What's new

Darrell Hair calls Pakistan's players 'cheats, frauds and liars'

cricfan967

cricfan967

ODI Debutant
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Runs
10,883
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/sep/25/darrell-hair-pakistan

Darrell Hair, the former Test umpire, has branded the Pakistan cricket team "cheats, frauds and liars" and criticised the International Cricket Council, the world governing body, for refusing to act despite apparent evidence that Shoaib Akhtar tampered with the ball during the one-day international between Pakistan and England at the Rose Bowl last Wednesday.

Hair, who stood in 78 Tests and 135 one-day internationals, also told Observer Sport he feels vindicated following Pakistan's troubled tour of England, which was overshadowed by the "spot fixing" scandal when players were accused of deliberately bowling no-balls. Pakistan's Test captain, Salman Butt, and his team-mates Mohammad Amir and Mohammad Asif were suspended and returned home early.

The Australian's career was ruined by his stance in the controversial Oval Test in August 2006 during Pakistan's last tour of England, when a Test match was forfeited for the first time, following accusations that Inzamam ul-Haq's team had tampered with the ball. Hair retired in 2008 because of the fall-out from the incident.

The Pakistan players returned home late last week after the most troubled tour in modern cricket history. Ijaz Butt, the chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board, reiterated his refusal to apologise for smearing England players' reputations. Butt said there had been "loud and clear talk in bookies' circles that some English players were paid enormous amounts of money to lose [the third one-day international]." He made the allegations after the ICC said they were investigating the third ODI for suspicious scoring patterns by Pakistan. Nadeem Sarwar, the PCB media manager, told the Jang newspaper that there was no question of Butt apologising.

Hair said of the tour: "The fans, viewers and crowds have been watching cheats and liars. How long will they continue to part with their money to watch manipulated matches and players cheating? The ICC should be ashamed to allow these matches to take place."

Shoaib was apparently caught on camera interfering with the ball and Hair said: "Regardless of irrefutable evidence of ball tampering the ICC still choose not to take action, which is unsurprising given their record and inability to control their own game. 'The game must always go on' seems to be their motto.

"Unfortunately the Pakistan cricketers show no respect for the game and continually attempt to cheat. The game as currently being played by Pakistan is a hoax and a fraud to the public."

On the fourth day of the Oval Test in 2006 Hair and Billy Doctrove ruled that Pakistan had tampered with the ball and awarded England five penalty runs and offered the batsmen a replacement ball. When Pakistan refused to resume play after tea in protest at the decision the umpires left the field, informed Pakistan they must return, then walked back out to the middle.

When Pakistan did not do so Hair removed the bails and England were declared winners by forfeiture. Pakistan did retake the field 25 minutes later but while England were also willing to resume, Hair and Doctrove refused. Hair's career was effectively ruined when a few days later the ICC made public his offer to resign in exchange for $500,000 for what he considered his projected lost earnings.

The following year Hair took the ICC to an employment tribunal, claiming racial discrimination, after the governing body had banned him from officiating in November 2006. While that case was settled out of court and Hair did umpire two more Tests, he then retired.

Asked if he now felt vindicated Hair said: "Yes. Maybe now more and more people will understand why I acted like I did in 2006."

When contacted the ICC declined to comment.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
And Pakistani players call him "a cheat, fraudster and a liar..."

So really, no harm done.
 
The guy doesn't even matter. Inconsequential rubbish from an inconsequential person.
 
so how does he feel vindicated when Pakistan were found not guilty of ball tampering after he falsely accused them and the ICC havent taken action after seeing some dodgy photos now?

I dont understand Darrell
 
He is absolutely right. When Pakistani player has a ball in their hand they are obviously tampering with it but when a white player steps on it or rubs sweets on the ball then it cannot be considered ball tampering.

If any nation should be punished for ball tampering it is obviously England. They won with the Ashes only because they tampered with the ball and now we have all see pictures of Collingwood/Broad/Bresnan/Anderson. In fact since the 90's English bowlers, in their attempts to emulate Pakistani bowlers, have tampered with the ball.
 
yo, Darell! over here! take a look!

20074122026490.D%20Table%20mirror.jpg
 
wait so all pakistan players are cheats frauds and liars?? surely thats defamation against every paksitan player? legal notice anyone?
 

Heres a good one.

The anagram of Darrel Hair is Harder liar.




