 |
March 19, 2008
Posted on 03/19/2008 in Umpires
|
|
|
Darrell Hair was ranked the second best umpire in the world at the time of his last Test
© Getty Images
|
|
For all that Darrell Hair is a fine umpire, his reinstatement will exacerbate racial divides within cricket's governing bodies, writes Barney Ronay in the Guardian:
... it seems that the ICC has taken this decision for pragmatic reasons. And possibly because it has little choice in the matter. Hair's ICC contract runs out this month. Without a robust legal reason for failing to renew it - and Hair was ranked the second best umpire in the world at the time of his last Test - it leaves itself open to a potentially disastrous unfair dismissal action. Hair's own racial discrimination claim was quietly dropped last year, a case presumably bolstered by the fact that his fellow umpire at the Oval, Billy Doctrove, received no censure.
The final point in all this is that Hair is a very good umpire. Currently there's a general perception of a talent vacuum at the very top and, at 55, Hair has a good few years left in him. All in all this might be an ideal moment to move into the portly Australian umpire flammable effigy business.
January 8, 2008
Posted on 01/08/2008 in India in Australia, 2007-08
Jonathan Agnew, the BBC’s cricket correspondent, has used his blog to give some forthright views on the current mess in Australia. He starts with Australia themselves.
What a shame it is that the legacy of this fine team will be so tarnished by the ugly and offensive manner in which it plays the game – and has done for at least three years.
Ricky Ponting’s men have trampled all over the spirit of cricket by offering the lame excuse that they are "hard". In their world, deliberately conning the umpire is part and parcel of the game
He then turns to the decision of the ICC to remove Steve Bucknor as umpire.
As I warned when Darrell Hair was seen off by the Pakistan Cricket Board 18 months ago, the way was opened for powerful cricket teams to dispose of officials when a decision is made they do not like. How dare the game be held to ransom in this way.
But the real fault lies with the players – and it is their behaviour, attitude and respect for the game and its traditions that need urgently to be addressed. Umpires will always make mistakes – just as the players do (although you wouldn’t believe it sometimes) and undermining their confidence by removing their most senior colleague in this way is unbelievably foolish.
January 6, 2008
Posted on 01/06/2008 in India in Australia, 2007-08
The initial fallout to the shenanigans at the SCG has started with Peter Roebuck firing the first shots. In his Sydney Morning Herald column he argues that India were robbed and that no sensible person would take satisfaction at Australia’s win.
It was a match that will have been relished only by rabid nationalists and others for whom victory and vengeance are the sole reasons for playing sport. Truth to tell, the last day was as bad as the first. It was a rotten contest that singularly failed to elevate the spirit.
Until another shocking decision was made by a 61-year-old umpire, reliable in his time but past his prime, the fifth day of this unattractive contest was offering plenty of tension to put alongside the memorable hundreds contributed by capable batsmen on both sides. Thereafter they might as well have drawn stumps, as all interest had been removed. Once justice and fair play have been ejected there is no point in playing the game.
October 26, 2007
Posted on 10/26/2007 in Umpires
|
|
|
Frank Tyson: "Hair can probably quote you chapter and verse from every regulation in the Laws of Cricket"
© Getty Images
|
|
Following Darrell Hair's certain exit from the ICC's Elite Panel of umpires, Frank Tyson asks whether it is preferable to leave the destiny of a Test or a rubber in the hands of a “nice guy umpire” like Dickie Bird or in the fingers of one who is an immaculate interpreter of the game such as Hair. He writes in the Sportstar:
By the consensus of his colleagues there is no doubt that the portly umpire from central New South Wales stands proud in the front rank of international umpires. His competence is unquestioned and he is well acquainted with the Laws of Cricket from Lord Cowdrey’s Preamble to the last full stop of Law 42. Hair can probably quote you chapter and verse from every regulation — forwards, backwards, sideways and upside down; every full-stop, comma, colon, semi-colon and each and every punctuation mark. But irrespective of his knowledge about the interpretation of cricket’s regulations, Hair may yet find himself handed the cold mitt, unless his translation of the game’s rules is not diluted by humility and a little give and take on his part.
