Time to suspend Pakistan from test cricket??

[Seamer]

After once again bringing the game of cricket into disrepute, is it time for the ICC to make a stand and make an example of Pakistan? Pakistan's coach, Bob Woolmer brought the game into disrepute after Pakistan's tour to Australia when he blamed Pakistan's woeful effort on the umpires.

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/c...ry/144506.html

While the ICC did the right thing and cited Woolmer, the Pakistan board subsequently cleared him. I remember thinking at the time that the decision by the PCB to clear Woolmer would lead to trouble - and so it now has.

I believe that the PCB is fully responsible for what has now taken place and action must now be taken. Suspension possibly. Or stronger powers given to the ICC to allow them to directly deal with those that are guilty of bringing the game into disrepute

I think if Pakistan goes unpunished for this petulant act, the problem will only get worse. Thoughts?

[alf stewart]

This is getting silly...

[Rachael]

Interesting thought: I'm actually all in favour of the Pakistan team picking a fight with the ICC over Hair's lack of diplomacy, tact and apparent inability to deal sensitively and sympathetically with anyone, anywhere.... but the point of staging a protest like this one is that you know it's going to lead to penalties but you think the price is worth paying.

Presumably not even Inzi feels his sides actions should be just accepted by the ICC: he might want to offer a defence of undue provocation.... but he's presumably against the setting of a precedent for sides just randomly wandering off a test field in a unilateral decision that no obligation exists for further participation.

Further disciplinary action seems inevitable... but I'm not sure it's addressing a real problem.

[Mongoose]

Rachael, for the record I will second every word you have written there. Pakistan must have known, and expected, that the ICC would mete out further punishment. Inzi will take the main rap. As for a suspecsion of Pakistan from international cricket, Seamer, I don't think the ICC will go that far, but they will be very unhappy about Pakistan's actions. This could be a very intersting time for the ICC. What I now wonder about, is whether other Asian nations will come out in full support of Pakistan, as there have been many comments suggesting Hair favours non-Asian teams. The ICC could have a real battle on its hands if it ends up taking on the whole Asian bloc.

[vvvrulz]

Suspension is definately taking this too far.

[Quagmire]

Unfortunately this has come under racism again; I personally don't think that it is the case.

No matter which county the umpire and the players come from there is going to be accusations of racism when decisions don't go a teams way. I am not racist at all but it is interesting that it is really only the countries from Asia that complain about racism when there were no racist comments at all. Unfortunately every race in the world is subject racism but the amount of players from countries like New Zealand, England and Australia never complain about racism even when there are racist comments sent there way. Maybe Pakistan is in the wrong and Hair is the only one who has done anything about it? He was the only umpire willing to call Muralitharan for throwing which was a correct decision. I’m not sure maybe he is a racist but unless he has said racist comments there is no proof. The question about him not being able to umpire anymore should be based on him umpiring. If Pakistan were ball tampering well done by Hair for picking it up, if not and his motives were race related he should be never allowed to umpire again shame on him. The only reason I can see why he has singled out the Asian teams more than the others is that they may break the rules more that others, but he did call Flower for throwing.

[Ninjaman]

Originally Posted by Quagmire

Unfortunately this has come under racism again; I personally don't think that it is the case.

No matter which county the umpire and the players come from there is going to be accusations of racism when decisions don't go a teams way. I am not racist at all but it is interesting that it is really only the countries from Asia that complain about racism when there were no racist comments at all. Unfortunately every race in the world is subject racism but the amount of players from countries like New Zealand, England and Australia never complain about racism even when there are racist comments sent there way. Maybe Pakistan is in the wrong and Hair is the only one who has done anything about it? He was the only umpire willing to call Muralitharan for throwing which was a correct decision. I’m not sure maybe he is a racist but unless he has said racist comments there is no proof. The question about him not being able to umpire anymore should be based on him umpiring. If Pakistan were ball tampering well done by Hair for picking it up, if not and his motives were race related he should be never allowed to umpire again shame on him. The only reason I can see why he has singled out the Asian teams more than the others is that they may break the rules more that others, but he did call Flower for throwing.

I don't agree with this comment at all.

Not a single bit of it.

[Django]

The whole situation has to be viewed from two point of view:

1. The decision to award the match to England; and
2. The ball tampering accusation (or should I say "decision") by the umpires

The decision to award the match to England is as per the rules and no one should have problems with it. The Australian media (so far they are the only ones!) have come out in support of this decision of Hair, which is fair enough.

But the ball tampering judgement passed by the umpires, which is the root cause of the problem, is a totally different and a very serious issue. It basically says that all the Pakistan cricketers are cheats. This is going to be very difficult to prove unless the umpires have solid evidence not known to anyone. The history of both the Pakistan team as well as that of Hair makes the matters worse.

As some one who brought the game to disrepute the most (and who got away with it) by taking sledging to its lowest level, Steve Waugh should keep his mouth shut. It is the case of pot telling the kettle black.

Now it remains to be seen whether the ICC come out of this situation with any credibility. Whatever happens, I suspect cricket will never be the same again.

[Orchid]

Originally Posted by Quagmire

Unfortunately this has come under racism again; I personally don't think that it is the case.

You are quite right to personally think what you want, as many of us who think this could be race related.

I am not racist at all

Wouldn't that be a day, when somebody openly says "I am a Racist"?

but it is interesting that it is really only the countries from Asia that complain about racism when there were no racist comments at all.

Could that be because it's players of those countries alone that have been subjected or feel that they have been subjected to such behaviour? And probably you already know it, but racism isn't just somebody spouting racist comments. Isn't racism really about somebody from one race acting out as if his/she is superior to another because of the race he/she belongs to? Talking filth is one way of chanelling it and there surely are other ways too. Have you watched the way Hair has dissmissively dealth with Pakistani players in some of the matches he has offciated? You can draw your own conclusion if you have seen him admonish Mohammad Sami; Salman Butt and Danish Kaneria. When he warned Butt and Danish for running into the pitch, there was no previous attempt at talking to those guys first, no friendly reminder. Had that been a player from England or New Zealand, would he have done the same?

[Occasional Fan]

The problem with this thread lies in the first ten words of the first post. Guilt in a charge of bringing the game into disrepute is assumed. That's unfair, as the hearing into the charge doesn't take place until Friday, 25 August. If we assume guilt, we are no better than some people believe Darrell Hair to have been in awarding (after consultation with Billy Doctrove) five penalty runs to England on Sunday.

And here's on further question: is Darrell being unfairly pilloried at the moment? Would the situation have been different for him if it had been Billy Doctrove who had signalled those five runs? Not for the first time, I remind readers that the umpires act as a team in determining fair and unfair play: neither umpire can do this alone - that's the Law.