Is Darrell Hair Ok to be on the International Panel ?

[social]

Just quietly, I think he meant Taufel in his first point.

Exactly

 

[social]

And perhaps you might be gullible enough to think that there is no self interest involved in 'offering to resign today and pocket the salary of next 5 years in advance without actually working', ie, take the money and split ?

Has a contract, Pakistan have already made a request that he not umpire any of their fixtures, ICC are in a bind because Hair umpired according to the letter of the law, etc etc etc

Obviously someone within the ICC thought the idea had merit and, btw, it happens every day of the week in business

 

[social]

Apart from a few overzealous Aussie fans ( who support Hair from a sense of patriotism more than anything else), i've never heard Hair being mentioned as the best. No, infact his quality has been par for the course-nothing more, nothing less.
Best umpire without nationality is an absurd concept and in no international team sport is the umpire from either of the nations engaged in the said contest.
But i dont know where exactly you are getting the notion of 'we advocated best umpires'- the change to neutral umpires was done at the behest of Imran Khan, Gavaskar, Holding and Lloyd, largely due to Dalmiya's support for their valid argument pertaining to extremely biassed umpiring meted out by certain first world cricketing nations to the third world ones ( colonialist mentality).
As per taking the word for it- to be frank, the reputation of many Australian players are in question not only amongst fans but by several non-aussie players themselves. True, players having a bad reputation around the circuit is not an Australia-only syndrome but by far, the sheer number of Aussie players thought to be unfair players and the number of people who think that (fans and players) far outstrips any other nation's.
You call it 'envy of success', yet this has been the case since the days of Ian Chappell and Lillee, with many for example holding the notion that the Aussie team between mid 80s and mid 90s was the most uncouth and unfair team out in the field.
Many Australian players are gentlemen but many just play hard and forget the ' and fair' bit. And this, mind you, is not a cricket-only phenomenon.I've heard some Canadian players single out Aussie team in off-the-record convos in fairly low profile sports too. You may not like it - i wouldnt either if it were my country but whichever way you look at it, it is a fact that Australian sportsmen, particularly teams, in general, enjoy a rather low level of confidence (in terms of fairplay) overseas.You may look at it only from a cricketing angle and see the color divide as a convinient excuse but when a white Canadian chick talks about her 'rough experience' with 'foulmouthed Aussie chicks from the flipping rowing team', its a question of your whole sporting culture (and sometimes much bigger than that itself) being singled out through various autonomous incidents.I'll say this for the Aussie sporting culture- they hate to lose probably more than anyone else in the world and their drive to win is simply peerless. This is probably the reason for excellence from a country that is no more advanced or any more involved than many others and with such a small population base(Ausitralia).But unfortunately, this peerless drive to win sometimes just translates to 'win at all costs' for quite a few of yer blokes. As such, 'taking their word for it' is simply not on.
But then, there are many gentlemen Aussie sportsmen and one of the few sportsmen i genuinely admire as a human being is Pat Rafter. Perhaps, to borrow from Chemistry, this 'fudging the boundary between win and win-at-all-costs' is present in the form of 'weak force' interaction within the cultural soup.

I think you'll find that Ponting recently advocated the use of the best available umpires, no matter what their nationality, and was knocked back in a heart-beat by the ICC who supposedly were acting on the wishes of the majority of their members..

Likewise, before both the recent Sri Lanka and SA series, Ponting suggested to both rival captains that players should take each others' word when it came to contentious catches. On each occasion it was summarily rejected. In Sri Lanka's case, it hurt them as Jayawardene claimed a "catch" off Ponting who stood his ground. Replays showed that the ball had bounced and yet Ponting was criticised for not taking the word of the fieldsman.

As for Aus in general, sure there are good and bad - like any country.

 

[C_C]

I think you'll find that Ponting recently advocated the use of the best available umpires, no matter what their nationality, and was knocked back in a heart-beat by the ICC who supposedly were acting on the wishes of the majority of their members..

Which the ICC was perfectly justified in doing and one of the few calls the ICC has gotten right. As i said, there is no international sport of mass appeal where the participating official(s) is the same nationality as one of the contesting teams.

Likewise, before both the recent Sri Lanka and SA series, Ponting suggested to both rival captains that players should take each others' word when it came to contentious catches. On each occasion it was summarily rejected.

Because, as i said, the word of the Aussie teams are valued very lowly in such criterias as honesty or good conduct. They may be valid for individual cases but in the team there is always someone present who is a total 'will do anything to win' type of a guy.
Ie, Aussie teams arn'nt exactly known for its fairplay or good behaviour (despite their self-styled claims).

