IPB
Custom Search

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Before Posting Read Below

New Topics in this forum will be subject to Moderator preview prior to being publicly listed for comment.

Some posted Topics have the propensity to cause an explosion of opinion or emotions amongst members and as a result, ANYONE who finds these posts offensive and or upsetting is CAUTIONED to avoid getting involved in the debate and or raising topics that are likely to stir disharmony amongst members in this forum.

Only topics RELEVANT to CURRENT issues will be considered.

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> England/pakistan Oval Test Result In 2006 Reversed, Umpires' forfeiture decision was correct
Stirer
post Feb 1 2009, 11:15 PM
Post #1


Senior Member
***

Group: Dedicated Member
Posts: 1,324
Joined: 29-March 04
From: Sandton, Gauteng
Member No.: 3



Another U-turn by the ICC. Once again, the doddering incompetency of the ICC makes cricket a laughing stock. Over two years ago the game was declared by the umpires Hair and Doctrove, to be forfeited in England's favour, when Pakistan refused to take the field. Last year, the ICC (in its infinite wisdom) decided to declare the game a draw. Now, the J-walking ICC has effected a U-turn to return to the original forfeit decision!

The resultant win for England is, in my opinion, the correct one. Regardless of the reasons for Pakistan not taking the field, they were given fair warning by Hair that play should continue. The laws of cricket provided for a forfeiture under the conditions, and the umpires removed the bails and declared the end of the match and a win to England. The laws of cricket do not provide for a reversal of a match decision, once the umpires have ruled.

I believe that Hair was the rogue who was responsible for the situation in the first place, but he was quite correct in his ruling. The five-run penalty for ball tampering was ill-conceived and not apparent nor was it proven (even after the fact). If there were suspicions of ball tampering, then a quiet warning to the fielding captain (Inzi for Pakistan), would have sufficed.

However, Inzi carried his protest just too far. By staying off the field initially as a protest, he made his point. The (wrong) decision to penalise Pakistan was not going to be reversed, and the vendetta against Hair could have been picked up after the game had reached a cricketing solution. If Pakistan had taken the field when asked to do so, the controversy would have been limited to the penalty for ball tampering.

As far as the revolving decision by the ICC is concerned, I think that the members of the board who considered the change to the match decision should be charged with bringing the game into disrepute.

After the game both Hair and Inzi were penalised - and rightly so.

Will this contraversy have any more re-appearances?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jamstains
post Feb 5 2009, 08:06 PM
Post #2


Moderator
***

Group: Moderator
Posts: 1,875
Joined: 22-January 05
From: Gibraltar
Member No.: 287



What grounds did the ICC use for either decision? Jokers in their Ivory Towers.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Stirer
post Feb 6 2009, 02:39 PM
Post #3


Senior Member
***

Group: Dedicated Member
Posts: 1,324
Joined: 29-March 04
From: Sandton, Gauteng
Member No.: 3



QUOTE (jamstains @ Feb 5 2009, 08:06 PM) *
What grounds did the ICC use for either decision? Jokers in their Ivory Towers.


I guess they just like everyone to know that they're still there. Why don't they do something useful - like put a stranglehold on the Zimbabwe officials, who live it up on the ICC handouts instead of using it for the promotion and advancement of cricket.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Stirer
post Feb 14 2009, 08:35 PM
Post #4


Senior Member
***

Group: Dedicated Member
Posts: 1,324
Joined: 29-March 04
From: Sandton, Gauteng
Member No.: 3



QUOTE (Stirer @ Feb 6 2009, 02:39 PM) *
As far as the revolving decision by the ICC is concerned, I think that the members of the board who considered the change to the match decision should be charged with bringing the game into disrepute.

After the game both Hair and Inzi were penalised - and rightly so.

Will this contraversy have any more re-appearances?


Perhaps we should have expected it .... the Pakistani board has requested a further reversal of the decision. Will this thing ever go away. In terms of the law 21.3.(a).(ii) (I read this in a report somewhere) the umpires were quite correct in awarding the game to England. If the players refused to come out onto the field it constitutes a refusal to play. There is no other decision for the umpires to make; and also according to the laws, the umpires are in full control of the game, and their decision is final.

What will happen next, if Pakistan are allowed to (be above the laws and) get the decision revered off the field? Will batsmen be allowed to protest their dismissal too? Will tests previously decided, be declared a draw because the last wicket should never have been given out? Will bowlers protest that a wicket off a noball, should have been given out because the delivery was actually fair? Will close-call four/sixes be revised after the game and decided by boards and courts after the game.

This type of controversy is bringing the game into disrepute, and the officials concerned should be charged.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shane
post Feb 18 2009, 07:57 AM
Post #5


Site Administrator
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 6,109
Joined: 28-March 04
From: Australia
Member No.: 1



Probably never go away Mike at least not until the ICC rolls over and appeases the Pakistanis which they likely will at some stage.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jamstains
post Feb 18 2009, 10:40 AM
Post #6


Moderator
***

Group: Moderator
Posts: 1,875
Joined: 22-January 05
From: Gibraltar
Member No.: 287



QUOTE (Shane @ Feb 17 2009, 10:57 PM) *
Probably never go away Mike at least not until the ICC rolls over and appeases the Pakistanis which they likely will at some stage.

They only appease Pakistan because cricket is the only arena they ever back their neighbour, India, who pretty much run the show.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th December 2014 - 01:39 PM