September 3, 2007
Posted on 09/03/2007 in Umpires
The feud between Darrell Hair and the ICC is set to be played out at a London tribunal next month after negotiations between the two parties broke down completely, according to a report in the Australian. Malcolm Conn argues that it was “disgraceful” that the ICC had sacked Hair from major international matches in the aftermath of last August’s Oval Test match debacle.
Despite Pakistan's behaviour, which forced the first forfeit in 129 years of Test cricket, Hair was blamed for the loss of millions through television rights and gate receipts when the match failed to resume on the final day. Hair will allege racial discrimination on the basis that while his international umpiring career has been ruined, costing him about $120,000 a year in match fees, [Billy] Doctrove has continued to umpire international matches largely unhindered.
August 25, 2007
Posted on 08/25/2007 in Umpires
Richard Boock looks at the practice of denying basic technological assistance to umpires and referees in sports with a jaundiced eye in New Zealand's Sunday Star Times.
One day, hopefully soon, we'll be able to speak with feigned disbelief about a time when the only person who wasn't allowed access to all the information in a multi-million dollar operation, was the one person who was charged with running it competently.
"Why ever did you do that?" the children will chorus, and the answers will surely have them doubled over in near fits: "Well, we wanted to retain a certain human charm ... we didn't want to slow things down ... it would've detracted from the tradition of the game ... haven't you heard of the `glorious uncertainty of sport'?"
And in the Sportstar Ted Corbett wants to know why there isn't a Society for Protection of Umpires in World Cricket.
June 28, 2007
Posted on 06/28/2007 in Umpires
|
|
|
Northern exposure: Darrell Hair
© Ian Jacobs / Cricinfo Ltd
|
|
Darrell Hair, who was cut from the ICC’s elite umpiring panel last year, will stand in three matches between Canada and the Netherlands in Ontario, AAP’s John Coomber reports.
In an indication of how far Hair has fallen from grace, the 76-Test veteran - the third most experienced umpire in world cricket - is listed to stand alongside Roger Dill, a 49-year-old Bermudan firefighter.
The pair will officiate in the four-day Intercontinental Cup game and two one-day internationals between the sides next week.
May 1, 2007
Posted on 05/01/2007 in World Cup 2007
The post-tournament flack continues to fly three days after the end of the World Cup. In The Times, Simon Barnes pulls no punches about the format and execution of the whole thing:
It had everything, mismatches, one-sided games, games that didn’t matter much, games that were simply short of action or drama or interest. International sporting organisations across the world are invited to study this event long and hard: it is the perfect template for the ruination of a sport.
How can sports administrators make such crass errors? Simple. They aren’t interested in sport. They are interested in power. The more countries you involve, the more power you have. The more money you make from a multi-nation tournament, the more power you have.
In The Daily Telegraph, Simon Hughes, reflecting on the farcical end to the final, writes that petty officialdom and the mindless obstructiveness of jobsworths has gone too far:
As a cricket-mad Hollywood light wrote in an email to me: "For those of us who love the game, it is beyond agonising to watch it systematically being ruined by small-minded, over-literal, bean-counting umpires and officials. It's entertainment, not a bankers' convention!!"
Exactly. As usual the people who really suffer are the paying public who are utterly disregarded in this pursuit of legal untouchability. So much for the 'Spirit of Cricket' preamble to the Laws of Cricket. Where's the 'spirit' in all of this?
In yesterday's Guardian, Gideon Haigh says that the current 50-over format has a limited shelf life and that the World Cup has paved the way for Twenty20.
Fans in the West Indies know their cricket; they do not sit there waiting for the next beach ball to bounce along or Mexican wave to wash over them. Maybe it was not only exorbitant ticket prices that kept them away. Maybe they saw this spectacle for what it was: a bunch of overcoached, overcooked lookalikes providing third-rate content for Rupert Murdoch. Perhaps the idea all along was to soften us up for the inexorable advance of Twenty20 cricket. It has never looked better.