In Sri Lanka's case, it hurt them as Jayawardene claimed a "catch" off Ponting who stood his ground. Replays showed that the ball had bounced and yet Ponting was criticised for not taking the word of the fieldsman

Well if you are not trusted one bit and you wanna make some 'deal' involving honestly, the onus is on YOU to demonstrate your stance first. Conditional morality is always just a poor excuse for lack of one or simply 'stabbing it in the back when convininent'.

As for Aus in general, sure there are good and bad - like any country.

Well my point was that Aussie teams get far more flak in terms of fairplay and conduct than almost any other and its not exactly undeserved either.. But sure, stick yer head in the sand and go 'every country is like this. lalalala'

 

[C_C]

Has a contract, Pakistan have already made a request that he not umpire any of their fixtures, ICC are in a bind because Hair umpired according to the letter of the law, etc etc etc

Obviously someone within the ICC thought the idea had merit and, btw, it happens every day of the week in business

It is not customary business practice to offer your resignation and ask for a compensational package for the rest of the contract. As a rule of thumb, it is the employer who initiates any dialogue towards severance package, not the employee.
Furthermore, one of your clients/cases having a problem with you does not constitute enough grounds to tender your resignation and then ask for compensation package.
Management can easily assign someone else for the client and you can work with the other clients.
Please do not try to pull your familiar wool over our eyes on this- Hair demanded a payout because he simply thought that his reputation is shot regardless of the outcome (the moment he decieded to 'look for evidence' instead of 'look at the evidence presented') and it was a convinient time to ask for a payout so that he could basically have a nice easy time financially ( highly doubtful he'd have remained unemployed during the next 4-5 years). And he got caught in the act.

You are entitled to a severance package IF and ONLY IF you are found to be innocent of any wrongdoing in your situation (or proportionate compensation if minor guilt is accrued). Hair's integrity was very much brought into question before he fired off that email and therefore, he is genuinely comming across as a money-grabbing dishonest <expletive> for not clearing his name first.

 

[social]

Which the ICC was perfectly justified in doing and one of the few calls the ICC has gotten right. As i said, there is no international sport of mass appeal where the participating official(s) is the same nationality as one of the contesting teams.



Because, as i said, the word of the Aussie teams are valued very lowly in such criterias as honesty or good conduct. They may be valid for individual cases but in the team there is always someone present who is a total 'will do anything to win' type of a guy.
Ie, Aussie teams arn'nt exactly known for its fairplay or good behaviour (despite their self-styled claims).



Well if you are not trusted one bit and you wanna make some 'deal' involving honestly, the onus is on YOU to demonstrate your stance first. Conditional morality is always just a poor excuse for lack of one or simply 'stabbing it in the back when convininent'.



Well my point was that Aussie teams get far more flak in terms of fairplay and conduct than almost any other and its not exactly undeserved either.. But sure, stick yer head in the sand and go 'every country is like this. lalalala'

C_C, you really do talk the biggest load of rot.

Australia's record in terms of fairness on the sporting field is better than virtually any other country you care to name.

As for Canada, 3 words, BEN FREAKIN' JOHNSON, the biggest single sporting disgrace in the history of world sport.

 

[social]

It is not customary business practice to offer your resignation and ask for a compensational package for the rest of the contract. As a rule of thumb, it is the employer who initiates any dialogue towards severance package, not the employee.
Furthermore, one of your clients/cases having a problem with you does not constitute enough grounds to tender your resignation and then ask for compensation package.
Management can easily assign someone else for the client and you can work with the other clients.
Please do not try to pull your familiar wool over our eyes on this- Hair demanded a payout because he simply thought that his reputation is shot regardless of the outcome (the moment he decieded to 'look for evidence' instead of 'look at the evidence presented') and it was a convinient time to ask for a payout so that he could basically have a nice easy time financially ( highly doubtful he'd have remained unemployed during the next 4-5 years). And he got caught in the act.

You are entitled to a severance package IF and ONLY IF you are found to be innocent of any wrongdoing in your situation (or proportionate compensation if minor guilt is accrued). Hair's integrity was very much brought into question before he fired off that email and therefore, he is genuinely comming across as a money-grabbing dishonest <expletive> for not clearing his name first.

Nonsense, it's irrelevant as to who instigated the talks and the only consistency in this whole affair is that Hair has been backed BY EVERYBODY as having complied with the letter of the law.

 

[marc71178]

did Hair/Doctrove not do anything wrong at all?

They followed the rules in abandoning the game - what wrong can you actually find there?

 

[marc71178]

They did have a choice. They could've easily continued the game. The Pak team was ready, the England team was ready, and I guarantee you ICC wouldn't have minded. So please stop making this absurd argument that Hair couldn't continue.

Why should they have done?

They gave the team ample opportunity to come back out, and when they were told to get out immediately or forfeit, the dressing room door was shut with the team inside the dressing room.

How much longer should they have waited, another hour, another 2?