Correction > I missed spelled Darrell
 
Last edited:
Ths guy is an idiot and was biased towards asian teams. He made some poor decisions and I recall kept calling murali as chucker and was no balling him. He was caught with his pants down when asking for $500,00 us dollars. Guy is arrogant and cheat himself. Sadly Billy Doctroive is following in his footsteps...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BREAKING NEWS: BNP has replaced Nick Griffin as party head by Darrell Hair
 
my opinion of Darrell Hair is mixed. statistically, he is known as a good umpire - in the aftermath of Ovalgate, it was revealed that he made more correct decisions on LBWs, catches and other marginal decisions than the majority of the elite umpires over a long period. and he was arguably correct to no-ball Murali when the previous set of rules forbade certain bowling actions. however, by all accounts except his own, his handling of the ball-tampering row was reactionary, brash and inept, and deservedly shortened his career by many years.
 
Whippy said:
my opinion of Darrell Hair is mixed. statistically, he is known as a good umpire - in the aftermath of Ovalgate, it was revealed that he made more correct decisions on LBWs, catches and other marginal decisions than the majority of the elite umpires over a long period. and he was arguably correct to no-ball Murali when the previous set of rules forbade certain bowling actions. however, by all accounts except his own, his handling of the ball-tampering row was reactionary, brash and inept, and deservedly shortened his career by many years.
Click to expand...

His decisions were biased against asian teams. Seen enough matches where he was anti asian and decisions were howlers a bit like David Constonant
 
Whippy,

My opinion for Darrell is very luke warm.

Some time ago I saw Chaminda Vaas appealing for FOUR stone dead LBWs withing a span of few overs, and they ALL were given not out for some reason.

He DID have some issues with asian players. history will show that.
 
Whippy said:
my opinion of Darrell Hair is mixed. statistically, he is known as a good umpire - in the aftermath of Ovalgate, it was revealed that he made more correct decisions on LBWs, catches and other marginal decisions than the majority of the elite umpires over a long period. and he was arguably correct to no-ball Murali when the previous set of rules forbade certain bowling actions. however, by all accounts except his own, his handling of the ball-tampering row was reactionary, brash and inept, and deservedly shortened his career by many years.
Click to expand...

How could he no-ball murli when his end was changed?
He is an agenda based biased umpire. Not worth for the white suit.
 
cricfan967 said:
Asked if he now felt vindicated Hair said: "Yes. Maybe now more and more people will understand why I acted like I did in 2006."
Click to expand...

Umm, actually no they would not. You didnt provide any evidence remember!

Poor guy.
 
I just hope Hash doesnt post his address up again...
 
Before the England tour would have sweared at him BUT

After all thats come out, got say he is right now.
 
He's a real softy at heart - doesnt mean it.
 
Silly ****. Blackmailing, Incompetent ****.

Two men I utterly despise in cricket: Darrell "$500k" Hair and Ijaz "Clown" Butt.

Statistically overall he may have had a good record, but as mentioned before, his record with Asian teams was well dodgy. He made some well dodgy decisions when it came to Asian teams. He certainly had form against Pakistan.

For ICC to appoint him for Eng/Pak was a mad decision. We had a decent, articulate, urbane chairman and a great coach at the time - not like the mad, innarticulate fool we have masquerading as a chairman, now.

If somebody like Dicky Bird or Shep, had been umpiring, Ovalgate would never happened. Darrell "$500k" Hair and "Blindman" Billy Doctrove were a disgrace. Although "Blindman" stuffed him by not appearing at the hearing with him.

Hair was just a disaster waiting to happen. He was just a grandstanding, egotistacal fool like Butt. He got burnt - as a result of his handling of the Test and his subsequent attempts to blackmail the ICC and his legal action claiming to be a victim of racism. (The geezer's an Aussie version of Butt!)

Mr Hair please **** off.
 
Darrell Hair.

like I said, a lot of the decisions that he made throughout his career were probably the right ones. however, his mistakes in 2006 forever ruined his reputation in my eyes.

first, something I would defend Hair over is the Harmison run-out of Inzamam in Faisalabad. live, the incident happened very quickly and was always worth another look, if only to confirm that Inzamam should not be given out. Hair simply referred the incident to the 3rd umpire, and although it was the 3rd umpire that incorrectly gave it out, Hair went on to get blamed for what happened, which I always thought was a bit harsh. at this point in time, I was on Hair's side.

where I lost sympathy was the unprofessional manner in which he handled the ball-tampering allegations at the Oval, and the first day at Headingley in the previous test, when he failed to give a number of obvious key decisions against England players. biased, or just useless? either way, very very unimpressive.