January 18, 2007
Posted on 01/18/2007 in Umpires
Having presided over one of the most controversial days of cricket last year, Darrell Hair was subsequently sacked by the ICC from officiating in top-flight international matches. A triangular series between Kenya, Canada and Scotland, in Mombassa, though has no illusions to top quality and marks the scene of Hair's low-key return to the umpiring fold. It's not all fun and games for as The Guardian reports, he's lost his suitcase.
The umpire wore dark glasses and last night's clothes: black shoes, black trousers and a black shirt, loose at the wrists. Hands in his pockets, he walked alone around the field. Past the whitewashed mango tree situated a few metres inside the boundary rope; past the baobab tree so thick that the wall of the Mombasa Sports Ground was built around it.
January 2, 2007
Posted on 01/02/2007 in Umpires
Billy Bowden is well known for his umpiring idiosyncracies. But do you know who he would invite for dinner? And were you aware that he once played for Auckland A? Perhaps less surprising is that he thinks too much technology is a bad thing for the game, but for the answers to the above, and more, read an interview with him in The Daily Telegraph.
November 6, 2006
Posted on 11/06/2006 in Umpires
Ben Dorries and Robert Craddock, writing in The Courier-Mail, report Malcolm Speed wanted to save Darrell Hair from the axe.
The Courier-Mail has learnt that ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed strongly lobbied for Hair to remain on the elite umpires panel in Friday's ICC board meeting in Mumbai but was howled down by the board members. Speed does not have a vote on the ten-member executive board which voted 7-3 to sack Hair after heavy pressure from the Asian bloc countries.
In a comment piece Craddock says “we’ve been whispering it for years but now it's official – the Asian nations run cricket”.
Whether it be chasing the rights to host a World Cup, getting officials in important positions or getting rid of an umpire, the Asian bloc gets what it wants. England and Australian officials may luxuriate in holding the oldest, most famous series of all but when it comes to power broking they are no longer the kings.
In The Age Trevor Marshallsea writes no international umpire will ever take a stand again after Hair’s treatment.
Scyld Berry in The Sunday Telegraph reflects on the ICC’s decision to ban Hair from standing in any international matches between now and the expiry of his contract in 2008, saying that he had “been hung out to dry”.
September 29, 2006
Posted on 09/29/2006 in Pakistan cricket
In the aftermath of the Code of Conduct hearing at The Oval, the media has gone into overdrive. While the decision came too late for the Australian papers, and most in Asia took agency reports, in the UK, there was no shortage of comment.
In The Independent, Angus Fraser reveals that he has actually seen the ball at the heart of the whole row:
The state of the ball surprised me. It was protected in bubble wrap and treated as though it was part of a murder investigation. My first impression was that there was not a great deal wrong with it. I expected there to be more. This was not a ball that was about to reverse swing - the phenomenon created by the type of ball-tampering the Pakistan side had been accused of - extravagantly. The seam and quarter seam were in as good a condition as you would expect from a ball that was 56 overs old. They had definitely not been tampered with. There was a contrast between the two sides of the ball, as there always is. This is because one side has sweat and spit put on to it and is polished, while the other is left alone. The darker side is the one that has been polished and it generally looks tidier, while the other side always appears rougher.
Continue reading "'The state of the ball surprised me'"
September 28, 2006
Posted on 09/28/2006 in Pakistan cricket
|
|
|
Ranjan Madugalle and David Pannick QC prepare for the hearing yesterday
© Getty Images
|
| Although the ICC Code of Conduct hearing was conducted behind locked doors at The Oval, that has not stopped a couple of reports appearing offering insights into what happened.
In The Daily Telegraph, Simon Briggs claims that the Pakistan Cricket Board’s legal team are ahead on points:
In the course of the hearing, it became clear that Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove — the umpires at the centre of last month's ball-tampering storm — had not fully followed protocol during the emotional and chaotic afternoon of Aug 20. Insiders say this has weakened their case substantially.