 

[marc71178]

As a rule of thumb, it is the employer who initiates any dialogue towards severance package, not the employee.

Remind us of the first words in the leaked email to Cowie...

 

[C_C]

C_C, you really do talk the biggest load of rot.

Australia's record in terms of fairness on the sporting field is better than virtually any other country you care to name.

As for Canada, 3 words, BEN FREAKIN' JOHNSON, the biggest single sporting disgrace in the history of world sport.

You really live in ****oo land if you think that Australia's record of fairness on the sporting field is as good as most other nations out there, let alone better. Infact, it is near the bottom of the group- perhaps you need to interact more with foreign sportsmen but if you do, you'd realise that 'Aussies = loudmouth abrasive and abusive language players' is a startlingly common mentioned theme.
And yes, lets talk about a guy doping (Which btw, really does happen almost everywhere) and try to deflect attention from the main issue in this thread- the issue of fairplay and good conduct in sports (the basis of any gentleman's agreement).

 

[C_C]

Nonsense, it's irrelevant as to who instigated the talks and the only consistency in this whole affair is that Hair has been backed BY EVERYBODY as having complied with the letter of the law.

So far he's been backed by his organisation that employs him. His case is not closed by any stretch of immagination and i'd like an official enquiry into Hair's conduct as well.

 

[marc71178]

Exactly what conduct is this then?

If the evidence him (and Doctrove) provide leads to the case being proven, exactly what misconduct has he displayed?

 

[_TiGeR-ToWn_]

And yes, lets talk about a guy doping (Which btw, really does happen almost everywhere) and try to deflect attention from the main issue in this thread- the issue of fairplay and good conduct in sports (the basis of any gentleman's agreement).

How is it fair and him showing good conduct towards his fellow competitors by being so dopped up on steriods that he smashes the 100m record by a ridiculous margin? Isn't really off topic there.

 

[social]

You really live in ****oo land if you think that Australia's record of fairness on the sporting field is as good as most other nations out there, let alone better. Infact, it is near the bottom of the group- perhaps you need to interact more with foreign sportsmen but if you do, you'd realise that 'Aussies = loudmouth abrasive and abusive language players' is a startlingly common mentioned theme.
And yes, lets talk about a guy doping (Which btw, really does happen almost everywhere) and try to deflect attention from the main issue in this thread- the issue of fairplay and good conduct in sports (the basis of any gentleman's agreement).

So no-one else sledges? Dream on.

I suggest that you know sweet naf-all about sport at much above schoolboy level if you don't realise that.

Name one piece of behaviour by an Australian sportsman that remotely compares to, say, Afridi or Azha or Malik or Cronje.

 

[Fusion]

Name one piece of behaviour by an Australian sportsman that remotely compares to, say, Afridi or Azha or Malik or Cronje.

How about Shane Warne and the bookie?

 

[social]

So far he's been backed by his organisation that employs him. His case is not closed by any stretch of immagination and i'd like an official enquiry into Hair's conduct as well.

His stand has been backed as legally correct by his organisation AND his peers (Aleem Dar amongst them).

As to whether all would have handled it in a similar fashion, that's another matter but it's also a moot point as Hair was legally 100% correct.

As for an inquiry, what's the point?

As it stands, he was within his rights and no amount of hot air is going to change the situation unless new evidence comes to light.

 

[Swervy]

You really live in ****oo land if you think that Australia's record of fairness on the sporting field is as good as most other nations out there, let alone better. Infact, it is near the bottom of the group- perhaps you need to interact more with foreign sportsmen but if you do, you'd realise that 'Aussies = loudmouth abrasive and abusive language players' is a startlingly common mentioned theme.

So this is your opinion, not fact. Maybe the people you have spoken to have had bad experiences playing vs Australians (I guess it would be interesting to see if they had been beaten by the Australians as well...sour grapes???)...seems you are generalising (again!!!!) about the people of a nation based on the chat of a handful of your mates.

Australia seem to have a record in terms of discipline in cricket as good as other countries, Australia in the World Cup seemed to play the game well within the rules, when you consider the diving,fouling, whinging to the ref etc commited by other teams...people I know who play with and against Aussies each week at cricket all really enjoy the Australians presence, the sense of humour and the competitivness.....maybe mine and my friends experiences of Australians in sport are different to yours, but I think its a bit off you generalising about the Australians (in the way I seem to remember you have done in the past as well....I maybe wrong on that one)

 

[Swervy]

How about Shane Warne and the bookie?

absolutely nothing like Cronje, or for that matter Afridi in my eyes

 

[social]

How about Shane Warne and the bookie?

Took $5000 off a guy to gamble in a casino.

No-one has ever suggested otherwise and no-one has ever suggested that any more came of it.

Dumb - yes

Illegal - no

Unfair - no

Ungentlemanly - no