***Official*** England in Pakistan

[wpdavid]

Think that was Strauss

I had to look, but it was Tres - at Old Trafford on Day 1.

 

[chipmonk]

An excerpt from Cricinfo's article by Osman on how disgustingly biased the Umpiring has been this series .....


"The other men whose blunders we notice, of course, are those in white. Generally, there is little point to talk of umpiring blemishes but sometimes, if aligned with an attitudinal observation, some criticism can be poked. Darrell Hair's officiating in Faisalabad teetered between the officious and the obtuse. At times, it seemed rejecting appeals was foregone, no matter the validity. Pakistan, and particularly Kaneria, don't endear themselves to umpires with their appealing - and it can be excessive - but that shouldn't affect the way any appeal is treated.

In Faisalabad, Hair erred on numerous occasions. He was one of the culprits in the Inzamam run-out, but was also involved in the Salman Butt fracas. Butt claimed Hair hadn't spoken to him before warning him about running on the pitch and with one of those warnings, Hair appeared too eager to see an indiscretion where there wasn't one. When Inzamam later swept and then ran halfway down the pitch for the first of his three runs, beguilingly no word came from Hair.

He missed a Collingwood inside edge today and coupled with Rudi Koertzen appearing to premeditate his rejections of appeals reasonable, plumb, ridiculous or otherwise, it was understandable why some journalists, foreign and local, were bemused at the day's end to put it mildly."

 

[Peter Henderson]

It really is an absolute joke to be honest. Will a day's play ever go by without an errornous decision?

Of course we could make it a lot easier by employing technology....But do they do it? Nope.

 

[Scaly piscine]

An excerpt from Cricinfo's article by Osman on how disgustingly biased the Umpiring has been this series .....


"The other men whose blunders we notice, of course, are those in white. Generally, there is little point to talk of umpiring blemishes but sometimes, if aligned with an attitudinal observation, some criticism can be poked. Darrell Hair's officiating in Faisalabad teetered between the officious and the obtuse. At times, it seemed rejecting appeals was foregone, no matter the validity. Pakistan, and particularly Kaneria, don't endear themselves to umpires with their appealing - and it can be excessive - but that shouldn't affect the way any appeal is treated.

In Faisalabad, Hair erred on numerous occasions. He was one of the culprits in the Inzamam run-out, but was also involved in the Salman Butt fracas. Butt claimed Hair hadn't spoken to him before warning him about running on the pitch and with one of those warnings, Hair appeared too eager to see an indiscretion where there wasn't one. When Inzamam later swept and then ran halfway down the pitch for the first of his three runs, beguilingly no word came from Hair.

He missed a Collingwood inside edge today and coupled with Rudi Koertzen appearing to premeditate his rejections of appeals reasonable, plumb, ridiculous or otherwise, it was understandable why some journalists, foreign and local, were bemused at the day's end to put it mildly."

Yawn. Yawn. Yawn.

I could go on all day every day about how Afridi got off extremely lightly, but I mention it the odd time and that's it. Can we see an end to these endless boring tirades against the umpires before this thread becomes a waste of time reading?

 

[marc71178]

He was one of the culprits in the Inzamam run-out, but was also involved in the Salman Butt fracas. Butt claimed Hair hadn't spoken to him before warning him about running on the pitch and with one of those warnings, Hair appeared too eager to see an indiscretion where there wasn't one.

So Butt's claiming to have not been told about the first warning, but also that the first warning (that he didn't know about) was wrong?

 

[marc71178]

Of course we could make it a lot easier by employing technology....But do they do it? Nope.

Well considering that Hawkeye isn't available, how can they employ it?

 

[Hodgo7]

- wouldn't be Lee tho, he's like a slightly better version of Mohammed Sami.

.

Lee has the most wickets in the Windies series. Has 18 of which 11 of those are Top 4 Batsmen. He will be the fourth bowler there for sure. Has been bowling pretty good lately. Will be a bit more expensive than McGrath but he is there as a strike bowler.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

So Butt's claiming to have not been told about the first warning, but also that the first warning (that he didn't know about) was wrong?

No Butt was saying he wasnt talked to by the umpire before he got the first warning (ie the umpire gave him the first official warning without having a little word with him to watch where he was running before hand).