Billy Doctrove cannot be excused for his part in the series in 2006 either. he also umpired poorly when Pakistan were bowling (although when England were bowling too, so I think he is incompetent rather than biased), and him and Hair played an equal part in finishing the Oval test prematurely. the only way penalty runs could be awarded at that time is when the two on-field umpires agreed the ball had been tampered with - that Darrell may have 'started it' does not excuse Billy in any way. the rules over ball-tampering have since been changed, requiring the match referee to agree with both on-field umpires, but it came too late.

Later in the evening, England and Pakistan were actually at the stage where there might have been an agreement for the match to resumed on the fifth day, which is a testament to how strong the relations have often been between these two cricket boards. Duncan Fletecher, David Morgan, Andrew Strauss, Inzamam-ul-Haq, Shehryar Khan, Bob Woolmer and even Malcolm Speed down the phone...this makes at least seven important individuals who wanted to resume the match. the eighth and most important individual who was happy to resume the match was match referee Mike Procter, who was about to give the instruction. however, David Morgan (ECB chairman at the time, who has been praised by Shehryar Khan for his handling of the incident) recalls the exact words of Hair and Doctrove when it looked like the match may have been about to be resumed:

Hair: 'if you send them out there [having removed the bails], you will make a monkey of me'
Doctrove: 'I couldn't do it without Darrell'

that's really pretty final. if the umpires refuse to umpire in a match they feel they have finished, the game cannot resume. the behaviour of this pair brought the game into disrepute, not the behaviour of Inzamam-ul-Haq, which is pretty sad because it was Inzamam who was found 'guilty' of bringing the game into disrepute. after appointing Hair in the first place, this decision was yet another failure on the part of the ICC, as was re-appointing Hair in 2008 to umpire in England again. this series of events left the ICC with zero credibility at the time. The PCB and the ECB have never had their due respect in the media for the way they handled Ovalgate, and given the truth of what happened, this is a shame.

Doctrove's behaviour towards Hair after the incident, formerly his close colleagues and mate, was selfish and gutless, particularly after he had stuck up for Hair in the above manner. it must have made Hair feel very betrayed. Hair has since claimed that he never even heard from Doctrove after Ovalgate despite efforts to amicably get in touch with the West Indian, probably an effort from Doctrove to isolate Hair, and allow the blame to fall on the Australian in the public eye. it's difficult to care about Hair's feelings at this point - this is more an indictment of Doctrove, and what a sly little man he really is.

so yes, Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove. both dodgy characters and should not be anywhere near the game of cricket. for the record, I will be buying Darrell Hair's new book when it comes out, because I do find him a fascinating character and am always intrigued to see what he says about various things, including Ovalgate. he is a clever man, but has a lot of issues, and in my eyes, should never have umpired again after Ovalgate.

anyone who would like to hear lots of interesting views and evidence on Ovalgate should have a look through the Test Match Special podcast archive, there is a great 40 minute piece on Ovalgate that was broadcast a month ago, and I hope it's still available somewhere because everybody needs to hear it. I would be happy to forward it in an mp3 file to anybody here.
 
Last edited:
A Typical convict approach we have seen that from his past Idiotic sprouting's...... HE should be known as DARRELL AIR HEAD.
 
t_kaay said:
so why is there no talk by the pcb for suing hair?
Click to expand...

Noork85 said:
can PCB sue him? thats one person i'd like to see in court :)
Click to expand...

cricfan967 said:
Honestly, Ijaz Butt must take action against this.
Click to expand...

the Great Khan said:
wait so all pakistan players are cheats frauds and liars?? surely thats defamation against every paksitan player? legal notice anyone?
Click to expand...

ghulam35 said:
he should get sued by the pcb!
Click to expand...

Random Aussie said:
This is getting ridiculous. Can we just have a "sue him" smiley for every single thread where any human being makes a comment? FFS

On Darryl Hair...LOL
Click to expand...

I'm with Random Aussie....forum needs a "sue him" smiley
 
Darrell Hair is obsessed with Pakistan....maybe he needs to get a job.

I think he should get employed by the ICC highlighting the consequences of obesity.
 
