Re: Hair v ICC, employment tribunal, London, Oct 1st to 9th

by JKLever Tue 09 Oct 2007, 13:33

bliksem wrote:And even now he's not going to officiate in games involving Test nations, so he's backto where he was.

He'll be back in test cricket within 8 months.

by furriner Tue 09 Oct 2007, 13:55

Invader Zim wrote:Two dickheads v the World.

You're so adorable.

by Henry Tue 09 Oct 2007, 14:12

Hair wont umpire international cricket again. He's rubbed too many people up the wrong way, including, now it seems, his umpiring colleagues. I cant imagine he will be on Rudi Koertzen's christmas card list. And Billy Doctrove obviously had too much pride to come to London and be talked of as the "poor little junior umpire who agreed with everything big Dazza said."

He'll quietly pass the time doing some sort of behind the scenes umpiring work with the associate countries, retire in march 2009 to his hometown of Orange in Country NSW, and write a book about it all, the funds of which will nicely supplement the six figured cheque he received under the table from the ICC to drop the case.

by Invader Zim Tue 09 Oct 2007, 14:14

FFS Mudge, anyone would think you had it in for him. You're not a Stani, are you?

by taipan Tue 09 Oct 2007, 14:15

Invader Zim wrote:FFS Mudge, anyone would think you had it in for him. You're not a Stani, are you?

No, but there is a rumour he's a mod over at PP>

by Invader Zim Tue 09 Oct 2007, 14:19

The could explain why I can't post with my new PP ID...

by Henry Tue 09 Oct 2007, 14:39

I was looking forward to a Griffiths/Speed "You want answers?"
"I want the truth!"
"You cant handle the truth!" exchange. Ah well.

by holcs Tue 09 Oct 2007, 16:26

Having just read a few tit-bits from varying sites, it all seems very fishy.

Looks to me as if he'll be back in 6 months time umpiring in tests.

The ICC have poo'd themselves, thought better of continuing having various employees made out to look, less than useless, and come to an agreement, that he will be 'rehabilitated' for 6 months and then wham back in.

I'm disappointed that they weren't taken to the cleaners personally. It could have been the opportune moment to get rid of the sh1te that is involved at top level.

by embee Tue 09 Oct 2007, 16:37

embee wrote:Furry

The umpires' job is to manage the game within the rules of the game ....

If , in the umpires' opinions a team breaks those rules their job is to enforce the rules ...which Hair and Doctrove did.

Firstly with the ball tampering and secondly with the refusal to play ...

If Hair has an abrasive manner to certain sections of the cricket community then it is the ICC's responsibility to counsel Hair about his actions . Is their any evidence that Hair has been counselled about his past actions? The ICC certainly haven't brought any evidence of anything

The decisions made at the Oval must be made by both umpires . So why isn't Doctrove demoted/sacked too?

Doctrove's suggestion that they keep playing with the tampered ball to catch the tamperer(s) is wrong in the Laws and also unfair to England (having to bat against an obviously tampered ball)

Was Hair going to cause a forfeit in future Tests? Is any umpire going to forfeit a match in future even if a team refuses to play for a whole day?

Is making an unpopular decision wrong even if it's the right decision?

Then shouldn't the Umpires at the Oval at 2005 who went off for the bad light in a series deciding Test Match be sanctioned too?

Or should a batsmen run out for 99 by a beesdick on the umpteenth third umpire replay be given not out?

Or should Warnie be given every LB he appeals for in Australia and Sachin never given out in India (even when he's been bowled).

No ...

Perhaps the ICC reads this forum ...

by please don't yell Tue 09 Oct 2007, 17:20

Looks to have been only one winner out of this thing.

The crazy backwards way the ICC run things might be accepted within cricket circles as we pretty much are at the financial mercy of certain countries but exposed to a wider audience and the non cricketing community the way things are run just don't pass the laugh test.

hair is indeed an arrogant man but compared to the men who run the ICC he's appears to be a saint.

by LeFromage Tue 09 Oct 2007, 17:27

Didn't see that coming - thought he'd stick it out to the bitter end even if it was going horribly for him.

I suppose we'll only know the value of Hair's decision in six months or so. If he's back umpiring, then it's the perfect outcome for him - he got his day in court, he showed up the ICC for the inept quasi-politicians that they are and he got his job back.

If he doesn't return to the elite panel, however, it would make his decision extremely difficult to understand. He appeared to be scoring points at will during the trial and his case seemed in good shape.

by Basil Tue 09 Oct 2007, 18:00

Pleased for Hair as it looks like he's going to get his job back. But incredibly frustrating all the same as with another few days of testimony, it was possible that the ICC would have been shown up for the racially-motivated, incompetent bunch of tossquers that they are undoubtedly are.

by doctorspin Tue 09 Oct 2007, 18:57

embee wrote:

Or should Warnie be given every LB he appeals for in Australia and Sachin never given out in India (even when he's been bowled).

No ...

:laule:

by lardbucket Wed 10 Oct 2007, 23:53

Hair will no doubt return to Test cricket soon, after a 6 month rehabilitation course in Phuket, Barbados and the Maldives. Gosh, those counsellors are atractive.

When do Sri Lanka next play Pakistan?

by tac Thu 11 Oct 2007, 01:05

More power to him. Hope the Paks give him a guard of honour on his return to Test match umpiring.

_____________
Hair v ICC, employment tribunal, London, Oct 1st to 9th - Page 35 Third

Hair v ICC, employment tribunal, London, Oct 1st to 9th - Page 35 Third

by Invader Zim Thu 11 Oct 2007, 01:08

Stoopidhead.

by tac Thu 11 Oct 2007, 01:19

Who?

________________
Hair v ICC, employment tribunal, London, Oct 1st to 9th - Page 35 Upontheladdert

by tac Sat 13 Oct 2007, 07:00

. . .

by lardbucket Sat 13 Oct 2007, 07:03

They should send all the bigots back where they came from.

Blanche, circa 1972 (Parker and Hart)

by LeFromage Sat 13 Oct 2007, 07:10

tac wrote:Now all the Aussies on this forum are racist, as well as Hair . . .

filosofee

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish
Being Australian and reading cricket boards from most cricket playing nations I find that Indian and Pakistan supporters to be the most racist.

Posters here will attack me instead of adressing the issue.

Fish: not an attack but a request to name the boards and quote the comments from Subi forum members. Without evidence to back up your claim I'd say you're overlooking those boards which see Australians being very Subi-ist (see Flaming Bails forum, for example).

Again - don't post conversations from other boards. What goes on there is of no consequence to here and vice versa.

by tac Sat 13 Oct 2007, 07:15

Fair enough . . .

by lardbucket Mon 15 Oct 2007, 10:31

So, ICC wears Hair suit?

by tac Mon 15 Oct 2007, 10:32

Sorry, mate, it's been done.

by freddled gruntbuggly Wed 17 Oct 2007, 13:45

Eric Air Emu wrote:Sexy fox-faced, swan-necked lady. She was on the last series of the Apprentice.

I bloody love her.

OH.
I thought it was Rachel . . .

by Brass Monkey Wed 17 Oct 2007, 13:47

freddled gruntbuggly wrote:
OH.
I thought it was Rachel . . .

Why?

by Sponsored content