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Lee has the most wickets in the Windies series. Has 18 of which 11 of those are Top 4 Batsmen. He will be the fourth bowler there for sure. Has been bowling pretty good lately. Will be a bit more expensive than McGrath but he is there as a strike bowler.

1 good series vs a VERY poor side, doesnt make up for years of crapness If he can continue doing well vs the South Africans then ill begin to think he's turned the corner, and not a moment before.

 

[greg]

I had to look, but it was Tres - at Old Trafford on Day 1.

Doesn't matter how many times you "looked" - it was still Strauss!

 

[greg]

They can't start earlier as there's too much dew on the ground. That's the reason why there's rarely a result in Lahore.

Fairly simple solution - 6 day tests, 75 overs per day. I'm not holding my breath for this common sense approach to materialise though...

 

[wpdavid]

Doesn't matter how many times you "looked" - it was still Strauss!

Turns out it was both of them. I'd forgotten about the Strauss dismissal, which was in the 1st innings at Trent Bridge - caught by Hayden after he played a sweep into his boot.

But it did happen to Tresco too, in the 1st innings at Old Trafford: caught Gilchrist via glove, boot & bat again. I should know about that one, as I was writing the CW report for the day!

 

[greg]

Turns out it was both of them. I'd forgotten about the Strauss dismissal, which was in the 1st innings at Trent Bridge - caught by Hayden after he played a sweep into his boot.

But it did happen to Tresco too, in the 1st innings at Old Trafford: caught Gilchrist via glove, boot & bat again. I should know about that one, as I was writing the CW report for the day!

Well I don't recall it going anywhere near his boot - pad followed by back of bat, and Gilchrist's chest head was what was freakish about that dismissal. Maybe my memory's playing tricks.

 

[wpdavid]

Well I don't recall it going anywhere near his boot - pad followed by back of bat, and Gilchrist's chest head was what was freakish about that dismissal. Maybe my memory's playing tricks.

Nope, you're dead right. Having looked at my report properly, it's as you described it. Even more embarrassingly, I also wrote the report for Day 1 at Trent Bridge, but Strauss' dismissal had escaped my memory. Or somehow merged with Tresco's at Old Trafford. Or something.

 

[chipmonk]

Yawn. Yawn. Yawn.

Can we see an end to these endless boring tirades against the umpires before this thread becomes a waste of time reading?

Talk about waste ? look in the mirror !

 

[Scaly piscine]

Talk about waste ? look in the mirror !

As dull as your predictable response was, you may notice I don't actually repeat the same thing each day, week after week. But I expect this minor detail that you overlooked would be beyond your feeble mind anyway.

 

[a10khan]

Yawn. Yawn. Yawn.

I could go on all day every day about how Afridi got off extremely lightly, but I mention it the odd time and that's it. Can we see an end to these endless boring tirades against the umpires before this thread becomes a waste of time reading?

the author here is talkin abt the umpiring on day 1 of the 3rd test. u dont need to bring back afridi in every conversation of urs. do u want me to bring back harmison an bell's indiscretions?

 

[Scaly piscine]

the author here is talkin abt the umpiring on day 1 of the 3rd test. u dont need to bring back afridi in every conversation of urs. do u want me to bring back harmison an bell's indiscretions?

Look at the bit I bolded. The article itself did not go on about "how disgustingly biased the Umpiring has been this series" - which is the sort of crap that keeps coming up on these forums.

 

[a10khan]

It really is an absolute joke to be honest. Will a day's play ever go by without an errornous decision?

Of course we could make it a lot easier by employing technology....But do they do it? Nope.

its not the decisions as much as is the attitude of these two umpires that osman, the writer their, is highlighting. seeing both of these umpires in the last 2 years, i couldnt agree more with him. hair is having a pathetic series, and rudi is coming off from australia after having another one of his many dissapointing series.

 

[a10khan]

Look at the bit I bolded. The article itself did not go on about "how disgustingly biased the Umpiring has been this series" - which is the sort of crap that keeps coming up on these forums.

yeah i saw that now. but afridi's mention was still out-of-place. in any case, i think osman samiuddin, pakistani editor of cricinfo, has some excellent points.