Continue reading " Lawyers put umpires to the test"
September 19, 2006
Posted on 09/19/2006 in Umpires
Umpires are in the news again today, starting with Darrell Hair’s belief he will stand in the Champions Trophy. The Courier-Mail’s story is here and the Sydney Morning Herald’s report is here.
In the Herald Sun Jim Wilson writes Cricket Australia supports neutral umpires for any Test series.
September 10, 2006
Posted on 09/10/2006 in Umpires
Darrell Hair, the umpire at the centre of cricket's biggest controversy since Bodyline more than 70 years ago, has broken his silence to hit back at those critics who have condemned his role in the Pakistan ball-tampering affair. Bill Day speaks to Darrell Hair for The Mail on Sunday.
"It really upsets me when people describe me as racist, because they have no idea how I spent my childhood and how that shaped my beliefs in adult life. How can people judge me to have prejudices when I went to school in Australia alongside Chinese children, Hungarian refugees and all manner of other nationalities?
August 31, 2006
Posted on 08/31/2006 in Umpires
It could have been a scene out of England, Their England ... two village sides battling it out in rural Gloucestershire, a vicar umpiring, cream teas about to be taken ...
Only one of the teams refused to play on after the Right Reverend Geoffrey Creese gave a controversial LBW decision and went home (but not before offering to pay for the uneaten teas!). As the local Forester newspaper reports, it's not just Darrell Hair who has problems ... and at least he doesn't have to give the sermon the next day.
As the captain of the Rev Creese's side said:
"He doesn't always get it right, but he's not biased ... he calls it as he sees it."
Posted on 08/31/2006 in Umpires
Speaking of umpires and controversies, Judah Reuben, a former Indian umpire, recalls his moment in the spotlight, during the John Lever-Vaseline controversy in Madras in 1976-77. Reuben firmly beleives that Darrell Hair's actions were justified. Clayton Murzello of the Mid-Day caught up with him at his Pune home.
“I walked up to England captain Tony Greig and he argued that Lever used Vaseline to ward off perspiration. I said, ‘skip, he can wipe away the sweat after every ball.’
August 30, 2006
Posted on 08/30/2006 in Umpires
Darrell Hair should never umpire another cricket match - even though there may be some truth in his claim that he was encouraged by the ICC to make an offer to quit as an umpire, writes Tony Becca in the Jamaica Gleaner.
August 28, 2006
Posted on 08/28/2006 in Umpires
|
|
|
Should we feel sorry for Hair?
© Getty Images
|
|
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.
Continue reading "Hair: should we feel sorry for him?"
Posted on 08/28/2006 in Umpires
Australians often fall over themselves to defend a fellow countrymen irrespective of the evidence presented, or the lack of it - as in the recent ball-tampering controversy - writes Neil Manthorp in Supercricket. Barry Jarman's defence of Darrell Hair is one such example.
You have to admire the Australians for their sense of musketeerism. All for one and one for all. When a sporting colleague comes under fire, they rally around in defence. No matter what the circumstances or the validity of the arguments.
Posted on 08/28/2006 in Umpires
Malcolm Conn writes in The Australian how Malcolm Speed, the ICC chief executive, has "burnt Darrell Hair at the stake".
Under unbearable pressure for simply enforcing the laws of the game after Pakistan was forced to forfeit the fourth Test against England for refusing to take the field in protest at a ball-tampering charge, Hair stupidly tried to end the grief for everyone by suggesting the International Cricket Council pay out his contract and he retire.
ABC Online runs a story with Ian Chappell saying Hair’s position is “untenable”.
Mark Nicholas, writing in the Daily Telegraph feels it's inconceivable that Darrell Hair can umpire at international level again.
Also read Tony Cozier's thoughts on the issue.
August 26, 2006
Posted on 08/26/2006 in Umpires
Mike Selvey writes in the Guardian on the latest twist in the Darrell Hair saga:
Whatever his motive, Hair was unwise and naive to think that his suggested course of action was an easy way out. As far as the ICC is concerned, he is dispensable, and in disclosing his correspondence, they have all but cut off at the knees his career as an international umpire.
