Inzamam Ul Haq - Should he be sacked ?

[cricketboy29]

The only person i think should get sack should be that idiot Darrel Hair, who likes to take the lime light always and create these controversies.

Every single Pakistani would 100% support their captain for what he did, and i think it was about the time someone did something about it

I don't think it's about Pakistanis or Englishmen. If Dravid did something worng, I'm pretty sure even though I'm Indian. i'd still be against him. It's about doing what's right. When both teams come out to play, and the freaking umpire decides not to play, then what the hell can you say. People don't come there to watch the umpires, they come there to watch the players. The umpire is there, not because he has any special capbility but because the laws demand an impartial observer to give decisions, not to try and push his weight around. (Although he has enough of it).

 

[Yahto]

I don't think it's about Pakistanis or Englishmen. If Dravid did something worng, I'm pretty sure even though I'm Indian. i'd still be against him. It's about doing what's right. When both teams come out to play, and the freaking umpire decides not to play, then what the hell can you say. People don't come there to watch the umpires, they come there to watch the players. The umpire is there, not because he has any special capbility but because the laws demand an impartial observer to give decisions, not to try and push his weight around. (Although he has enough of it).

Which is exactly what the umpires did. Pakistan failed to show up despite a warning and plenty of time. Therefore they forfeited the match. Any pretence they put up later is of no consequence. They had their chance, they blew it.

 

[SJS]

.... to me Hair's actions go hand in hand with Inzi's reaction. You can't talk about one without mentioning the other.

Sure.

PLUS, it is also possible for both to be wrong amd for both to be at fault.

 

[Sanz]

^
The fighting at Wagah has re-started?

 

[Slow Love™]

I don't really know whether Inzy should be sacked or not. I don't think you could say he was blameless, as surely, being the captain, he had to have had some control as to how things eventuated that day. I guess it's mostly a political consideration.

He probably deserves some credit for not going ballistic on the spot, and I find deeps' hypothesis that he waited until the break to ask the players about possible ball tampering before spitting the dummy on the matter to be plausible. Don't know for absolute certain that it's what happened though.

Beyond this point I guess we're not sure how much was Inzy's decision and how much related to the surrounding heirarchy. The team should have come out faster than they did in order to resume the match - of that there is no doubt, though it should be remembered that there have been numerous other sit-in protests before where teams have taken time of various durations where the umpire has remembered the priorities of the game and acted in the interests of the match finishing it's course. And given that ECB officials and the match referee were discussing a return to play, it's feasible that the Pakistan heirarchy didn't know (the former certainly didn't) that the match had been awarded to England when Inzy or the Pakistan administration decided to return to the field.

In a way I'd be interested to know some of the time durations of previous protests before games were recommenced in order to judge how excessive the delay was - which would influence my opinion of how the captain/team should be disciplined. I certainly wouldn't expect zero consequences, in any case -- with any such protest you have to accept that there will be repercussions.

 

[cricketboy29]

Hahaha.....Sorry. I just saw your sig for the first time. Slow Love. That's brillant.

 

[SJS]

In a way I'd be interested to know some of the time durations of previous protests before games were recommenced in order to judge how excessive the delay was - which would influence my opinion of how the captain/team should be disciplined. I certainly wouldn't expect zero consequences, in any case -- with any such protest you have to accept that there will be repercussions.

Once the Umpire/s came to the dressing room having waited for one period of over quarter of an hour, to ask if they were coming or not, Inzy should have known they were on notice. Hair was abiding by the law which required him to talk to the captain of the side that refuses to turn up the first time and the match is forfeited if they still refuse to come. The law is clear on that.

The time is immaterial after that.

 

[Fusion]

Once the Umpire/s came to the dressing room having waited for one period of over quarter of an hour, to ask if they were coming or not, Inzy should have known they were on notice. Hair was abiding by the law which required him to talk to the captain of the side that refuses to turn up the first time and the match is forfeited if they still refuse to come. The law is clear on that.

The time is immaterial after that.

SJS, that's exactly the problem IMO. Hair did EVERYTHING by the letter of the law. You can't say he broke any rules. But my problem with him is that he didn't employ common sense, nor did he act to defuse the situation. Sure he had no responsibility to wait longer to award the game. Sure he was within his rights to not come back and umpire once the game had been awarded. But I will maintain that most other umpires would've sought to calm things down and compromise. They would've waited MUCH LONGER to award the game. And IMO, most umpires would've come back and resumed the game afterwards when all parties were ready to play. Hair chose not to do any of those things. To me, that shows he welcomed the dispute and wanted to escalate it due to his ego. Dickie Bird has stated he blames Hair for these reasons. It's only my humble opinion, but I would maintain that if there was almost any other umpire out there, this whole situation would've turned out much much different.

 

[Slow Love™]

Once the Umpire/s came to the dressing room having waited for one period of over quarter of an hour, to ask if they were coming or not, Inzy should have known they were on notice. Hair was abiding by the law which required him to talk to the captain of the side that refuses to turn up the first time and the match is forfeited if they still refuse to come. The law is clear on that.

The time is immaterial after that.

Fair enough. My comment was regarding how harshly I'd judge Inzy on the basis that he's the first captain to forfeit a test match, given that it's a possibility that other captains may have been given longer by umpires more concerned with the game carrying on. Is it that Inzy refused to come, or is it that they didn't appear soon enough? At some point it's going to be up to the umpire's discretion when they call "time's up", but I still believe it's in the game's interests to allow the game to continue if possible, particularly if the issue is being negotiated at the time by other match officials (whom Hair made look extremely stupid). It doesn't prevent you from disciplining a captain afterwards.

