The row between Darrell Hair and the ICC continues to rumble on after yesterday’s news that Hair “was encouraged to make the offer that was disclosed by ICC”. Hair’s latest revelations confuse and compound matters though; two days ago, he cited stress - or "a difficult time" - as the explanation for his inappropriate e-mail. The muddle continues.
Mark Nicholas, in the Daily Telegraph, rather sits on the fence but rightly points out that further judgement can only be made after the hearing, at the end of September.
Should we feel sorry for him? This depends on the outcome of the ball-tampering investigation, assuming there is one. If Pakistan are found guilty, then yes. If not, we can only reflect on a small, big man so hell bent on making an impact that it led to his downfall.
Richard Hobson, in the Daily Times, questions whether Hair will umpire in the forthcoming Champions Trophy:
Hair’s next international appointment is the Champions Trophy in India in October and November, but if the Oval affair and its fallout were not reason enough to step down or be removed, then his public conflict with the ICC makes his presence even less plausible.
The ICC are holding an executive board meeting in Dubai on Saturday, but the case of Inzamam-ul-Haq won’t be the only point of discussion for the board directors as Mihir Bose in the Telegraph points out:
Much time will be spent discussing how Malcolm Speed, the chief executive of the ICC, has handled this issue - and also whether Mike Procter, the match referee, could have overruled Hair and ensured that the final day's play at the Oval took place.
One senior ICC source told me: "The match referee can do that. There were two other umpires if Hair was not amenable. They could have been brought in and we need to look at these powers, how they are used, and make sure nothing like this ever happens again."
Bose also notes that Hair, not one to roll over easily, is questioning the ICC’s handling of the issue:
Hair has clearly decided that he will fight the ICC's fire with his own fusillade of press releases, and there could be further exchanges before Saturday's meeting. His intention seems to be to raise questions about how the ICC have handled the issue.
Instead of providing a solution to a situation he genuinely believed was untenable, Hair has, foolishly undermined his own integrity, writes Paul Kent in The Courier Mail.
