it was great skill. When Pakistan does it, the opposite happens, no one thinks it is great skill. Everyone associates it with skullduggery.

"When bombs go off in Karachi and Colombo everyone wants to go home. When bombs go off in London, no one says anything.

"That is first world hypocrisy and we have to live with it."

Holding said he was astonished that both teams and match referee Mike Procter were willing to resume play on the final day, but the umpires cited rules and insisted the game was already over.

"Being the senior umpire, Hair was probably leading the way in that decision," wrote Holding.

"Today, Hair is being defended in Australia but that is just a matter of friends sticking together, the Aussies defending an Australian umpire.

"Everyone now citing the cricketing law as the absolute and final truth is talking absolute rubbish. Every law has room for flexibility.

"I read a prime example recently in the British press. It said that by law, you can be fined for parking within the yellow lines in England. If you do that to run into a chemist to buy emergency medicines, a sensible policeman would more than likely tell you about the law but it's unlikely a ticket would be forthcoming."

The International Cricket Council's powerful Executive Board, comprising the heads of all 10 Test-playing nations, is due to meet in Dubai on Saturday to discuss the crisis
 Reply:   Speed admits Hair's career cou
Replied by(Noman) Replied on (30/Aug/2006)
Malcolm Speed, the ICC chief executive, believes that Darrell Hair's Test career could be over after the controversy of the past week
Malcolm Speed, the ICC chief executive, believes that Darrell Hair's Test career could be over after the controversy of the past week.

Hair offered to quit top-level cricket in return for $500,000 after the ball-tampering furore which lead to Pakistan forfeiting their final Test against England. Throughout the week Speed has been quick to establish that the ICC were not ending Hair's career or cutting him adrift from the game. However, he has admitted he doesn't know whether Hair could shake off this latest controversy.

"There have been other issues in his umpiring career where people have said 'this is the end for Darrell Hair' - after he called Muttiah Muralitharan for throwing in 1996, and he then wrote a book, and people said 'this is the end for Darrell Hair'," Speed told BBC Radio Five Live's Sportsweek programme.

"Darrell survived that and has become a better umpire, he is one of the world's best umpires, so I hope we can find a way for him to continue but I'm not sure that that will happen.

"Why? Because there's a lot of speculation...that Darrell's career is finished, that he's compromised. That's not my wish, I hope we can find a way for him to continue. I would like Darrell Hair to continue umpiring in cricket matches at the top level."

Hair, who made a brief statement following the news of his offer on Friday, has spoken to Sydney's Sunday Telegraph about his thinking behind the email. "It wasn't a spur of the moment thing. I had dialogue with them. That was understood. I didn't do it off the cuff. [Umpires' manager] Doug Cowie even said in his email reply to my offer that the proposal had merit." Then asked whether he would ever umpire again, Hair said: "Let's address one thing at a time."

While it has been Hair's future making the headlines, there is now an increasing focus on Cowie, and his initial response to the emails when he said: "Your offer may have merit and is acknowledged and under discussions with the ICC management. Your timeframes seemed impractical at first glance even if agreement were achieved on the suggestion. Will discuss this further tomorrow."

Speed admitted that Cowie now regretted the content of his reply to Hair and the suggestion that ICC would consider it. "That was Doug Cowie's response and I think if he could play it again he would play it differently. When it came to me I saw that not for one second could we contemplate it. At no time did I ever consider paying Darrell any amount."

Speed said it was up to the ICC adjudicator to decide whether Hair's actions affected the charges against Inzamam-ul-Haq of ball-tampering and bringing the game into disrepute, brought up following the team's sit-in at The Oval.

Inzamam refused to bring his team out after the tea interval after Hair and his colleague Billy Doctrove's decision to penalise them five runs for ball-tampering.

Speed said: "The ball-tampering issue and the subsequent charge are very simple cricketing issues about what happened on the field. Whether it impacts on Darrell Hair's credit I don't know, that's a matter for Pakistan's lawyers whether to raise that, and then for the adjudicator to decide whether he takes that into account."

Shahrayar Khan, the PCB chairman, has insisted that Hair should not umpire another match involving Pakistan, but Speed refused to go that far. "It was said he could never umpire Sri Lanka again after 1996 but he has. Time will tell if water needs to flow under the bridge. I don't know what his future is but I hope we can find a way for him to continue."

Speed confirmed the ball-tampering charge had been made by both Hair and Doctrove, and that he was not aware the England players had made any complaint.

 Reply:   Pakistan wants Hair investigat
Replied by(Ghost) Replied on (29/Aug/2006)
Pakistan wants Hair investigation before Inzamam hearing
The Pakistan cricket team has said they wanted the International Cricket Council (ICC) to launch an investigation against Darrell Hair, the Australian umpire at the centre of the ball-tampering row, before taking a decision on charges levelled against Inzamam-ul-Haq.

Shaharyar Khan, the chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), said he had written a three-point letter to the ICC topped by the demand of an inquiry against Hair for his accusation of ball tampering against Pakistan and a controversial verdict to forfeit the fourth Test at The Oval in favour of England.

Shaharyar wrote the letter following the ICC announcement that they have cancelled a meeting of the body's executive board scheduled for September 2 in Dubai.

"The decision by the ICC to cancel the Executive Board meeting in Dubai was taken after a consensus was reached among the members," Shaharyar said in an interview from his London home.

Shaharyar said that Pakistan were OK with the ICC move. According to him, Pakistan's main demand was that the ICC should begin an inquiry against Hair for his role in turning The Oval Test into a farce.

The ICC set a hearing in Inzamam's disciplinary case for August 25 in London but later postponed it after adjudicator Ranjan Madugalle expressed his unavailability to attend the hearing because of family illness. The ICC later announced that the hearing would take place in the second half of September.