Of course, if Inzy bellowed "Not if you was the last immigrant grocer on earth, honey!" when Hair called by, this is moot.

 

[SJS]

SJS, that's exactly the problem IMO. Hair did EVERYTHING by the letter of the law. You can't say he broke any rules. But my problem with him is that he didn't employ common sense, nor did he act to defuse the situation. Sure he had no responsibility to wait longer to award the game. Sure he was within his rights to not come back and umpire once the game had been awarded. But I will maintain that most other umpires would've sought to calm things down and compromise. They would've waited MUCH LONGER to award the game. And IMO, most umpires would've come back and resumed the game afterwards when all parties were ready to play. Hair chose not to do any of those things. To me, that shows he welcomed the dispute and wanted to escalate it due to his ego. Dickie Bird has stated he blames Hair for these reasons. It's only my humble opinion, but I would maintain that if there was almost any other umpire out there, this whole situation would've turned out much much different.

I dont know exactly what Dickie Bird said. But I tend to blame Hair. NOT for the decision to forfeit the match when he did but for the conclusion he drew on ball tampering, UNLESS, I repeat, he has some proof we are not aware of.

Hair MAY have made the mistak (and a very big one it may turn out) of concluding that a Pakistani fielder had deliberately tampered with the ball. But after that with the ball changed, match restarted, players going in for early tea etc, the rest of it followed a course that seemed to leave him with little choice.

Thats why I feel both Hair and Inzy (or Pakistani management) both made grave errors. One on his ball tampering conclusion and the other on their belated protest and the brinsmanship that followed.

 

[FRAZ]

I dont know exactly what Dickie Bird said. But I tend to blame Hair. NOT for the decision to forfeit the match when he did but for the conclusion he drew on ball tampering, UNLESS, I repeat, he has some proof we are not aware of.

Hair MAY have made the mistak (and a very big one it may turn out) of concluding that a Pakistani fielder had deliberately tampered with the ball. But after that with the ball changed, match restarted, players going in for early tea etc, the rest of it followed a course that seemed to leave him with little choice.

Thats why I feel both Hair and Inzy (or Pakistani management) both made grave errors. One on his ball tampering conclusion and the other on their belated protest and the brinsmanship that followed.

I think you are right about Inzi . But hey , he did the thing which was due at the end .. Nothing much is going to happen in the hearing and only Inzamam will be sacked for 3-4 games and the things will go on ..

 

[SJS]

.. Nothing much is going to happen in the hearing and only Inzamam will be sacked for 3-4 games and the things will go on ..

Yes. And Pakistan lost the opportunity to record a superb win.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Yes. And Pakistan lost the opportunity to record a superb win.

While they were obviously big favourites, it's debatable whether they'd have won anyway (England only 37 behind).

 

[FRAZ]

Yes. And Pakistan lost the opportunity to record a superb win.

Pakistan lost the chance of a series victory too . Too many changes and too much of a stress they took in the third test due to the wrong umpiring by Hair and also this test was Pakistan's all the way ..
The Hair type of a problem is a fact and its a reality and it will be there as long as the different teams are going to play . But Inzamam should realize that not only the stress in the dressing room but also the characters like Hair he will have to deal with if he wants to be the captain .. Same type of the things have been happening in the past but never any action has been taken before and again never any action will be taken in the future . So face it ...... Inzamam did a bad job by not reacting immediately after the incident and his mind did not help him at all that what should he do right away ...
I went through the posts and the threads and I find it so hilarious that when I say that its like a war between Pakistan and India and its like a world war of cricket and I was accused of fighting . And I smile when even now some people are not accusing Hair at all of any wrong doing . Hair may not have gone against the law but he used the law for his personal evil deeds and thats a fact ... What else can I say ?
Dont take it to the context of this post but racism and hidden hatred can never be finished and Inzamam and other concerned people should realize that
Anyways !!

 

[Sanz]

You are fading faster than expected and when that happens blame Hair for that as well.

 

[FRAZ]

You are fading faster than expected and when that happens blame Hair for that as well.

What do you mean by fading . I am firm at my ground
1. I said it upon watching Hair's face that "I reject the outcome of this series " .
2. I said Problems specifically for "Pakistan" will happen ..
3. I said that Hair seems specific in his mistakes
4. Same happened .. Whats the fading point in that
5. I said in the predictions thread just a day before that stupid lil Sunday that chances are there for a split so almost happened ....
6. What fade factor you are talking about ..
7. I said once that it is just like a war between Pakistan and India (typa funny example) . And people said I am fighting ...........
8. I said it is hard to get rid of racism ? Is it wrong?
9. No body except Jason accepted that I might be right about the appointment of Hair .. Whats so faded about it ?
10 . I was always irritated and bugged upon reading the posters like Alex Kumar , Amit and bla bla and I had a problem that I wanted to answer them right away and I felt important to do so because its not a habit of mine to post a lot any where else. And I did a bad thing and I should have ignored them and I think that I should also ignore stupid rants that Hair is not a guilty party ...
11. I am not fading and yes you are by not usind swears and stupid , idiot , types of words recently ....

 

[Sanz]

Who is Alex Kumar ?

 

[FRAZ]

Who is Alex Kumar ?

The spinach lover ...

 

[Legglancer]

OK, 32 out of the 47 people belives Inzumam is not at fault ..... Hope that settles it.

 

[Sanz]

Did you know how many registered members CW has ?