1. Standard memberRSMA1234
    The Guvnor....!!!!
    The Dark Side
    Joined
    11 Sep '04
    Moves
    70118
    07 Feb '07 13:10
    My mate Hair's at it again

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/6337481.stm

    This guy cracks me up, I think he is living in a dream world.

    Not only did his direct actions lead to the first forfeiture in 129 years, he tried to get $ 500 K for his resignation.....now he is trying another tack...what a joker
  2. Standard membermillerman
    Y.N.W.A
    Athens
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    24586
    07 Feb '07 13:53
    He has single handily ruined his own career,

    The word Numpty springs to mind
  3. Standard memberRSMA1234
    The Guvnor....!!!!
    The Dark Side
    Joined
    11 Sep '04
    Moves
    70118
    07 Feb '07 13:57
    Originally posted by millerman
    He has single handily ruined his own career,

    The word Numpty springs to mind
    LOL...true

    Needs looking for blame now, but the reality is that he will only hurt himself
  4. Subscriberinvigorate
    Only 1 F in Uckfield
    Buxted UK
    Joined
    27 Feb '02
    Moves
    211713
    07 Feb '07 14:33
    Originally posted by millerman
    He has single handily ruined his own career,

    The word Numpty springs to mind
    I have little sympathy with Hair but the point is he didn't single handedly do anything. The other umpire involved whose name escape me has got off scot free for his actions whilst Hair has been made a scapegoat.

    Inzi should never have refused to play. Any issues he had with Hair should have been brought up after the match.

    Hair has been very poorly advised since the incident and I'm sure he wont gain anything from his latest action. But the other umpire should have stood shoulder to shoulder with Hair.
  5. Joined
    16 Oct '06
    Moves
    27460
    07 Feb '07 21:351 edit
    Originally posted by invigorate
    I have little sympathy with Hair but the point is he didn't single handedly do anything. The other umpire involved whose name escape me has got off scot free for his actions whilst Hair has been made a scapegoat.

    Inzi should never have refused to play. Any issues he had with Hair should have been brought up after the match.

    Hair has been very poorly from his latest action. But the other umpire should have stood shoulder to shoulder with Hair.
    The other umpire was Billy Doctrove from the West Indies.

    I still can't see what all the fuss is about. Granted, since the event he has acted like a clown, but good on him for sticking to the rules of the game and not being pushed around by the Pakis.

    It was an absolute disgrace the way Inzi behaved and I think Hair did the right thing and I doubt any other umpire would have the balls to do it. It's good to see someone doing what's right rather than looking out for his own skin.

    Everybody seems to think the umpires are the ones who did something wrong. It was the Pakis for refusing to play on. The only reason the ICC hasn't backed its umpires for following the rules is that the ICC (like cricket in general) is being dominated (not on the playing field, but decisions and stuff) by Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan etc.

    It's becoming a joke.
  6. Standard membermillerman
    Y.N.W.A
    Athens
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    24586
    07 Feb '07 22:121 edit
    He made an assumption before gathering the facts/evidence.

    His decision making was poor, he deserves to go.


    Pakistan had every right to refuse to carry on playing. Hair was trying to make some sort of point by accusing pakistan...
    By penalising Pakistan and inviting the England batsmen to choose a replacement ball, Hair was making his declaration: Pakistan, in his eyes, were cheating and the damage to the ball had been haphazard, wilful. Upon reflection, it is surprising that Inziand his team did not deliver an immediate protest.

    All the TV camera's at the ground could not prove a single pakistani player tampered with the ball.



    In hindsight, Hair should have thought about these words "Innocent until proven guilty"
  7. Standard membermillerman
    Y.N.W.A
    Athens
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    24586
    07 Feb '07 22:15
    And why should Pakistan have carried on after they've effectively been branded cheats by one umpire?????
  8. Standard membermillerman
    Y.N.W.A
    Athens
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    24586
    07 Feb '07 22:18
    Originally posted by Crita

    The only reason the ICC hasn't backed its umpires for following the rules is that the ICC (like cricket in general) is being dominated (not on the playing field, but decisions and stuff) by Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan etc.

    It's becoming a joke.
    This did make me laugh,

    Mike Atherton was shown to have cheated on T.V and was punished for it. And the ICC acted accordingly.
    Your ignorance does make me laugh..

