I don't find it odd.

They have the financial clout to exert themselves whilst West Indies or Bangladesh (also Asian), for example, don't.

We both agree they do it but the ECB and ACB have also done the same too on issues in the past when they had the financial power and the ICC veto.

Nothing has changed just he who wields the boot!

For you, and many others, it is the origin of the bootwielder that is a problem.

I'm not surprised.

If the PCB had actually called for these 2 guys removal then criticise away. They have, so far, only expressed dissatisfaction.

I'm not seeing any racial differences. YOU are the one moaning about Asian influence. I am interested in rational criticism. Your criticism isn't.

That's why you have to resort to calling me naive because you've ultimately got nothing to say.

On top of that you continually assume what I'm thinking and mistate my position no matter how many times I've clarified it to you.

Bull!!

The only person who has made any negative comment on racial matters regarding these issues is you. Even gibbs_fan called you out on it.

From being willing to call the Pakistan team cheats based on a "track record" and also not believing that the Sri Lankan judge could come to a fair decision in the Oval 2006 incident case without the ICC telling him how to decide AND because he is Asian.

Based on no proof whatsoever.

You've wrote those things, not me.

And then on a recent post when the English guy (Morgan?) was appointed as Chairman, he'd suddenly bring common-sense to the role.....Haha.

So transparent.

Totally irrelevant but understandable considering it is you.

This has nothing to do with PC issues.

Totally irrelevant but rant away.

And you claim race is driving my arguments???

Haha!

Well now you've got all that irrelevance off your chest, I hope you feel better.

Now after all that ranting and irrelevance, can you point to any evidence that my opinions on issues discussed here are based on the ethnicities of the particulars?

You can't of course because you are just trying to get away from the fact that several of your postings have shown negative considerations of Asian people which I've noticed you have not actually denied.

You cared enough about something to go off on a dumb rant!!

I don't care whether you agree with me or not either. This is the internet. I notice you still haven't refuted

Spin implies I've twisted the meaning of things you have posted to form another one.

I have not. Everything I've criticised you posted yourself.

Has it?

I said Hair was removed by the ICC via a vote of 7-3. FACT

I said displeasure with Darrell Hair was not only from Asian boards. FACT (only 4 of 7 were Asian)

I said many people have complained about his rough manner and lack of "diplomacy" thus Oval 2006 was a timebomb waiting to explode. FACT

I said Darrell Hair could not and did not name a single Pakistani individual as tampering with the ball. FACT.

I said as a result of that he was going above all levels of decency to then accuse the team of tampering with the ball and the charge would not be upheld. FACT.

I said Inzi would have to take the punishment for what he did. He was banned. FACT

I said Hair will not win his claim for racial dsicrimination because he was not removed because he is white, or conversely, Doctrove was not kept because he is black. FACT.

However, you have said you would have called the Pakistanis ball tamperers because they have a track record, "there is no smoke without fire" and then you posted a link of an incident from way back in 1989!!

Thus advocating an umpire should have take the field with pre-conceived ideas of the game's participants and make decisions accordingly.

You don't even know how, when or where I was brought up.

You know very little about me.

You've just made an assumption based on me being West Indian.

Please enlighten me on what I was brought up to believe?

Well you're the one with the problem regarding people's ethnicities, so what else should I call you?