That was a very good analys by whippy - that is more or less the truth of the matter.
 
Asif khan said:
Darrell Hair is obsessed with Pakistan....maybe he needs to get a job.
Click to expand...

That's the problem for him, he cant get a job, its beacuse of Pakistan he lost his job, he is obviously still bitter.
 
What a waste of space this person is in this world. Absolute rubbish
 
Atif said:
That's the problem for him, he cant get a job, its beacuse of Pakistan he lost his job, he is obviously still bitter.
Click to expand...

Even when he had his job (which he left by his own choice btw) he had an agenda against asian teams and Pakistan inparticular.
 
Whippy said:
Darrell Hair.

first, something I would defend Hair over is the Harmison run-out of Inzamam in Faisalabad. live, the incident happened very quickly and was always worth another look, if only to confirm that Inzamam should not be given out. Hair simply referred the incident to the 3rd umpire, and although it was the 3rd umpire that incorrectly gave it out, Hair went on to get blamed for what happened, which I always thought was a bit harsh. at this point in time, I was on Hair's side.
Click to expand...

Whippy, by referring the incident to the third umpire Hair was saying he did not believe Inzi was taking evasive action. Remember all the 3rd umpire could adjudicate on were the line calls, so in this instance it would be whether Inzi was out of his ground or not. Hair had already decided Inzi was obstructing the fielding side and his poor judgement rightly drew criticism.

Contrary to your defence of Hair, I think this incident actually illustrates Hair's biased actions. He was widely regarded as someone who had comprehensive knowledge of the laws of the game. His manipulation of the situation, referral to the 3rd umpire when it was unwarranted, he hoped would 'muddy the waters'. Any umpire officiating without an agenda would have found in the batsman's behaviour, not least because of the benefit of the doubt and the spirit of the game considerations.
 
Whippy said:
Darrell Hair.

like I said, a lot of the decisions that he made throughout his career were probably the right ones. however, his mistakes in 2006 forever ruined his reputation in my eyes.

first, something I would defend Hair over is the Harmison run-out of Inzamam in Faisalabad. live, the incident happened very quickly and was always worth another look, if only to confirm that Inzamam should not be given out. Hair simply referred the incident to the 3rd umpire, and although it was the 3rd umpire that incorrectly gave it out, Hair went on to get blamed for what happened, which I always thought was a bit harsh. at this point in time, I was on Hair's side.

where I lost sympathy was the unprofessional manner in which he handled the ball-tampering allegations at the Oval, and the first day at Headingley in the previous test, when he failed to give a number of obvious key decisions against England players. biased, or just useless? either way, very very unimpressive.

Billy Doctrove cannot be excused for his part in the series in 2006 either. he also umpired poorly when Pakistan were bowling (although when England were bowling too, so I think he is incompetent rather than biased), and him and Hair played an equal part in finishing the Oval test prematurely. the only way penalty runs could be awarded at that time is when the two on-field umpires agreed the ball had been tampered with - that Darrell may have 'started it' does not excuse Billy in any way. the rules over ball-tampering have since been changed, requiring the match referee to agree with both on-field umpires, but it came too late.

Later in the evening, England and Pakistan were actually at the stage where there might have been an agreement for the match to resumed on the fifth day, which is a testament to how strong the relations have often been between these two cricket boards. Duncan Fletecher, David Morgan, Andrew Strauss, Inzamam-ul-Haq, Shehryar Khan, Bob Woolmer and even Malcolm Speed down the phone...this makes at least seven important individuals who wanted to resume the match. the eighth and most important individual who was happy to resume the match was match referee Mike Procter, who was about to give the instruction. however, David Morgan (ECB chairman at the time, who has been praised by Shehryar Khan for his handling of the incident) recalls the exact words of Hair and Doctrove when it looked like the match may have been about to be resumed:

Hair: 'if you send them out there [having removed the bails], you will make a monkey of me'
Doctrove: 'I couldn't do it without Darrell'

that's really pretty final. if the umpires refuse to umpire in a match they feel they have finished, the game cannot resume. the behaviour of this pair brought the game into disrepute, not the behaviour of Inzamam-ul-Haq, which is pretty sad because it was Inzamam who was found 'guilty' of bringing the game into disrepute. after appointing Hair in the first place, this decision was yet another failure on the part of the ICC, as was re-appointing Hair in 2008 to umpire in England again. this series of events left the ICC with zero credibility at the time. The PCB and the ECB have never had their due respect in the media for the way they handled Ovalgate, and given the truth of what happened, this is a shame.

