Re: Ball Tampering -- Almond Valley Cricket Club

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 13:20:13 08/25/06 Fri
Author: Andy (The defiant!)
Subject: Re: Ball Tampering
In reply to: jaf 's message, "Re: Ball Tampering" on 14:39:03 08/21/06 Mon

>You miss out one key fact of course Andy. In the laws
>of the game a team is allowed to protest in this way
>with play added on to the end of play. I don't know
>the law number but David lloyd read it out and
>suggested Pakistan know the laws of the game better
>than the umpires.

Then maybe they should have known they would forfeit the game after 2 mins and if they did they shouldnt have then come out and said later 'we are ready to play now, lets get on with it. We want to play for the people here' (not exact words). Damn cheek I say, shame you werent thinking about them half an hour ago. The best way to deal with the problem on the day is to go out and beat England and then complain in my book.

>
>Also when Darryll Hair came in to tell them they would
>lsoe the game unless they reappeared Inzy said to him
>they were continuing their protest and wanted to see
>the ball. He did not get the courtesy of a reply.

Is it also a rule that the umpires must be man slaves to the teams taking part and bow to their every desire? I bet he didnt say please.

>
>For what it is worth I don't think the ball was
>tampered with (do you think it was or was not Andy,
>you must have an opinion?), as I just can't believe
>the number of ex players who were at the game who have
>all reached that conclusion unanimously suggests that
>anything untoward went on. Remember there was only a
>ten minute window of opportunity between Cooks
>dismissal after which the ball was returned to Hair
>and was apparently ok and the incident. Sky alone had
>26 cameras at the ground which saw nothing except Mr
>Hair constantly watching the Pakistanis polishing the
>ball.
>

I cant say if it was or not, I have an opinion but im not sure opinions are relevant. Was the ball in constant view of all cameras for the whole day? Not that by this i am suggesting that the ball was tampered with of course...

>It is probably easier to reach the conclusion that Mr
>Hair is racially biased than it is to say there was
>ball tampering, although one would not dare conclude
>that Mr Hair is racially biased as there is
>insufficient circumstantial evidence.
>

For what my opinion is worth i dont think Mr Hair is a racist. Im sure they look out for these things before making umpires umpires as im also sure they look out for ability to make well judged decision, but ultimately umpires are human so will make mistakes. Then again maybe Mr Hair hid his racist tendencies in order to bring the sub-continent's cricket teams to their knees. Or not.

>I think that one of the most emotional things that
>will happen to anyone during their life is to be
>wrongly accused of something serious or fitted up (I
>know, I've been there) and when the offence is
>cheating and you are a Pakistani and honour (or izza)
>goes right to the route of your society, you are
>extremely niave if you cannot appreciate the
>difference between that and questioning an lbw
>decision.

How about the accusation of being a racist by some of the sub-continent?

>
>Following your logic, presumably Pieterson should have
>been disciplined for a blatant piece of cheating in
>the last test when he gave a huge edge and did not
>walk and was not given out by ..... Darryl Hair.
>surely all cheating should be so summarily punished.

All cheating should be punished depending on severity of the crime. Fines for not walking etc.

>
>Further there are many reasons why Pakistan could not
>and should not have protested in an unseemly way on
>the field of play immediately.
>
>For the record I hope Pakistan and Inzy sue Hair and
>the ICC for defamation of character. If you can't
>prove someone has done something and summarily punish
>them without evidence (and lets stop this pretence
>that the ball proves anything) and that accusation is
>serious enough, you are running the risk of such an
>action.
>

This doesnt justify anything but people get punished for things they didnt do every day - even in our law courts - bit of a sidetrack i know but shit happens sometimes and i have huge respect for people who can get on with life.

>As for your last point, if it transpires that Inzy is
>not found guilty of being in charge of a team who have
>ball tampered on Friday, are you still in favour of
>Hair having made such a monumental error of judgement
>(at least no 2 v Asian countries in his career)
>continuing to stand in any Test matches. Surely in any
>walk of life an error to this degree would result in
>dismissal/termination of contract.

I dont know enough about his past decisions to say really, but if its as bad as all that then yeah fire him. Better still the Sub-continent could raise the $500,000 to pay him off then everyone would be happy!

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: Ball Tampering -- jaf, 15:16:47 08/25/06 Fri
- Re: Ball Tampering -- Andy, 11:52:00 08/28/06 Mon