- Posts: 63128
- Thank you received: 36
- Forum
- Rally Around West Indies!
- We dont like Cricket. We love it.
- 'If Hair tries to damage my reputation, I'll seek legal action'
'If Hair tries to damage my reputation, I'll seek legal action' |
16 Oct 2014 08:42 #218727
by chairman
Always tell someone how you feel because opportunities are lost in the blink of an eye but regret can last a lifetime.
cricketwindies.com/forum/
Harbhajan Singh has threatened to take legal action against controversial former Australian umpire Darrell Hair if he continues to damage his reputation by making provocative comment that youngsters with suspect action have made him a role model.
"I have no time for Darrell Hair's nonsense. Who the hell is he? Is he bigger than the ICC? But if he tries to damage my reputation or belittle my achievements as an international cricketer with another provocative comment, I will be speaking to BCCI (Board of Control for Cricket in India) and seek legal action against Hair," an angry Harbhajan said.
Hair, in a recent interview to an Australian newspaper, said, "I said it in the late '90s that if something wasn't done about it you'd have a generation of chuckers on your hands and now you have. They try to emulate Harbajan Singh and Saqlain Mushtaq and Murali and that's the problem".
"I have no time for Darrell Hair's nonsense. Who the hell is he? Is he bigger than the ICC? But if he tries to damage my reputation or belittle my achievements as an international cricketer with another provocative comment, I will be speaking to BCCI (Board of Control for Cricket in India) and seek legal action against Hair," an angry Harbhajan said.
Hair, in a recent interview to an Australian newspaper, said, "I said it in the late '90s that if something wasn't done about it you'd have a generation of chuckers on your hands and now you have. They try to emulate Harbajan Singh and Saqlain Mushtaq and Murali and that's the problem".
Always tell someone how you feel because opportunities are lost in the blink of an eye but regret can last a lifetime.
cricketwindies.com/forum/
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 Oct 2014 09:11 #218731
by chairman
Always tell someone how you feel because opportunities are lost in the blink of an eye but regret can last a lifetime.
cricketwindies.com/forum/
F
rom the start of his career there is no love lost between Harbhajan and the Australians, but what he disliked about Hair's comment was his idea of trying to paint everyone with the same brush.
"Just because three for four international bowlers' action has been found suspect, who gives him (Hair) the right to put everyone in the same bracket. Those who have problems with their action will undergo corrective measures.
"Well, I have undergone bio-mechanics test at Perth in Australia in 2005 under (Daryl) Foster as well as in England under Fred Titmus in 1999. ICC has all my reports and this former umpire tries to malign my reputation.
"It has taken 14 years of rigorous hard work to attain a level and some random man can't spoil that," said the spinner, who has 413 Test and 259 ODI wickets for India.
"Just because three for four international bowlers' action has been found suspect, who gives him (Hair) the right to put everyone in the same bracket. Those who have problems with their action will undergo corrective measures.
"Well, I have undergone bio-mechanics test at Perth in Australia in 2005 under (Daryl) Foster as well as in England under Fred Titmus in 1999. ICC has all my reports and this former umpire tries to malign my reputation.
"It has taken 14 years of rigorous hard work to attain a level and some random man can't spoil that," said the spinner, who has 413 Test and 259 ODI wickets for India.
Always tell someone how you feel because opportunities are lost in the blink of an eye but regret can last a lifetime.
cricketwindies.com/forum/
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 Oct 2014 09:22 #218733
by chairman
Always tell someone how you feel because opportunities are lost in the blink of an eye but regret can last a lifetime.
cricketwindies.com/forum/
H
arbhajan said he is proud of being one of the pioneers in successful execution of the doosra or the wrong 'un.
"Saqlain Mushtaq invented the doosra and I perfected the art. I am proud of having successfully executed the doosra. If some bowlers are not being able to bowl doosra within legal limits, it is not my look-out," said the 34-year-old bowler, who is aiming to make a comeback into the Indian team for the Australian tour.
"Let me put a question for Mr Hair. He has officiated in a number of international matches in which I have bowled. Why didn't he challenge the ICC then? Just when three bowlers are called, he wakes up and makes a random comment. He could not because he knew there was nothing wrong.
"And what does he mean by role models like Murali, Saqlain or Harbhajan? Did we teach them to bowl with suspect action?" he fumed.
"Saqlain Mushtaq invented the doosra and I perfected the art. I am proud of having successfully executed the doosra. If some bowlers are not being able to bowl doosra within legal limits, it is not my look-out," said the 34-year-old bowler, who is aiming to make a comeback into the Indian team for the Australian tour.
"Let me put a question for Mr Hair. He has officiated in a number of international matches in which I have bowled. Why didn't he challenge the ICC then? Just when three bowlers are called, he wakes up and makes a random comment. He could not because he knew there was nothing wrong.