Doctrove's behaviour towards Hair after the incident, formerly his close colleagues and mate, was selfish and gutless, particularly after he had stuck up for Hair in the above manner. it must have made Hair feel very betrayed. Hair has since claimed that he never even heard from Doctrove after Ovalgate despite efforts to amicably get in touch with the West Indian, probably an effort from Doctrove to isolate Hair, and allow the blame to fall on the Australian in the public eye. it's difficult to care about Hair's feelings at this point - this is more an indictment of Doctrove, and what a sly little man he really is.

so yes, Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove. both dodgy characters and should not be anywhere near the game of cricket. for the record, I will be buying Darrell Hair's new book when it comes out, because I do find him a fascinating character and am always intrigued to see what he says about various things, including Ovalgate. he is a clever man, but has a lot of issues, and in my eyes, should never have umpired again after Ovalgate.

anyone who would like to hear lots of interesting views and evidence on Ovalgate should have a look through the Test Match Special podcast archive, there is a great 40 minute piece on Ovalgate that was broadcast a month ago, and I hope it's still available somewhere because everybody needs to hear it. I would be happy to forward it in an mp3 file to anybody here.
Click to expand...

He should never have umpired before Ovalgate either. That TMS Ovalgate podcast confirmed what I though of both the sycophantic Agnew and Darrel Hair. Those two need to get a room. Agnew is doing a programme about Oval and brings up the Inzi incident and even then talks about how there were other umpires involved. Er no Aggers, Hair made the decision to refer it upstairs. The 3rd umpire can only make a line decision. Then Aggers goes on to try and shift the blame away from Hair to Doctrove for the Oval incident. Whippy, re-listen to that interview with Hair and judge for yourself whether Agnew was objective or not. Hair was completely in the wrong on both occasions, end of.

His general approach and umpiring to the 2005 Pakistan-England series was atrocious too.

As for the criticism of Doctrove, from all I have heard he was just supporting the senior umpire. Umpires in general tend to be a close knit bunch who always back each other, as was indicated by Doctrove's response: "Couldn't do it without Darrell". Doctrove backtracked when he realised how far Hair was willing to go to make an invalid point

Darrell Hair ruined so many games for Pakistan, to the point where there almost became no point in watching matches he was umpiring. The only reason to watch was though a perverse interest on what Hair might do next. What he delivered at the Oval was beyond even a cynical Pak fan's wildest imagination.
 
What kind of insane asylum allows weekly press conferences?

We should send Ijaz Butt there and these two can be roommates.
 
Hair is revealing a lot about his own prejudices as much anything else. His statement provides a glimpse as to why Pakistani cricketers were uncomortable with his umpiring.
 
Darrell Hair was/is a *****.

If Dicky Bird, Shep or someone like Simon Taufel or Aleem Dar gave a decision, I don't think any player or spectator disputed it. There was no feeling other than that it was an honest decision. These umpires had the players and fans respect.

Hair might have known all the rules but he had no people skills and Asian teams usually got the brunt of his many crap decisions. The Inzy run out and the decisions mentioned by Whippy - being good examples that led to Ovalgate.

Agree with your take on "Aggers" Agnew at the time of Ovalgate, when others such as Boycs, Nasser and Simon Hughes were very pro Pak - due to Hair's stupidity.
 
Iqbal'sh said:
Whippy, by referring the incident to the third umpire Hair was saying he did not believe Inzi was taking evasive action. Remember all the 3rd umpire could adjudicate on were the line calls, so in this instance it would be whether Inzi was out of his ground or not. Hair had already decided Inzi was obstructing the fielding side and his poor judgement rightly drew criticism.

Contrary to your defence of Hair, I think this incident actually illustrates Hair's biased actions. He was widely regarded as someone who had comprehensive knowledge of the laws of the game. His manipulation of the situation, referral to the 3rd umpire when it was unwarranted, he hoped would 'muddy the waters'. Any umpire officiating without an agenda would have found in the batsman's behaviour, not least because of the benefit of the doubt and the spirit of the game considerations.
Click to expand...

