ICC ranks Hair second best

[Slats4ever]

The readers of Wisden are largely English (and maybe some Australian), so that's hardly a surprise.

even then, you're australian so I'm sure Wisden is read by many people like yourself who don't support Hair

 

[C_C]

even then, you're australian so I'm sure Wisden is read by many people like yourself who don't support Hair

Aint many aussies who will do that.

 

[pasag]

He's become abit of a martyr amongst some.

 

[Slow Love™]

He's become abit of a martyr amongst some.

He's fulfilled his dream.

I have to laugh at this, it's a classic. It's a good effort by his fans amongst the Wisden Cricketer readership. Fair enough though - if I thought Hair was decent, I'd lodge a protest vote, too. I suppose there might be a bit of an anti-Asian bloc sentiment as well. Testimonials like "finally exposing the cheats" are probably a bit loaded though.

I wonder why this isn't up at Cricinfo? Cricinfo is owned by Wisden, I believe.

 

[C_C]

Testimonials like "finally exposing the cheats" are probably a bit loaded though.

Also, given the conduct of Australian umpires, their board's tilt in pre-neutral umpire era and conduct of many of their players, its also laughably ignorant and hypocritical.

 

[honestbharani]

hmm to be honest I'm not quite sure what the readership is but I thought that it'd be the most "worldly" or "international" of cricket magazines

nope, not for everyone. In India, magazines like The Sportstar and Cricinfo are way more widely read than Wisden. It is seen as rather elitist in India, while we are at it.

 

[Son Of Coco]

"The ICC report effectively ranked Hair as second best in the world, and on decision-making statistics alone, measured from video evidence, he was rated top, with 253 correct out of 263 - a success rate of 95.5%."

Are you claiming that's a lie? That they made that up? Or is it just a feeling you have, and if so, is your 'feeling' contradicting the video evidence. I'm asking here becuase I'm confused.

He's grandstanding

 

[Son Of Coco]

"The ICC report effectively ranked Hair as second best in the world, and on decision-making statistics alone, measured from video evidence, he was rated top, with 253 correct out of 263 - a success rate of 95.5%."

Are you claiming that's a lie? That they made that up? Or is it just a feeling you have, and if so, is your 'feeling' contradicting the video evidence. I'm asking here becuase I'm confused.

He's grandstanding

 

[honestbharani]

He's grandstanding

A fact that needs to be mentioned twice.



Anyways, these ratings are done by the ICC who are the ones that hire these guys. One can hardly expect them to blast their own employees (the guys they have picked out) publicly by giving out real figures. You can depend that the score will be a healthy 80+ even if you and I were umpiring. If some other independent network or organization rates the umpires, then it will be a little more believable.


BTW, I still do think even in that scenario, Hair will be in the top 3 or 5 as far as on field decisions like LBW and caught behinds are concerned.

 

[Slats4ever]

nope, not for everyone. In India, magazines like The Sportstar and Cricinfo are way more widely read than Wisden. It is seen as rather elitist in India, while we are at it.

i never suggested it was the most popular everywhere, I just said out of everything it is most worldly (it reaches the most shores)

 

[social]

Pakistan are sensitive about ball tampering allegations.

What a joke!

So sensitive that they haven't complained about the other 9 warnings?

 

[C_C]

i never suggested it was the most popular everywhere, I just said out of everything it is most worldly (it reaches the most shores)

Doest override the fact that most of their readership is English/Aussie, who are inclined to draw racial and 'subcontinent vs us' lines to this immediately, regardless of how out of order Hair was and how repeatedly he's been proven to be in error of major decisions on top of his usually below standard umpiring ( apart from a fast declining Bucknor and a pathetic Ashoka deSilva, i wouldnt rate anyone worse than Hair in umpiring stakes- regardless of what jingoistic readership state).

 

[nightprowler10]

Jeez CC, are you saying that Wisden readers are racists now?

 

[C_C]

Jeez CC, are you saying that Wisden readers are racists now?

No, i am saying that they are easily swayed by jingoism. Besides, you'd be surprised at how many retards are closer to our buddy Social in mentality than the Slow_loves of the world.

There is more to it than meets the eye if anyone is dumb enough to rate Hair near the top of umpiring lists - the man has been consistently mediocre in his on-field performance.

 

[nightprowler10]

No I agree, Hair has been substandard for quite some time now, and the fact that he was voted best umpire has nothing to do with his ability, just like his termination from the elite panel. But it would be best if you're a bit more careful using the word racist, or any form of it. I can safely say that people on both sides of the fence are pretty sick of it by now.

 

[honestbharani]

What a joke!

So sensitive that they haven't complained about the other 9 warnings?

No, you see, I feel that anyone making a hue and cry about a WARNING would be a joke. This is not a warning we are talking about here, this is basically a penalty we are talking about and no one will take it lying down if they are going to be penalized for an offence they never committed.


Now Pakistan may/may not have been tampering with the ball in those other 9 instances but they were warned. And they accepted it and moved on. That is what you expect. But it is really far fetched if you expect the same when they have actually been accused and penalized for the offence. That is when anyone's sensitivities comes to the fore.

 

[social]

No, i am saying that they are easily swayed by jingoism. Besides, you'd be surprised at how many retards are closer to our buddy Social in mentality than the Slow_loves of the world.

There is more to it than meets the eye if anyone is dumb enough to rate Hair near the top of umpiring lists - the man has been consistently mediocre in his on-field performance.

Check the figures - Wisden magazine is nothing more than an idle curiosity in Australia as a WORLDWIDE circulation figure of 34000 would attest

Hair has been on the elite panel since its inception meaning that he has been near the top of the ICC's rankings for over 10 years

I realise that facts are not your greatest strength but at least try to make it easier than this

Tickets, please!

 

[social]

No, you see, I feel that anyone making a hue and cry about a WARNING would be a joke. This is not a warning we are talking about here, this is basically a penalty we are talking about and no one will take it lying down if they are going to be penalized for an offence they never committed.


Now Pakistan may/may not have been tampering with the ball in those other 9 instances but they were warned. And they accepted it and moved on. That is what you expect. But it is really far fetched if you expect the same when they have actually been accused and penalized for the offence. That is when anyone's sensitivities comes to the fore.

What's the difference?

Warning - "the markings on this ball are inconsistent with those attributable to normal wear and tear - dont do it again!"

Penalty - "the markings on this ball are inconsistent with those attributable to normal wear and tear - dont do it again!"


Oooooooh sorry - 5 runs, forfeit and umpire sacking. How could we forget!

 

[nightprowler10]

There's obviously a huge difference between the two. The fact that you can't see the difference is just....well never mind.

 

[pasag]

Besides, you'd be surprised at how many retards are closer to our buddy Social in mentality than the Slow_loves of the world.

Unfair.