"I don't know what's going on out there"
That's exactly what Fred Trueman would have said, were he alive, after a day that saw drama suddenly pop up in the evening, much like it had last Sunday evening.
Just when the ICC was faced with the need to act fast on hearing the charges against Inzamam, a shocking revelation by ICC Chief Executive Malcolm Speed has rocked the boat, big-time.
Malcolm Speed revealed that Darrell Hair had offered to quit as an umpire for a one-off settlement of US $500,000. i.e. he'd offered to take money to not umpire, as opposed to taking money to not play well.
Subsequently, as the emails dated August 22nd 2006 reveal, he did back down on his protest, but only to the extent that the offer could be revised in the light of racism claims.
So what does this amount to? Is he accepting that his actions were not right? Could this set a precedent now? The next time an umpire gets into a controversy, will he do the same thing, i.e. offer to quit on payment of a huge sum? Isn't Hair in breach of any ICC code of conduct?
Labels: ball tampering, hair, oval 2006
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
| Indeed. I also don't understand why the ICC needs to make this public. If this emails are to be made public, so should the match ball as well as the entire set of deliberations which happened two Sundays ago at The Oval. The proceedings of Inzy's hearing should also be public. It can't be selective!
By 
Jagadish (29 Aug 2006, 4:06:00 pm)
Also about this whole revelation by Barry Jarman about South Africa's ball-tampering against India in 1996/7, it lends further credence to a few issues:
- Everyone's done it: Indians, South Africans, Englishmen, Aussies, Pakistanis, Sri Lankans [So make it legal?]
- There's a lot of inconsistency in ICC ref's rulings
- The ball-tampering by South Africa wasn't even registered. Instead, we saw penalties imposed for significantly more important transgressions such as over-appealing.
- There will be a lot more claims about racism
By Jagadish (29 Aug 2006, 5:05:00 pm)
just a few points i would like to make...
firstly hair has supposedly offered to quit from the elite panel
which is different from quitting as an umpire as such...
(he can still umpire in all first class matches and also in those
matches where an elite panel member umpire cannot be made available)
The main difference is, though, that Hair if removed from the elite
panel would not umpire in the world cup.
secondly, in my opinion, i dont think that his asking for money to save
ICC from an embarassing racial allegation in which atleast 2 countries
have joined hands(and possibly more could join) can be taken as any sign
of guilt. Trying to put myself in Hair's mindset(just for the letter part
please, not during the fiasco itself) if your quitting will make the situation
better for your employer and will just affect you financially, why not just
ask for financial reimbursement so that your employer can have an easier situation
to handle?
Well i would have probably done the same as Hair..but then thats just me :)
By MountCleverest (30 Aug 2006, 11:47:00 am)
mountcleverest: Hair umpiring in other games would be solely dependent on whether the ECB (not CA) wants him to be part of their "elite" panel or whatever. Lets say you're an employee and you're under investigation for an error of judgement at your company. Can you actually tell your CEO "Look mate, just pay me $500,000 and I'll go away"? Chances are it won't work :)
By Jagadish (30 Aug 2006, 2:45:00 pm)
We'd prefer if you posted comments with your real name to add more credibility to your opinions. However, the moderators reserve the right to delete comments, especially those containing offensive or unsuitable language. The opinions in the comments are your own views. You are welcome to provide a URL to your own cricket blog, but the moderators reserve the right to delete comments which only reference sites for viewing live streams.
Links within entries open in a new window. Some of the links may now be broken/not take you to the expected report since the original content providers may have archived/removed the contents. Some of the sites linked may require registration/subscription.
All opinions expressed are those of the authors alone. The authors' respective employers (past, present or future) are in no way connected to the opinions expressed here.
All pictures, photographs used are copyrights of the original owners. We do not intend to infringe on any copyright. Pictures and photographs are used here to merely accentuate and enhance the content value to our readers.
|
|
|
|
Post a Comment