The Hindu : Sport / Cricket : Boycott's testimony proved vital

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Sep 30, 2006
ePaper

Sport

Sport - Cricket

Boycott's testimony proved vital

Hair was only guessing, says expert witness

LONDON: Umpire Darrell Hair was only ``guessing'' when he decided to penalise Pakistan for ball tampering, according to TV analyst Simon Hughes, one of the three experts who gave evidence at the disciplinary hearing of skipper Inzamam-ul-Haq.

``The problem was Hair was guessing, using the flimsiest evidence,'' the former Middlesex and Durham seam bowler said.

``The marks on the ball were not blatant enough for the drastic measures Hair took,'' he said.

The testimony of Geoffrey Boycott, another expert witness for the defence, proved crucial, The Guardian stated.

``Boycott, in particular, delivered a veritable tour de force. At one point, he took the infamous match ball in his hand, held it up and said: ``That's a good ball, not just a playable ball.''

Boycott also took exception to the idea that an accusation of cheating should be tolerated. ``If me or any of my friends were ever called a cheat,'' he told the hearing, the accuser would be ``decked with a bunch of fives.'' The former England opener ``invoked the spirit of the game'' with passion while Hughes, a former county player, gave evidence in support of Boycott's position that the ball had not been tampered with.

Pakistan's demand

Meanwhile, Pakistan is demanding Hair be investigated by the ICC. Pakistan Cricket Board chairman Shaharyar Khan said his team has been unhappy with the Australian umpire for five years and never wanted him to officiate any game involving Pakistan again.

Khan said the 53-year-old Australian was ``very brusque'' and ``rude'' in his dealings with the Pakistan team during the final Test.

``Pakistan has a problem with his attitude,'' Khan said. ``We are not questioning his technical ability.''

And hours after Thursday's verdict, the ICC withdrew Hair from the Champions Trophy in India for ``security and safety'' reasons. Denying that he was axed, he said that his contract with the ICC provided that he could be hired as an umpire as and when required.

``I did not say I was concerned about my safety if I had gone to India and I've received no threats. My contract with ICC says I will be available to umpire as and where required. If they have, for those reasons in their minds, decided not to send me to the Champions Trophy, I accept that decision,'' The Sun quoted Hair as saying.

Insisting that he had no fears about going to India and had received no threats of violence, Hair further said: ``The ICC have a security unit which advises us on all sorts of aspects of safety and I always accept that.''

Hair said Thursday's decision would not affect his future in the game, which had been in doubt since shortly after the abandoned Test following the publishing of e-mails he sent to the ICC offering to resign in exchange for $500,000.

`Ill-advised'

``It may well have been an ill-advised thing to do at the time and I think I've already admitted that,'' he said.

Hair didn't agree with the ICC's decision to publish the private correspondence, but refused to criticise his employer and denied he'd been made a scapegoat.

``I don't feel that at all,'' he said. ``But that is obviously a perception that people will perpetuate.''

Hair said he'd never contemplated resignation and would leave it up to the ICC, where he's contracted until March, to decide his next assignment. — Agencies

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Sport