Like millions of viewers I was transfixed yesterday afternoon by the "revelations" of Malcolm Speed, Richardson and the President of ICC. It all started off most promisingly with most of the cricket writers present and viewers expecting a statement along the lines of...."... we support the actions of the umpires and stand by their decisions....the reason for the ICC enquiry delay is....ICC have requested the PCB to continue the tour.....la di da!" Instead we got assurances from the ICC CEO that he had consulted 3 legal advisers seperately who all agreed along with the President who was a lawyer himself that the contents of PRIVATE correspondence between a representative (Doug Cowie...where were you Doug?) of ICC and Mr Hair (employed and paid by ICC under a rolling contract expiring in 2008) should be made public to safeguard the interests of the game and not effect the outcome of the "ball tampering enquiry" as well as the issue of "Inzie bringing the game into disrepute". Incredible! I shall repeat this....encroyable (sorry I live in France these days and my french is improving slowly). Well I have been a stockbroker and businessman for 30 years and in my experience when a client, employee or consultant writes or speaks privately it means that the contents must remain PRIVATE. I wouldn't give twopence for the views of these legal advisers on the basis that they advised publication of private emails which by all accounts were confirmations of a discussion that may have been instigated by Mr Cowie not Mr Hair as prescribed. Although it's commonly felt that the game lacks financial clout (see soccer) administrators and players at the top of the game can earn around £100,000+ p.a and Mr Hair as a top 3 umpire in the world of cricket probably earns in excess of £70,000 p.a touring the world and in the main doing a very good (if not stern job) so what I don't understand is why the media should think that a demand (don't forget it must have been discussed with Cowie for it to appear in the email and anyway Hair consulted someone, presumably an employment lawyer) for $500,000 (around £265,000 approx) for losing 2 years income, keeping his mouth shut about the "ball tampering incident", stress caused by ICC's lack of urgency in dealing with the matters, etc is unreasonable. It's possible that with next year's World Cup he may have been in greater demand in OCI's too.
The actions of the ICC are bewildering........
It's quite possible that Cowie suggested to Hair that he should fall on his sword. Certainly the q's from those present, most notably Christopher Martin Jenkins of The Times, implied that there was nothing unusual in trying to obtain a one-off payment for breaking a contract early. This occurs almost daily in soccer so wake up cricket....and wake up media!
It does look suspiciously as if the ICC have been got at by the PCB and other asian members, supported by politicians alike and that they have tried to distance themselves from Hair.
Let's not forget Hair is the innocent party here. Hair shared responsibility with other umpires, did a good job, was paid and employed by the ICC. It is not Hair in the dock. It is Pakistan and Inzie. Maybe it should be the PCB for their sly approach to what happened last Sunday.
As Nasser Hussain is now saying today...the ICC needs to get their act together and call a meeting asap to clear this mess up.
It's my view that ICC needs an overhaul. Being based in Dubai is crazy. Cricket is an english game and it should be run in London by people who are competent not political dummies.
No comments:
Post a Comment