I fought the law and the law won
England vs Pakistan, 4th Test, The Oval 2006
The particular law that resides at the centre of the Pakistan forfeiture controversy is this one.
“Law 21, 3 (b) If an umpire considers that an action by any player or players might constitute a refusal by either side to play then the umpires together shall ascertain the cause of the action. If they then decide together that this action does constitute a refusal to play by one side, they shall so inform the captain of that side. If the captain persists in the action the umpires shall award the match…..”
There is an explicit statement here that the umpires must inform the captain that his actions are being deemed as a refusal and that therefore persisting will result in a refusal. Inzamam has indicated that this did not happen.
So, assuming that this is true (and it has not been denied), then Darryl Hair failed to correctly apply the law.
This is not a benign playing of words I’m doing here. This is such a significant point that in the explanatory notes issued by the MCC to accompany the laws of the game themselves, an example is cited that when the captain of a side is unavailable to be informed then the law cannot be applied (and therefore the forfeiture cannot be awarded).
Whilst the explanation here relates to a team not turning up, the principles are the same. Copy of the Q&A here if you are as anally retentive as I am.
Therefore, the discussion between umpire and captain is a monumentally important one, that cannot afford the smallest degree of ambiguity.
According to Inzamam, Hair barely spoke to him.
I say again, Hair’s gotta go.
Posted: August 22nd, 2006 under Cricket.
Comments: 6
Comments
Comment from S Jagadish
Time: August 23, 2006, 4:19 am
Chris, reg. the match awarding clause, the question will be whether Law 21.3 (a) has to be read in conjunction with Law 21.3 (b) or not. If it isn’t in conjuncion, and an ‘either-or’ case, then the umpires were right. If it is ‘(a) and (b)’ then the umpires are wrong.
Comment from tasmeena
Time: August 23, 2006, 4:28 am
DEAR SIR
DARREL SHOULD RESIGN
REVERSE SWING CONTROVERSY
HERE WE GO AGAIN
Before I may say anything let me assure you that I am an ardent fan of Cricket and I love this game so whatever I say is not due to partialism.
I am going to be straight forward in what I want to say….no diplomatic ways of narration…because I have had enough of whining and worst spotsmanship by the English….
Today we have had another drama about Reverse Swing……Last year when Jones,Flintoff and Hoggard were reverse swinging ,never was the ball shown to be examined by umpires and it was taken to be just a case of an art being put in practice….!! The English Trio was hailed as MASTERS OF REVERSE SWING…!!!! No one found anything wrong….
Now I want to take you back almost 15 years in the past….1990-91…. West Indies Captain D.Haynes and New zealand Captain M.Crowe “ACCUSED” Pakistan for doing “something ” to the ball….In fact it was just because they were whiners who could not take defeats fairly……Similarly in 1992 English media,newspapers,Players and dare I say even children and housewives went up in unison that PAKISTAN is tempering with ball….!!! Fact was that ENGLISH were totally oblivious with regards to this art…They did not know about it altogether…
Hence each English player thought “if I don’t know how to do it then it must be something illegal …so why NOT accuse the other party and hide my embarrasment of defeat through these allegations…”
Plainly I can say that if Person A does not know how to solve mathematical equations but person B does …then if A accuses B to be proponent of witch craft…then it will be a sad case of accusation due to one’s own less-learned approach…!!! That is exactly what has been happening till last year when finally England learned to reverse swing….
It is on record that once I.Botham said …”THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS REVERSE SWING…IT IS ALL BUT PURE CHEATING” and now he is seen saying “ENGLAND BOWLERS ARE THE MASTERS OF REVERSE SWING….”
HMMMM …How quickly one can change one’s words and thoughts……I even read in in English newspapers last year that reverse swing is as old as 1930’s and has been in practice in England…since then….how amazing….!!!!
Now today when England thought they were going to lose fairly and squarely….an old “ally” came to their rescue..in the form of ever controversial, highly inept DARREL HAIR…Who seems to plagued with different “HUMAN ERRORS OF JUDGEMENT” whenever he is adjudicating on an appeal raised by Indian, Pakistani,Srilankan player…..He might not hear a big nick from 22 yards though it might be heard by a sparrow sitting 75 yards away on boundary..!!!
He can ask for banning players for “over appealing” , he can warn bowlers and even batsmen for tempering with wicket…by running on it (only Asians have been accused by him..be it TENDULKAR,SALMAN BUT OR KANERIA…)…
Then he can call a bowler a chucker…be it Murali,Afridi, Akhtar,Shabbir or Hafeez….
Still he is on elite panel….Pakistan team have lodged official complaints about this HIGHLY PARTIAL umpire at least 3 times in 5 years…but still he is seen officiating no other match but those involving Pakistan,,….
