Obviously the ball-tampering law wasn't defined with individual country sensitivities in mind. As an Australian, I wasn't aware of the hurt caused to the Pakistan nation by the frivolous allegations of ball-tampering against Wasim and Waqar. I can also understand Inzamam's frustration with Hair after that diabolical decision of being given out when evading a throw from Harmison. I understand now that Inzamam thought this latest "slur" on his team would further hurt the pride of his country and needed a strong protest. However, the penalty for ball-tampering is far less hurtful to the team than the penalty for bringing the game into disrepute. Inzi's protest cost the Pakistan team a Test match and now their fortunes in the ICC Champions Trophy may suffer due to Inzi's absence. Surely, that is a far greater penalty than giving away 5 runs which is nothing when you consider how many extras are awarded in the course of a match.

If ball-tampering is such a serious charge why not award the match to the other team when ball-tampering is detected? Even Ranjan Madugalle said "Having regard to the seriousness of the allegation of ball-tampering - it is an allegation of cheating - I am not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that there is sufficiently cogent evidence the fielding team had changed the condition of the ball." If the charge is so serious then the penalty should be much stiffer.

Wasim Akram said the ICC should make it binding on the umpires to warn the captain at least once if they suspect the ball is being tampered with. "The problem at the Oval arose because Hair didn't bother to deem it fit to at least once warn Inzamam what his suspicions were. All good umpires could do this at least once to avoid any unpleasant situation", said Wasim. Do the umpires warn the team captain or bowler before they call no-balls and wides? These actions aren't related to cheating but they incur penalty runs nonetheless. The point of giving penalty runs is to discourage the action. The point of giving penalty runs for ball-tampering is to discourage it. Why does the captain need to be warned before a penalty for ball-tampering is given? I'm just playing the devil's advocate here because there is obviously a difference between no-balls and ball-tampering but the law as written doesn't really highlight the seriousness of the ball-tampering charge by awarding a penalty of just 5 runs.

Let me use an analogy based on our forum rules. Plagiarism is cheating but a member caught posting plagiarized material usually gets off with a caution. Someone posting racist remarks can be banned permanently because it brings the forum into disrepute.