Also check out Richard Williams' piece in the same newspaper where he says, "Hair appears to have demolished his claim to moral authority. Whether he was being greedy or stupid, or even just pragmatic, will be of no importance."
The Daily Telegraph's Mihir Bose on how releasing the letter was part of ICC's strategy.
The Pakistani lawyers, headed by Mark Gay and Wasim Khohkar, thought they had come to be told the one-day series was going ahead. Instead, Speed handed them a copy of Hair's letter and told them that the advice they had received from David Pannick, the QC, was that if they had kept the letter secret and it had later emerged that it had existed then this would have jeopardised the hearings against Inzamam-ul-Haq.
Geoffrey Boycott feels all that Hair has done is make himself a laughing stock.
Also read Christopher Martin-Jenkins' piece in The Times:
His [Hair] own statement said that he wanted to continue as an umpire. No doubt he will, but he is unlikely to take charge of a game involving Pakistan, which makes it the more ironic that his demand for a payoff should so have prejudiced the ICC case and enhanced Pakistan’s.
In The Independent, David Llewellyn relates a brief but belligerent phone conversation with umpire Hair himself.
Not for the first time, you were left with the overriding impression that in Darrell Hair's world there is no middle ground, no grey area. Black, white, right, wrong, he could almost march to the monosyllabic, monotone rhythms that have directed him in his life.
Cricinfo's Andrew Miller comments on the issue here.
August 24, 2006
Posted on 08/24/2006 in Umpires
Barry Jarman, the former match referee, says he confiscated a ball from the South African team, which was being coached by Bob Woolmer, when it was only 16 overs old because the seam had been lifted. He talks to Robert Craddock in The Courier-Mail about the 1997 incident.
Jarman kept the issue secret until yesterday, when he produced the ball which has been in his possession ever since he demanded it be replaced. Jarman, no longer on the refereeing panel, noticed the ball was being scratched by two fieldsmen who would then lift their shirts and rub sweat into one side of it, causing an imbalance that would make it swing at freakish angles.
"The ball is only 16 overs old, yet one side has been tampered with and you can see where they have run their thumbnails down the seam which opens up," he said. "The open seam [which caught the sweat] meant one side was heavier than the other ..."
Jarman told the umpires to immediately replace the ball, triggering a fiery exchange with Woolmer. "They all went berserk, including Bob Woolmer, who raced into my office and said 'what's going on?'," Jarman said. "I said 'your guys are stuffing around with the ball, mate'. I told him who it was and he went out with his tail between his legs.
August 22, 2006
Posted on 08/22/2006 in Umpires
Peter Roebuck breaks away from the Australia media pack to attack Darrell Hair for his decision at The Oval. After the local columnists backed the umpire's courage yesterday, Roebuck writes in The Age “cricket has been reduced to a state of high farce by a bone-headed umpire and an impetuous touring team".
Hair and Inzamam-ul-Haq should both be removed from their posts. A plague on both their houses. Actually, Hair should have been sacked years ago because he is an erratic and headstrong umpire whose time has passed. His conduct at The Oval was merely the latest episode in a notably contentious career. Once again, he chose the path of confrontation, throwing his weight around, asserting his authority without much thought about the consequences. Certainly, he did not hesitate to accuse a touring team of cheating. He is not so much a bull in a china shop as a dinosaur in a delicatessen.
Richard Boock of The New Zealand Herald too agrees that Hair and Inzamam were at fault, but makes a valid point that the idea of an umpire taking a unilateral action against one team on the basis of a hunch, in the process provoking an unprecedented forfeiture and tarnishing the reputation of an entire team, isn't likely to go down well at ICC level.
Phil Wilkins remembers England’s walk-off and walk-back-on at the SCG in 1971.
