Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
did they abandon it cos someone cheated? too lazy to find out
and everyone waited about for the guy to shit it out.
If you google bbc sport, it'll tell you on there much more betterer than we will on here.
With betterer grammar and everyfink.
The match was abandoned by Darryl Hair, the most obnoxious, pompous, arrogant, stupid, pig-headed, conceited, stuck-up-his-own-arse twat ever to be asscoiated with cricket.
His decision was supported by the tax dodgers at the ICC from their bunker in Dubai.
would never condone that. A Daily Mail reader trying to put one over the touring Pakistanis?
He repeatedly no-balled Muttiah Muralitharan in a one-day international despite the fcat that his action had recently been cleared of illegality by the ICCC, and despite the fact that the umpire at the other end did not no-ball Muralitharan. I his "autobiography" Hair described Muralitharan's action as "diabolical", a slanderous remark that contradicted the view of Hair's empolyer, the ICC. Still, he continued to be an international umpire.
He's made a number of bad decisions and he should not have been chosen to umpire in this series.
He's probably penning the script for a Hollywood blockbuster: "The Ashes"
Unlike football cricket does not have dictators like that knob Blatter. Cricket has a very fluid administration that relies on agreements, agreements that can be broken easily and changed easily. It is bedecked with intrigue, scandal and political interference.
to forfeit the match because they refused to re-take the field after tea yesterday and frankly I don't blame them. Darrell Hair is a twat.
WHO'S...fucking caps....going to white heat?
and has probably made an almighty balls up, the bottom line is that you can't have a situation where one team says "We will accept this guy as umpire, unless he makes a decision that we do not like".
If Pakistan have a problem with Hair and his previous decisions, they should have made their displeasure known before the match started. And refused to play at all, if they felt that strongly.
The laws of cricket (and football for that matter) are that the rulings of the umpire/referee are regarded as being correct within the context of a game, even if they are actually wrong. Otherwise, there is no point in having a ref or umpire at all.