Since last Sunday night many retired test cricketers have appeared on tv. A few of them have talked sense to a degree but none of them have given the umpires the support they deserve. None of them accept of course the main man......a certain G Boycott. Interviewed on the field of play in dim light he was asked whether the game should be restarted on Monday. Impossible! The game was over. Pakistan had failed to take to the field thus breaching Law 21. England were the victors!
Mike Atherton, a past England captain has been vociferous in his support for Pakistan and his criticism of Mr Hair. Scandalous I say! This viewpoint and action typifies what is happening. Atherton, like Boycott has been, should be supportive of the umpires views instead he has fallen for the Pakistan defence which appears to be along the lines that because Pakistan and other asian cricketing countries had fallen foul of Hair in the past it is ok to tamper with the ball and show complete disregard to the paying public, millions of viewers by refusing to play because they had simply disagreed with the decisions made which are cemented in the Laws of the game. I wonder if it's because a certain Mike Atherton tampered with a ball himself that he has taken this stance in support of Inzie....hmmmm.....smells like it to me Mike!
Mike Gatting...solid stable as was Allan Lamb's comments.
But the best of all, the legendary Sussex & Pakistan Captain, he of political ambitions, good looks, Mr Imran Khan stated clearly on tv that he felt Inzie was wrong not to take the field after tea but even he spoilt this by a mild criticism of Hair by saying Hair (not both umpires you understand but Hair as senior umpire) had been too rash in making the pronouncement of ball tampering.
The common consensus amongst past pro-cricketers is that Hair (not Billy & Darrell by the way----unanimous in this regard) should have taken Inzie aside and politely (have you ever met a polite Aussie anyone?) enquire as to whether he (Inzie rarely bowls and sees the ball in the field; in fact I think he hides in the long grass) had wait for it......tampered with the ball. I ask you all out there..."have you heard anything so ridiculous?" So boys and girls imagine this....you have just been caught red-handed on world television with a doctored ball and you're supposed to say "Yes, officer, I have doctored the ball....you have me nicked" or even better still.."look officer, it wasn't me, it was the fast medium swing bowler over there...he touched the ball...it was him who (possibly) tampered with the cherry"....
With the game in Pakistan's favour there was no need to tamper with the ball. No-one has admitted it but both umpires saw the ball, both english batsmen saw the ball, most if not all the fielders saw the ball and no-one has said that the ball was NOT tampered with so logic dictates that the ball must have been tampered with.
I do not believe that for one minute both umpires did not consider their actions. Cook's dismissal was as a result of acute reverse swing which had just occurred and the ball was scratched. Draw your own conclusions!
No comments:
Post a Comment