Shaharyar said that Pakistan's second demand is that the ICC should make it sure that Hair is not allowed to officiate in any of Pakistan's matches in the future.

 Reply:   ZAHEER ABBAS Column: The sense
Replied by(Ghost) Replied on (28/Aug/2006)
ZAHEER ABBAS Column: The sense that is uncommon
I AM sure the readers would love to have all the details of the absolutely unfortunate incidents that have taken place in the last few days. The expectations of the readers are justified because these lines are being written by someone who was, and is still, closely involved in all that has taken place in the last few days. I feel sorry in disappointing the readers, but it is practically impossible for me to say anything, as, at the time of writing, there is so much happening on so many fronts. Right now, it is all in a flux. So much so that, as I write, we do not even know when actually the ICC hearing will be held, and where.

The proceedings of that black day at The Oval is something that you have all seen time and again over your television sets. There is no point repeating them here. Every one has an opinion and is entitled to have it. It just so happens that there is a huge understanding of the Pakistani stand on the issue not just here in England, but elsewhere as well. If the English media is empathising with Pakistan, one may well imagine the level of success of our tour machinery in building bridges with a nation with whom we have been at odds more often than not.

Ironically, I have seen a few reactions that I found a bit funny. It was a foregone conclusion that the umpire concerned will have enough sympathy in his home country Australia. It is in the nature of the Australians that they find absolutely nothing wrong in what they do, and everything wrong with what the others do. They didn't find anything wrong when Mark Waugh and Shane Warne took money from the betting mafia. Again they didn't find anything wrong with the fact that the Australian authorities kept the matter hidden from the world for a considerably long time. Yet, they continue to talk about betting scandals here, there and everywhere. So, as I said, it was only expected that they will find nothing wrong with Darryl Hair either.

But still the amount of praise lavished on the umpire by the likes of Steve Waugh and some other cricket columnists for being "brave" is something that amazed me. How can people simply fail to leave some room for a possible error of judgment? It is all fine to talk of laws. But about the spirit of the law?

A strict interpretation of law never asks an umpire to warn the fielding captain about the altering condition of the ball, and not to explain anything to him. But is it how the convention go? No. Most umpires take up the matter with the captain and take the decision after informing him beforehand. It does not happen often that the fielding captain comes to know of the decision only when the fourth umpire walks in with a box full of cricketing balls.

Surprisingly, there has been one statement from an Australian which has talked of the possibility of an error on the part of Hair, and that statement, interestingly, has come from Hair himself. Talking to the Sydney Daily Telegraph, he has been quoted as saying thus: "I stand by what I have done, but if anything comes out at the inquiry that proves me incorrect, I would accept that too." This is something that no one expected from him, because, most of the unfortunate happenings of the last few days owe their origin, more than anything else, to the apparent lack of sensitivity, common sense and tact.

I am quite sure that if he can keep that vital door open not just in words but also in actual practice, things can still be worked out. But that, I am sure, is a big `if'. Let's see.

 Reply:   Hair offer: The blackmail of a
Replied by(Ghost) Replied on (28/Aug/2006)
One of the senior umpire and former Test cricketer of the country have termed the $ 500,000 demand by Darrel Hair as a ransom and blackmail of an umpire who himself is a cheat
LAHORE - One of the senior umpire and former Test cricketer of the country have termed the $ 500,000 demand by Darrel Hair as a ransom and blackmail of an umpire who himself is a cheat. On condition of anonymity, the senior umpire, who is on the Pakistan Cricket Board and International cricket Council panel said that Hair had the backing of the ICC in all that affair. "The ICC, I would say is behind the entire episode. It's a conspiracy to award money to Hair. The ICC panel umpire is already earning a lot of money for supervising eight Test matches and 25 One-day Internationals," he said.

He further said that Hair had found a way of threatening threat and black mail just to earn money. He also lashed at the PCB officials mishandling the situation. "There are several other ways of protest and the issue would have ended right on the spot but now Hair has found another way of making money," the senior umpire said. He further added that in the west big newspapers and television channels give lot of money for selling stories and Hair is doing the same.

Meanwhile, another former Test umpire Khalid Aziz said that he has reviewed the day the incident happened and the list of incompetency of Darrell Hair is so long that volumes could be compiled. The controversial umpire Darrel Hair in an email to the ICC manager of umpires and referees conditioned his resignation from August 30, 2006 to a compensation of $ 500,000. Bird demanded that Hair should be removed from the international panel immediately as he had brought disrespect to the game of gentleman and the profession of umpiring.

Former Test cricketers Muhammad Ilyas has called Hair a black-mailer and cheat and said that he was demanding ransom from his biased umpiring. "The demand of money by Hair has proved that Pakistan was on the right and the controversy was a myth created by the umpire who is there to earn money with backing from the ICC."The ICC has itself revealed the dishonesty of one of their officials terming him clean when he is demanding money for his dislike to the sub-continental teams," said Ilyas.

Ilyas also said that when Hair had no-balled Sri Lankan off-spinner Muthiah Muralitharan for chucking and he wrote a book on the issue and made lot of money. "He did the same just for the sake of money. He spoiled the game for his gains and maligned Pakistan," said he.

"Now there is no need of any hearing against Pakistan captain Inzamam-ul-Haq. After Hair's black-mail, it is clear Pakistan team is clean and should be cleared of all charges," he added. "The ICC should not allow Hair to stand as umpire in any international or domestic matches," he said he also praised the PCB and Shaharyar Khan for standing with the team and captain in this hard time.


Please send your suggestion/submission to
Long Live Islam and Pakistan
Site is best viewed at 1280*800 resolution