"And what does he mean by role models like Murali, Saqlain or Harbhajan? Did we teach them to bowl with suspect action?" he fumed.
Always tell someone how you feel because opportunities are lost in the blink of an eye but regret can last a lifetime.
cricketwindies.com/forum/
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 Oct 2014 12:23 #218740
by Snoopster
I use to like Darrell Hair as a umpire. Particularly that part of his umpiring career before the incident with Pakistan at The Oval in 2006.
Before that incident I always thought he was a fair umpire who called it right down the middle. I recall the West Indies tour to Oz in 1992/93 where the Aussies were putting the umps under real pressure and in some instances were able to get away with blatant cheating (ie. Healy's "stumping" off Lara in Brisbane). But Hair didn't have any of it. Many times the Aussies went up for caught behind off Lara where Lara didn't walk. Hair was one of the few umps who knew Lara was a genuine "walker". If Lara didn't walk Hair was not going to put him out.
But then came that Test match at the Oval in 2006 where he accused the Pakistanis of ball tampering with little or no evidence. He stated afterwards that he thought the Pakistanis were all a bunch of cheats and liars. He obviously had it out for them and the fiasco which followed that incident was inevitable as a result of that bias. His position as an international umpire became untenable.
I do still agree with him on the chucking issue and that he was perfectly right to call Murali when he did.
Before that incident I always thought he was a fair umpire who called it right down the middle. I recall the West Indies tour to Oz in 1992/93 where the Aussies were putting the umps under real pressure and in some instances were able to get away with blatant cheating (ie. Healy's "stumping" off Lara in Brisbane). But Hair didn't have any of it. Many times the Aussies went up for caught behind off Lara where Lara didn't walk. Hair was one of the few umps who knew Lara was a genuine "walker". If Lara didn't walk Hair was not going to put him out.
But then came that Test match at the Oval in 2006 where he accused the Pakistanis of ball tampering with little or no evidence. He stated afterwards that he thought the Pakistanis were all a bunch of cheats and liars. He obviously had it out for them and the fiasco which followed that incident was inevitable as a result of that bias. His position as an international umpire became untenable.
I do still agree with him on the chucking issue and that he was perfectly right to call Murali when he did.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 Oct 2014 12:35 #218743
by Googley
I understand and agree with the first call. However, after Murali passed the ICC test he called him again and threatened to call him after that....even though the man was proven to be pelting.
Hair is a skunt...his first name should be Pubic!
I understand and agree with the first call. However, after Murali passed the ICC test he called him again and threatened to call him after that....even though the man was proven to be pelting.
Hair is a skunt...his first name should be Pubic!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 Oct 2014 13:04 #218749
by Snoopster
For me Googs, the ICC are to blame for the Murali incidents and all the plethora of pelters that followed.
The umps have always been empowered to call a no ball if they observed a bowler who they believe was chucking the ball. Hair and Emerson did just that. They called a no ball because by the laws of the game (at that time) Murali was chucking the ball based on their observations. These are incontrovertible facts.
What happened afterwards was the ICC decided to test Murali using virtual reality motion capturing and slow motion video technologies. These tests revealed two things. First, the tests revealed that Murali's elbow was indeed bent before delivering the ball. However, to their astonishment his elbow was kept bent and did not straighten at the apex of the delivery. He was therefore NOT chucking the ball notwithstanding his elbow was bent. Secondly, the tests confirmed that Murali's elbow was incapable of being straightened at the apex of the delivery because of an anatomical defect at birth.
The ICC conducted tests on other bowlers suspected of chucking, as well as those that weren't, and according to them (the results I believe have never been published in any medical journal) found that almost all bowlers have a slight bend in the elbow before the apex of the delivery where the elbow is then straightened. Some of these actions were noticeable to the naked eye and some were not.
So faced with the results of these tests what did the ICC do? They attempted to legitimize the results of their tests by implementing the 15 degree rule instead of going back to the old rule which left it to the umpires' observation.
This 15 degree "buffer" provided ample room for bowlers, more particularly off spinners, to bowl deliveries with a bent elbow. The result was the doosra. That was followed by carom balls, flickers, zooters, etc etc. These new deliveries were nothing more than chucking parading as "mystery spin".
But Pandora's box was already opened. Now the ICC is attempting to kill their 15 degree Frankenstein monster much to the dismay of the mystery spinners and their apologist.
Murali should have been the one off exception to the rule. The old law on chucking (without this 15 degree non-sense) should never have been amended and we would not be in this sorry state with chuckers as we are currently.
For me Googs, the ICC are to blame for the Murali incidents and all the plethora of pelters that followed.