SOSami said:
He should never have umpired before Ovalgate either. That TMS Ovalgate podcast confirmed what I though of both the sycophantic Agnew and Darrel Hair. Those two need to get a room. Agnew is doing a programme about Oval and brings up the Inzi incident and even then talks about how there were other umpires involved. Er no Aggers, Hair made the decision to refer it upstairs. The 3rd umpire can only make a line decision. Then Aggers goes on to try and shift the blame away from Hair to Doctrove for the Oval incident. Whippy, re-listen to that interview with Hair and judge for yourself whether Agnew was objective or not. Hair was completely in the wrong on both occasions, end of.

His general approach and umpiring to the 2005 Pakistan-England series was atrocious too.

As for the criticism of Doctrove, from all I have heard he was just supporting the senior umpire. Umpires in general tend to be a close knit bunch who always back each other, as was indicated by Doctrove's response: "Couldn't do it without Darrell". Doctrove backtracked when he realised how far Hair was willing to go to make an invalid point

Darrell Hair ruined so many games for Pakistan, to the point where there almost became no point in watching matches he was umpiring. The only reason to watch was though a perverse interest on what Hair might do next. What he delivered at the Oval was beyond even a cynical Pak fan's wildest imagination.
Click to expand...

personally I think Hair was just indulging a strong appeal. but you fellas could be right, you make a good case. the fact that Taufel umpired in that match as well, a superb and fair umpire, makes me think that the mistake of himself and Hair to follow Harmison's appeal was just that, a genuine mistake. either way I suppose we could criticise Harmison as well, obviously his throw was borne out of frustration at the team not taking wickets, but he must have known he was being naughty.

you are right about Agnew. his friendly approach to Hair was, in my eyes, for one of two reasons. 1, he supported Hair. 2, he was scared to challenge Hair because he didn't want him to hang up. haha. either way, the testimony of David Morgan completely trumped the denial of Hair and Agnew in a few short sentences, so the podcast ends up confirming what we all knew about Hair, and really doesn't do Agnew any favours as a journalist or as a fan. perhaps unintentionally on the part of Agnew, that little 40 minute audio file ended up as, for me, an important piece of evidence in the Ovalgate scandal, even providing a little closure on what was a foul incident.

we will have to agree to disagree on Doctrove. whether he was supporting Hair's bumbling crusade, or just being incredibly weak-minded, I believe that Ovalgate showed him up as having no business on the elite panel. if you combine Doctrove's performance in August 2006 with his numerous errors against a host of sides, surely there must be somebody better who can replace him in the long run.

I'm glad somebody else finds Darrell Hair interesting. what a strange man. this is why I'm buying the book, because there is that morbid curiosity into what actually goes on in his head.
 
Asif khan said:
Darrell Hair is obsessed with Pakistan....maybe he needs to get a job.
Click to expand...

Actually the only time he gets to speak to the media is when Pakistan are in the news for controversies. They don't go to him for quotes on anything else lol
 
Whippy said:
personally I think Hair was just indulging a strong appeal. but you fellas could be right, you make a good case. the fact that Taufel umpired in that match as well, a superb and fair umpire, makes me think that the mistake of himself and Hair to follow Harmison's appeal was just that, a genuine mistake. either way I suppose we could criticise Harmison as well, obviously his throw was borne out of frustration at the team not taking wickets, but he must have known he was being naughty.

you are right about Agnew. his friendly approach to Hair was, in my eyes, for one of two reasons. 1, he supported Hair. 2, he was scared to challenge Hair because he didn't want him to hang up. haha. either way, the testimony of David Morgan completely trumped the denial of Hair and Agnew in a few short sentences, so the podcast ends up confirming what we all knew about Hair, and really doesn't do Agnew any favours as a journalist or as a fan. perhaps unintentionally on the part of Agnew, that little 40 minute audio file ended up as, for me, an important piece of evidence in the Ovalgate scandal, even providing a little closure on what was a foul incident.

we will have to agree to disagree on Doctrove. whether he was supporting Hair's bumbling crusade, or just being incredibly weak-minded, I believe that Ovalgate showed him up as having no business on the elite panel. if you combine Doctrove's performance in August 2006 with his numerous errors against a host of sides, surely there must be somebody better who can replace him in the long run.

I'm glad somebody else finds Darrell Hair interesting. what a strange man. this is why I'm buying the book, because there is that morbid curiosity into what actually goes on in his head.
Click to expand...

Doctrove needs to be taken off that panel once and for all. Unfortunately ICC umpires are a bit like Kamran Akmal - untouchable.