    In this case there WAS evidence......................................
  9. Joined
    16 Oct '06
    Moves
    27460
    07 Feb '07 22:55
    So, you're telling me that Hair and Doctrove BOTH discussed the situation and decided "Hey, we've got no reason to suspect Pakistan of ball tampering but let's screw our careers up anyway! What the hell, it'll be a laugh!"

    Now, you may not think Hair is a genius, but he wouldn't do something that stupid. And Doctrove would have stopped him if he thought it was wrong.

    Obviously there was enough reason for Hair and Doctrove to believe the Pakis guilty.

    Anyway, what was the penalty? About 5 runs isn't it?

    Inzi should have taken his skirt off, copped the 5 runs, played on and dealt with it after the game.

    Maybe Hair made a mistake, but Inzi's was deliberate.
  10. Standard memberlordhighgus
    Kara Thrace &
    her special destiny
    Joined
    24 Apr '06
    Moves
    20456
    08 Feb '07 11:51
    Originally posted by RSMA1234
    My mate Hair's at it again

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/6337481.stm

    This guy cracks me up, I think he is living in a dream world.

    Not only did his direct actions lead to the first forfeiture in 129 years, he tried to get $ 500 K for his resignation.....now he is trying another tack...what a joker
    He was discriminated against because of the colour of his skin.
    Hair is the top ranked umpire in the world, the ICC ranked him number one for accuracy and fairness. He was sacked because of the colour of his skin and i hope he sues the ICC and their masters, the Pakistani Cricket Board for Everything they have.
    Why not punish Doctrove? Why not go through the proper channels and take your grievance to the match referee, rather than acting like a fat, petulant child and crying and taking his bat and tampered ball and going home.
  11. Standard membermillerman
    Y.N.W.A
    Athens
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    24586
    08 Feb '07 11:59
    Originally posted by Crita
    So, you're telling me that Hair and Doctrove BOTH discussed the situation and decided "Hey, we've got no reason to suspect Pakistan of ball tampering but let's screw our careers up anyway! What the hell, it'll be a laugh!"

    Now, you may not think Hair is a genius, but he wouldn't do something that stupid. And Doctrove would have stopped him if he thought it ...[text shortened]... dealt with it after the game.

    Maybe Hair made a mistake, but Inzi's was deliberate.
    I'm telling you he had no evidence to support his decision..

    and as for the 5 runs, thats not relevent, what is relevan tthat the Pakistani team were branded cheats by Hair...
  12. Joined
    16 Oct '06
    Moves
    4532
    08 Feb '07 12:35
    Is anyone else aware that there was controversy following Darrell Hair's first ever test match. There were suggestions that LBW appeals by Australia were treated more favourably than those by India.

    Since then there have been numerous other controversies, mostly involving India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Darrell Hair is now accusing other people of racism, well he should know.
  13. Standard memberlordhighgus
    Kara Thrace &
    her special destiny
    Joined
    24 Apr '06
    Moves
    20456
    09 Feb '07 07:33
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    Good one muppet.
    How come Aktar and that other bowler were not suspended for testing positive to steroids?
    Favouritism abounds in the upper levels of the ICC, all in the favour of Pakistan, India and Sri Lanka.
  14. Standard memberCrowley
    Not Aleister
    Control room
    Joined
    17 Apr '02
    Moves
    91690
    09 Feb '07 10:18
    Originally posted by Crita
    The other umpire was Billy Doctrove from the West Indies.

    I still can't see what all the fuss is about. Granted, since the event he has acted like a clown, but good on him for sticking to the rules of the game and not being pushed around by the Pakis.

    It was an absolute disgrace the way Inzi behaved and I think Hair did the right thing and I doubt any ot ...[text shortened]... field, but decisions and stuff) by Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan etc.

    It's becoming a joke.
    Your post is actually the only joke on this page.
  15. Joined
    22 May '06
    Moves
    1287
    09 Feb '07 15:04
    Originally posted by lordhighgus
    Good one muppet.
    How come Aktar and that other bowler were not suspended for testing positive to steroids?
    Favouritism abounds in the upper levels of the ICC, all in the favour of Pakistan, India and Sri Lanka.
    same reason fat boy warne was was given a life ban for 'chatting' with the Indian bookies.. i expect.😉
Back to Top