Fact of the matter is that with the passage of time this man has been growing wild with respect to Asian countries…and now he has started going really berserk….What happened today is totally INCOMPREHENSIBLE…..
When after each over the ball is examined then how on earth the ball was deemed to be tempered so suddenly…….
It is a fact that HAIR must be congratulated that in Cricket History …he is only the second umpire after T.Robinson from Zimbabwe ..who actually tempered with the ball….yes T.Robinson actually soaked a ball in water after he saw it reversing for Pakistan during a match in 1998….
Today, I am sure that it was HAIR who scratched the ball with blades during some break….WHY DO WE ALWAYS ACCUSE TEAMS…IF ROBINSON DID IT IN 1998 why can’t Hair do it in 2006….
I think we should look this matter from other PERSPECTIVE…..Justice can only be met if impartialty is met with….
Because when umpires are always checking ball how can it be tempered…if and only if they are BLIND or if they are tempering with it themselves….
Nowadays cameras are there…millions are watching on TV and scores of officials on ground are there….nowadays ball can not be scratched so easily by players …unless an umpire DOES it himself …YES an umpire can temper with the ball legally …on the pretext of setting the seem of ball right by plucking with blades………!!!!!!
So before getting on to any conclusion I think looking at track record of this HIGHLY PARTIAL and dare I say very very rude umpire ….if justice is to be maintained then he should also be probed…..and what to say about his fellow umpire BILLY DOCTROVE….Who dileberately did not give Jimmy Adams caught behind against Pakistan in 2000 and Pakistan lost….later on he went into Pakistan dressing room…and officially apologized for partial umpiring…!!! wow…and still he is on elite panel and officiating in allaince with D.HAIR…
I think if fast bowlers can hunt in pairs then shrewd and dishonest umpires can also hunt as well as hurt in pairs….!!!!!
I think umpires are not beyond the game…they are part of it and they are human too…so they can resort to vindictism and wrong doing…so why not probe them too………
CASE CLOSED……
A VERY VERY DISAPPOINTED FAN OF GAME OF GENTLEMEN…!!!!
Comment from fctroll
Time: August 23, 2006, 7:13 am
I am from Pakistan. I don’t have a problem with Darrell Hair inspecting the ball and even changing it during the game, however the manner in which he did what he did is what caused all the resentment and confusion. If Hair was convinced the ball had been tampered with, he should’ve replaced the ball and let Inzi know that after play is over, he will report whatever evidence he had to the match referee. This would’ve given Hair a chance to go over video footage as well if he wanted to.
What Hair did is become the the judge, the jury and the executioner right then and there, like there couldn’t be any doubt about it. I was really shocked that Inzi even continued to play until tea with this horrible insinuation hanging in the air.
Comment from Chris
Time: August 23, 2006, 9:53 am
Yep, spot on. And my understanding is that the laws have to be read in conjunction with either, so (a) and (b) must be taken as a whole.
Comment from Tasmeena
Time: August 26, 2006, 8:52 am
Do not blindly defend a person becuase you feel you have to..!!!
Face the music..face the reality…Darrel HAIR is no more than a mere mortal…let him be what he is…
he has fallen for money and his urge to be in news has always been with him……and to achieve this glory he does different things on different times….
1) Ignoring countless LBW appeals raised by pakistani and other asians…
2) Murali getting called a chucker
3) Accusing Murali again in a book written just for fame
4) Calling Shoaib Akhtar aa chucker in 2000.
5) Calling Shabbir a chucker…
6) Stopping Kaneria from bowling in the whole inings without giving a proper warning…..against WI
7) Warning Salman Butt for running on pitch although he wasn’t…(ENG V PAK )
Asking for third umpire even though INZI was just taking evasive action to save himslef from getting hit by a mindless throw from HARMISON last year..
9) Countless edges and snicks from bat coming from rival batsmen on balls delivered by PAKISTANI Bowlers during the last 10 years..even if the snick is as loud as a drum beat….
10) now calling a 56 over old ball as tempered even though the ball was smashed hard,fell on concrete and hit hoarding boards…
11) there are at least a dozen more stories of his inept and biased umpiring but………. I think you as well as many others will find the truth difficult to digest…
Lastly congratulations…A MONEY MINDED MAN HAS GIVEN THE TRUE MOTIVE BEHIND THIS CONCOCTED STORYLINE….HAIR JUST WANTED MONEY AND FAME…..
BYE BYE…SWEAT DREAMS….
Comment from fctroll
Time: August 26, 2006, 9:30 am
The way Hair handled the aftermath of the forfeited Test by making a secret demands for money to retire, is actually quite reflective of his lack of common sense and decency. While his demands might not actually be all that unreasonable, the brash manner in which he made them is similar to the way he treated Inzamam and Pakistan on Sunday. I hope Hair becomes the fall guy in this whole disaster and it will be thoroughly deserved.
Write a comment