I'm surprised he hasn't been Willised like Tiffin and Harper have. I think Sky have put Willis in his box a little in recent times. Pity, he was the only guy who would name umpires.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/yd7vkAfNGm0?fs=1&hl=en_GB"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/yd7vkAfNGm0?fs=1&hl=en_GB" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qTojcN1dsAs?fs=1&hl=en_GB"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qTojcN1dsAs?fs=1&hl=en_GB" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>


<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/SyT8d7T7kWc?fs=1&hl=en_GB"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/SyT8d7T7kWc?fs=1&hl=en_GB" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>


Legendary rants.
 
Random Aussie said:
Actually the only time he gets to speak to the media is when Pakistan are in the news for controversies. They don't go to him for quotes on anything else lol
Click to expand...

Why? It's never anything nice but perhaps that's why they go to him in the first place so he can ridicule Pakistan and somehow justify his behaviour at Ovalgate.
 
Mr Hair does have a strange fixation with Pakistan cricket, maybe they should take out a verbal restraining order against him. :)

I actually feel sorry for him, he just wants to be heard. Old people are like that, I hope his neighbours check up on him regularly and make sure there are not a stack of milk bottles and newspaper at his front door.
 
Asif khan said:
Why? It's never anything nice but perhaps that's why they go to him in the first place so he can ridicule Pakistan and somehow justify his behaviour at Ovalgate.
Click to expand...

In the same way that you go to Rashid Latif or Sarfraz Nawaz for a quote about match fixing. Or to Ian Harvey if you want a quote bagging the Australian team. Nobody is interested in what Hair has to say except for his little anti Pakistan rants. And even then I doubt many people care.
 
'Pakistan Cricketers are Cheats, Liars and Fraudsters'....
Says a 'Buffoon' who's forefathers were convicts.:14:

Just like Ijaz Butt and our High Commisioner to the the UK,
Village idiot Daryll Hair is another Donkey who needs to keep his mouth shut.
 
Braveheart said:
'Pakistan Cricketers are Cheats, Liars and Fraudsters'....
Says a 'Buffoon' who's forefathers were convicts.:14:

Just like Ijaz Butt and our High Commisioner to the the UK,
Village idiot Daryll Hair is another Donkey who needs to keep his mouth shut.
Click to expand...

Hey careful with that talk or I sue you. :yk
 
Random Aussie said:
In the same way that you go to Rashid Latif or Sarfraz Nawaz for a quote about match fixing. Or to Ian Harvey if you want a quote bagging the Australian team. Nobody is interested in what Hair has to say except for his little anti Pakistan rants. And even then I doubt many people care.
Click to expand...

Fair enough but i do wonder why is rants are purely aimed at Pakistan and i don't think Ovalgate would be his only reason.
 
Asif khan said:
Fair enough but i do wonder why is rants are purely aimed at Pakistan and i don't think Ovalgate would be his only reason.
Click to expand...

Because he will only get in the media if he says something controversial about Pakistan or Murali.
 
"Unfortunately the Pakistan cricketers show no respect for the game and continually attempt to cheat. The game as currently being played by Pakistan is a hoax and a fraud to the public."
Click to expand...


They should sue him.


As for the alledged tampering by shoaib, i think much more attention should be given to umpiring decisions during the odi series.
 
69 years old today.

A career of some controversy.
 
Few yrs back read that he was working in liquor store and was caught stealing some money from it.
Hope his life is now better at this age and Almighty grants him good fortune. Whatever his many faults, at one time he was a genuinely good international umpire and it is sad to hear such incidents.
 
I can’t say that I disagree with this statement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Pakistan to host Bangladesh, England and West Indies for seven Tests; New Zealand and South Africa to feature in ODI tri-series
Replies
40
Views
1K
stani_pak
stani_pak
MenInG
Dates announced for Pakistan's tour of South Africa (2024/25)
Replies
20
Views
626
Cricket Warrior
C
FearlessRoar
"Arshad Nadeem has brought joy to our nation, and we'll try to do the same": Shan Masood
Replies
44
Views
1K
Major
Major
FearlessRoar
Pakistan's obsession with comparing their players to Indian players
Replies
23
Views
600
RyanRyan10
RyanRyan10
The Bald Eagle
Bangladesh tour of Pakistan (2024)
2
Replies
102
Views
3K
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
Back
Top