Originally Posted by Fratboy
Thats absurd logic. Going by that same logic, Pakistan should not have been allowed into the Champions Trophy before the outcome of the hearing. It works both ways.
That makes no sense. Firstly, the ICC have a choice as to what umpires they appoint for the trophy - they can't pick and choose what teams they want. Secondly, Pakistan were already to play in the Champions Trophy - Hair wasn't confirmed to umpire in the tournament. Thirdly, Hair has (rightly or wrongly) been the one accused of bias (on this incident and others), so it's obviously going to be controversial to appoint him for the trophy - every decision he makes will come under scrutiny. In fact, your logic would be more sensible if you also argued that Inzy should be allowed to play in the Champions Trophy no matter what the decision of the hearing is.
If the hearing proves Hair is correct, then there is no problem. However, by saying that he will
umpire in the tournament before the outcome of the hearing, the ICC is provoking certain teams and is setting itself up for controversy. Not the most sensible move.