The England fast bowler John Snow never knew how close he came to rewriting Ashes history 35 years ago when he swaggered back to the fence below the Paddington Hill at the SCG in 1971,” Wilkins writes in the Sydney Morning Herald.
Tony Cozier remembers some acrimonious incidents involving umpires from the past.
At a crucial stage on the last day of the first Test [West Indies' tour of New Zealand in February 1980], which they lost by one wicket, fast bowler Michael Holding vented his frustration by kicking over the stumps with a full, graceful swing of his right foot after yet another appeal, this for a wicketkeeper's catch, had been turned down. When what they felt were several obvious decisions again went against them in the second Test, West Indies delayed their return to the field after tea on the second day for 12 minutes as a mark of protest.
Posted on 08/22/2006 in Pakistan in England
A lead editorial in The Age has slammed the conduct of Pakistan’s players in refusing to take to the field at The Oval on Sunday.
“No one is bigger than the game. Cricket if nothing else is a game built on rules, pages and pages of them. A player if feeling aggrieved about a ruling can sound off about it, but the game must go on. To withdraw from the contest is to abandon the principles of the game. It also achieves nothing in winning the contest against your opponent.”
The article goes on to slam remarks attributed to senior Pakistan officials that they would not play were Darrell Hair to be appointed to matches involving them in the future.
“Pakistan, in a burst of petulant indignation, said they would not play any more matches if Darrell Hair was the umpire. First, no team has the right, nor should it be able, to dictate who the ICC appoints to officiate a match. Pakistan say they have had "problems with Darrell Hair before". Last year Pakistan took umbrage at several Hair decisions, yet in 2003 Pakistan were the beneficiaries when decisions by the same man upset South Africa in a series against them. Pakistan are guilty of playing the man. Darrell Hair did not make up the rules, he just applied them as he saw right and proper to do (and we would argue this whatever his nationality).”
Posted on 08/22/2006 in Umpires
While it seems that the world is queuing up to have a pop at Darrell Hair, Pat Gibson in The Times has highlighted that the job of being one of the ICC's elite umpires is not all that it is cracked up to be:
It sounds like a life of glamour, flying business class around the world, staying in the best hotels, watching the greatest cricketers of the day from the best vantage point, but for the members of the Emirates elite panel of umpires, it can be a lonely, stressful existence.
Gibson says that the rewards are decent – they are believed to earn between $75,000 (about £40,000) and $100,000 a year, plus a match fee of about $5,000 for Tests and $2,000 for one-day games – but on average they are abroad for up to 240 days a year.
Small wonder that three of England’s top umpires — Peter Willey, Neil Mallender and Jeremy Lloyds — have recently declined the invitation to join the elite list.
David Frith, writing in the Daily Telegraph, sympathises with the man in the middle.
Posted on 08/22/2006 in Umpires
Simon Barnes, in The Times, writes a passionate piece about the "vanity" of Darrell Hair and "how a single man’s pigheadedness was allowed to disrupt the fun of millions, to give cricket a terrible, gaping wound and to add to the tensions between Muslims and white Westerners at this, of all moments in history."
So now we know it. Officials are more important than players, laws are more important than people, one man’s vanity is more important than the pleasure of millions, principles are more important than common sense, intransigence is better than decency, vindictiveness is better than compromise, trouble is much more fun than peaceful co-operation and a fat man’s dignity is more important than mutual understanding between nations.
August 21, 2006
Posted on 08/21/2006 in Umpires
|
Steve Waugh: 'The laws are there for a reason'
© Getty Images
|
|
Steve Waugh, the former Australian captain, has come out strongly in favour of Darrell Hair's decision at The Oval, which received scathing criticism in the English and Pakistani media yesterday. Waugh's sentiment is echoed in the Australian papers as well, with most journalists and former cricketers backing Hair.
Waugh felt that Hair did the right thing by abandoning the Test. "I definitely agree with that [Pakistan forfeiting] - if they don't go back on the field the Test is over," Waugh said in News Ltd papers. "That's quite simple. Sunil Gavaskar tried that one on the umpires in Australia [in 1981]. No-one is bigger than the game. The laws are there for a reason."
