Cricket administrators do it again

[chickenfeet]

One really has to conclude that the powers that be in cricket couldn't run a piss up in a brewery. I can't imagine any other sport where the reaction to one team refusing to play would be hours of negotiation including the personal representative of the president of Pakistan. If the Pakistanis get away with this it will be a licence for any team in future to walk off whenever they don't like the umpiring. It doesn't matter whether the umpires were right or wrong. That can be dealt with later. However, as usual with the ICC, sub-continent politics and money will be the determining factors.

Comments

[radinden]

Well, looks like it's become apparently the first Test ever to be forfeit for refusal to play, and I can't say I'm all that sorry - if nothing else, any novel approach would have caused the Bearded Wonder to fulminate for months on end.

Agnew in his BBC column observes that it was unlikely to be normal damage from being hit to the boundary that the umpires saw on the ball, not least because the ball had never gone for six, and hadn't gone for four for a while. I reckon Pakistan have been thoroughly caught here, and it's just unfortunate it's flaming Hair umpiring again (see also Afridi doing the twist on the wicket in Lahore, I think it was).

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I think that's the right decision. I wonder, though, whether it will stand once the ass lickers at the ICC are done.

[rparvaaz.livejournal.com]

Agnew also observes that there there is no evidence from the TV cameras to support the Umpire's claims. And when the Umpire in question is Hair, his presence might well be more than 'unfortunate'. Ball tampering is definitely difficult to prove, but it is incredibly easy to claim.

[rparvaaz.livejournal.com]

The Pakistani team really ought to have lodged a complaint off-field. But as far as the rest of it goes, I can't think of any other sport where a person as prejudiced and racist as Hair continues to officiate inspite of repeated problems. Even if one discounts Hair's long history of 'South Asians are cheats, especially when they are doing well' [and one shouldn't], there have been enough problems during this particular series. I really don't think it was a case of not liking the umpiring, I think it was a case of not liking the umpire's attitude. And I can't blame them for that. What I do blame them for is for allowing the chap to needle them enough to be this discourteous to their hosts. There were other, better ways of handling the issue.

And as for this being a license of sorts, umm, I don't quite see what you mean. Teams that walk off forfeit the match. They have always had that 'license' - no one sits with guns at the boundary line, forcibly keeping the teams in until the last over is bowled, or the last wicket falls.

[rparvaaz.livejournal.com]

*g*

I just read the morning papers, and can see what you mean by 'getting away with it'. The PCB seems to be trying to get the match to resume on Monday, and that is just not on. They refused to play, and they have to live with the repercussions.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

Teams that walk off forfeit the match.

Well it took them five hours to confirm that and the precedent was in fact otherwise; Tendulkar and the Indians walk out in South africa where the ICC annulled the result. I would also point out that the chairmnan of the PCB was on the BBC denying that Pakistan that had forfeited while his team were still locked in the dressing room.

[rparvaaz.livejournal.com]

I wasn't watching the BBC, or the match yesterday so my opinions are based on what I read in that link you posted, and on what my morning paper said.

That precedent bit sounded a bit strange, but I am probably basing my recollections on the Bombay World Cup semi-final, which was a one-day match.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

The precedent was a test in SA with Mike Denness as ref. He charged six Indians with Code offences. The Indians took umbrage and refused to play. The ICC decided to expunge the game from the record rather than record it as a SA win.

[rparvaaz.livejournal.com]

When was this? There have been a few years when I didn't have much time for cricket [tbh, I usually don't have much time for cricketing controversies unless someone I know personally is involved], and this rings no bell whatsoever.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

It was 2001 but the story may not be as simple as I thought. I'm trying to dig through the records and it looks more like the Indians objected to Denness as ref for the 3rd test, the SA's agreed to a change but the ICC didn't and so when the test was played with officials not appointed by the ICC they ruled it invalid.

[rparvaaz.livejournal.com]

Though I vaguely recall one major brew-up during Dalmiya's tenure...

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

"I can't think of any other sport where a person as prejudiced and racist as Hair continues to officiate inspite of repeated problems."

Andre Watson?

[rparvaaz.livejournal.com]

Who's Andre Watson?

[Not that I need to say it, but I am not too familiar with many, many sports - which is why I could so easily say th line you quoted above].

On a different note, hope the l'll kitten feels better soon.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

He's the Sith Efriken mofo who reffed the RWC2003 final and did his best to hand it to the Aussies in the last couple of minutes with some of the most outrageous decisions I've ever seen.