Cricket Controversy - Full Story - Inzamam Charged by ICC of "Bringing Cricket into Disrepute"
| 4
|
by user Alex Holowczak
Pakistani captain, Inzamam-ul-Haq has been charged by the International Cricket Council (ICC) of bringing the game into disrepute after the awful scenes at The Oval, London, England during the Fourth Test Match between England and Pakistan.
England went into the game leading two-nil in the series, with The Oval hosting the final Test of the summer as it always does. England batted badly to get to 173 in their first innings, and Pakistan profited from awful bowling to get to 508 in their first innings. On Day 4 (Sunday), England fought back, clubbing the Pakistani bowlers to all areas.
Pakistan were still comfortably winning the game. England had no chance of winning, a draw was looking like the only other result (where the game would not finish in time - i.e. after Day 5).
They took the wicket of one of England's batsmen, Aliaster Cook for 86, and the umpires, in correspondence with the laws of the game, checked the ball. They thought it was in good condition, and were sure there was nothing done to the ball.
The problem came fifteen minutes later. Suddenly, Darrel Hair, the senior umpire called to look at the ball. He saw that it had been tampered with, a very serious offence in cricket. He then talked to his umpiring colleague for the match, Billy Doctrove, who agreed (as far as we know) to the decision.
Hair immediately signalled for Inzamam to tell him he had been ball-tampering (the captain takes the blame).
Ball tampering occurs when the seam, or leather is scuffed with the fingernails of your hand. This causes the ball to reverse-swing, decieving the batsman. It is quite legal to "polish" the ball, or dirty one side. This helps the ball to swing. Eventually, with the continued deteriation of the state of the ball, it will begin to reverse swing. Ball tampering simply speeds up the process.
Hair has a history of contoversy -
- 1995 - Called Sri Lankan spinner Muttiah Muralitharan for seven no-balls for throwing. There was a pitch-side revolt, and eventually Sri Lanka returned. Murali switched ends to stop Hair calling him for no-balls.
- 2005 - Gave Inzamam out unfairly when Pakistan were playing England in Pakistan.
- 2006 - Earlier in the series, Pakistan reported Hair to the ICC, complaining about his umpiring, and requested a new umpire to take charge of the game.
Back to the issue, Inzamam was not given the chance to defend himself. He had to accept it and that was that. He appealed, saying it wasn't going on, but Hair refused to change his mind.
In accordance with the rules, the fourth umpire came out with a box of balls. When the batsmen chose the new ball, which only occurs during ball tampering situations, did the crowd and media know what was going on. Pakistan also injuced five penalty runs. That though, was the least of Pakistan's worries.
Ball tampering is so serious, that the captain can be fined, and banned from playing cricket for a time, if not from the national team again. The Pakistan Cricket Board can be heavily fined. It is even seen as disrespect to the country of Pakistan. Coupled with the fact, that Britain has a large Pakistani population, it wouldn't go down to well.
The umpires thought it was too dark to continue later on, so the umpires consulted their light-meters and offered the batsmen the choice to go off (as is customry). Since the England batsmen were losing, and needed to bat out time to save a draw, they went off the field in a flash. Because it was so close to the scheduled tea break, the umpires decided that to save time, they would take tea at the same time.
After tea, the umpires re-appeared. The England batsmen waited at the pavilion door, waiting to go through the crowd and gate onto the field. They waited for the Pakistani team to take the field - it is accepted practice that the fielding side takes the field, then the batsmen follow a minute or so later. But Pakistan did not appear.
Eventually, England waived that tradition, and went onto the field and spoke to the umpires. They had to make a decision. England were on the field, and Pakistan were not - and should be. Therefore, Pakistan default, England win, by the letter of the law. The umpires signalled this to the media, and everyone else in the ground in the normal way, knocking the bails off the stumps.
As soon as the umpires and batsmen went off the field, the Pakistani fielders were persuaded onto the field, with booing from the English fans after their protest. The umpires then refused to come out to the field, claiming the match had been forfeited by Pakistan. So after a while, the Pakistanis left the field.
This would have been the first time in Test cricket history that a Test had been won by default. That would leave the reputation of cricket in tatters, so the diplomats got to work, trying to get the game going again.
Play was abandoned for the day, and the meetings began. After a while, both the Pakistan and England teams were happy to play on. So were the scorers. So was the Match Referee (the man in charge of the umpires and everything off the field regarding the match). More importantly, so were the 11,000 crowd that had payed to see the game the following day.
Alas, the umpires refused, stating the game was over. Also, the ICC were worried about setting a precedent, where they would be bending the rules and going against their umpires.
So the Test was forfeited by Pakistan. The ICC then placed charges against Inzamam for "Bringing Cricket into Disrepute", and a likely ban will follow if convicted.
That is what we know. There are many things we don't know -
- What is the proof of ball tampering? Umpires Hair and Doctrove have not yet been made to prove their claim.
- What will happen to the rest of the tour? England still have to play 5 One Day Internationals and a Twenty20 game against Pakistan next week.
- Why didn't another game go on on the Monday? It would have been short notice, and very hard to organise overnight, but for the sake of the fans, why wasn't another ODI arranged, or a Twenty20 game or two played?
This whole fiasco is the fault of the senior umpire, in my opinion, Darrel Hair. Throughout his controversial career, he has umpired the game like a policeman. He lays the law down, with no leeway for the situation. That is simply not possible in cricket. The umpire needs to be constantly talking to the teams, making sure they know what's going on. Another umpire would have said to Inzamam that the ball looked a bit dodgy, so make sure nothing is going on. He would then review the situation at tea. It's not a case of making signals to scorers all the time - he needs to be a good communicator. Hair is leaving the elite panel of umpires at the end of the summer.
On the issue of ball tampering, there have been hundreds of cases of it, and most sides around the world implement it in one way or another. It happens, and most people around the game of cricket know it. Pakistan are by no means the lone-rangers. It is an issue that needs to be stamped out of cricket for good. How this is done is anyone's guess.
The claim of ball tampering in this situation is strange. 15 minutes previously there was nothing wrong with it, otherwise the umpires would have penalised Pakistan at the fall of Cook's wicket. TV Coverage has seen no evidence of ball tampering in those fifteen minutes.
Pakistani legend Imran Khan
As it came after tea, it appeared as though the Pakistani coaches and tour organisers were the ones that made the decision to stay off after tea. So they may also feel the ICC's wrath.
There was no way that Pakistan could have missed the resumption of play, as five minutes before the start of a period of play, a bell is rung. It is audible all around the ground, and since all the dressing rooms have a balcony overlooking the field, it would have been obvious that play was about to restart.
The real loser of the day was the game of cricket. It had a reputation for working through these situations like Formula One did. Even if the situation was dour, they still put on a show for the public.
It seems that The Oval Test of 2006 will be uttered in the same breath as the Indianapolis F1 2005 race. Situations that could have been avoided with negotiation and lack of egos to fulfil, the situation could have been sorted easily.
It is sad that such a brilliant batsman as Inzamam may be remembered for this issue. He has been one of the best batsman over the last decade, with 24 Test Match centuries. His slightly overweight appearance has made him a cult hero.
Date
Tue 08/22/06, 12:05 am EST