Continue reading "Waugh and Aussie media back Hair"
May 14, 2006
Posted on 05/14/2006 in Umpires
The cry “Kill the umpire”, used to ring out only in football and baseball stadiums but now it has a presence in the field of cricket, albeit in a metaphorical sense, writes Ian Chappell. Read the full article in Mid-Day.
"An umpire is getting 96% of his decisions right, while on the other hand Hawk-Eye is guaranteed 90% correct. So, why do we need technology to protect the umpires?"
April 6, 2006
Posted on 04/06/2006 in Umpires
The ICC will insist its technical assessment is right to a ‘T’. The umpires panel officers will spew statistics about how their panelists are 95 per cent right. What they may not record is the number of goofups of their favourites. Nor will they see the pattern that appears to suggest something else, writes R.Mohan in The Deccan Chronicle
January 27, 2006
Posted on 01/27/2006 in Umpires
Frank Tyson finds the harassment and questioning of umpires "obnoxious".
The consequent frayed relationships between two of the leading cricket nations [Australia and South Africa] may result in future unpleasant incidents when the two sides meet in the second half of the rubber on the high veldt; but personally, I was of the opinion that most of the animosity occurred in the media, provoked some players' tongues into outrunning their brains and testing Cricket Australia's tolerance.
...The war of words between the South African skipper, Graeme Smith and Aussie leg-spinner, Shane Warne, in their respective newspaper columns, masqueraded as psychological "banter", until it descended into personal name-calling, at which stage Cricket Australia had to intervene.
January 24, 2006
Posted on 01/24/2006 in Umpires
A dissident group of umpires were yesterday pondering the collapse of the Association of Umpires & Scorers special meeting at the Derbyshire County Ground on Saturday.
Hopley, a former association general secretary, said: "We're taking a couple of days to consider our options. Members were frustrated by a lack of proper organisation, which typifies the general council."
The 15 accused officers were also disappointed. Dave Brandon, facing a five-year suspension from office for witnessing a lease signature, said: "We would have preferred to have cleared the air."
Via the Daily Telegraph
December 2, 2005
Posted on 12/02/2005 in Umpires
The entertaining Martin Johnson in the Daily Telegraph writes about the delights of Lahore:
If you were to compile a list of adjectives to describe Lahore the word romantic would not be among them, and if you spot anyone having a candlelit dinner for two, the chances are that they're not so much holding hands as sitting through a power cut.
But he also has more serious points to make about the endless and punishing schedule imposed on umpire by the ICC:
You have to say that if cricketers around the world are justifiably pointing to the ICC's determination to cram quarts into pint pots, then the umpires have even more reason to grumble at the increasingly cluttered calendar. There are only seven of them on the elite panel, and while Billy Bowden - who flew straight from Pakistan v England in Multan to Australia v West Indies in Adelaide - probably didn't have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the airport, it would be a miracle if today's Test umpires didn't occasionally succumb to battle fatigue.
November 28, 2005
Posted on 11/28/2005 in Umpires
In the Sunday Telegraph Scyld Berry says that Steve Harmison's shy at Inzamam-ul-Haq could have resulted in something far worse that a run out, and warns that the time could come when players resort to fisticuffs to resolve their differences, and that umpires should be given red cards to deal with such a scenario:
A fielder will either think twice, or else will aim at the stumps with the maximum of care, if he risks being sent off the field for the rest of the innings because he has hit the batsman with a none-too-careful throw: that obnoxious practice introduced by the Australians in Steve Waugh's time.
September 25, 2005
Posted on 09/25/2005 in
Ray White, the former president of the South African board, puts forth his suggestions to improve Test cricket. Read the piece in Natal Witness.
September 22, 2005
Posted on 09/22/2005 in Umpires
Umpires have come a long way since Mike Selvey’s county days. In The Guardian he looks at the current elite panel, and stops briefly to analyse Duncan Fletcher’s defining off-field moment.
|
|