The umps have always been empowered to call a no ball if they observed a bowler who they believe was chucking the ball. Hair and Emerson did just that. They called a no ball because by the laws of the game (at that time) Murali was chucking the ball based on their observations. These are incontrovertible facts.
What happened afterwards was the ICC decided to test Murali using virtual reality motion capturing and slow motion video technologies. These tests revealed two things. First, the tests revealed that Murali's elbow was indeed bent before delivering the ball. However, to their astonishment his elbow was kept bent and did not straighten at the apex of the delivery. He was therefore NOT chucking the ball notwithstanding his elbow was bent. Secondly, the tests confirmed that Murali's elbow was incapable of being straightened at the apex of the delivery because of an anatomical defect at birth.
The ICC conducted tests on other bowlers suspected of chucking, as well as those that weren't, and according to them (the results I believe have never been published in any medical journal) found that almost all bowlers have a slight bend in the elbow before the apex of the delivery where the elbow is then straightened. Some of these actions were noticeable to the naked eye and some were not.
So faced with the results of these tests what did the ICC do? They attempted to legitimize the results of their tests by implementing the 15 degree rule instead of going back to the old rule which left it to the umpires' observation.
This 15 degree "buffer" provided ample room for bowlers, more particularly off spinners, to bowl deliveries with a bent elbow. The result was the doosra. That was followed by carom balls, flickers, zooters, etc etc. These new deliveries were nothing more than chucking parading as "mystery spin".
But Pandora's box was already opened. Now the ICC is attempting to kill their 15 degree Frankenstein monster much to the dismay of the mystery spinners and their apologist.
Murali should have been the one off exception to the rule. The old law on chucking (without this 15 degree non-sense) should never have been amended and we would not be in this sorry state with chuckers as we are currently.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 Oct 2014 13:10 #218750
by Googley
correct!
However, I am sure just like how you, I and the general public know the results of the test and why Murali appeared to the naked eye as a chucker, Hair knew it too. Plus, the ICC created a new rule to allow up to 15 degrees.
SO why he called Murali again?
I will tell you why!
Just like he did in the case of the PAkistanis, he wanted back at Murali since he felt wronged by Murali being cleared.
that shows the type of fella he is/was.
Again, a skunt whose first name should be Pubic!
correct!
However, I am sure just like how you, I and the general public know the results of the test and why Murali appeared to the naked eye as a chucker, Hair knew it too. Plus, the ICC created a new rule to allow up to 15 degrees.
SO why he called Murali again?
I will tell you why!
Just like he did in the case of the PAkistanis, he wanted back at Murali since he felt wronged by Murali being cleared.
that shows the type of fella he is/was.
Again, a skunt whose first name should be Pubic!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 Oct 2014 13:31 #218753
by Snoopster
Okay fair enough Googs. He had no reason to call Murali after he had been cleared by the ICC tests. At best it was wrong of him to do that and at worst it revealed a bias against that player. A quick investigation into the matter ought to have been able to sort out that issue and if a reasonable apprehension of bias was found then Hair's career as an ICC umpire would be have untenable and that would be the end of that. Of course that didn't happen.
But the ICC did not need to implement the 15 degree rule to legitimize Murali's action and/or abnormality. Murali's arm did not bend and straighten by 15 degrees. It remained bent from start to finish so it was a completely legal action as per the definition in the laws.
The 15 degree rule was implemented to accommodate every other bowler because from their tests they claimed all bowlers (except leg spinners) bowled with a slight bend elbow which straightened.
But my point is that this was completely unnecessary. For 100 years prior, the old law on chucking worked perfectly fine. Like every law penned, it was not perfect and enforcement of it was not perfect. Fairness, not perfection, is the reason we have those laws in cricket. Some bowlers inevitably got away with a suspect action but more often than not the Umps were able to get it right under the powers given to them pre-15 degree era.
And look where we are now. The ICC is reining in their stupidity in a ban 'en mass'.
Okay fair enough Googs. He had no reason to call Murali after he had been cleared by the ICC tests. At best it was wrong of him to do that and at worst it revealed a bias against that player. A quick investigation into the matter ought to have been able to sort out that issue and if a reasonable apprehension of bias was found then Hair's career as an ICC umpire would be have untenable and that would be the end of that. Of course that didn't happen.
But the ICC did not need to implement the 15 degree rule to legitimize Murali's action and/or abnormality. Murali's arm did not bend and straighten by 15 degrees. It remained bent from start to finish so it was a completely legal action as per the definition in the laws.
The 15 degree rule was implemented to accommodate every other bowler because from their tests they claimed all bowlers (except leg spinners) bowled with a slight bend elbow which straightened.
But my point is that this was completely unnecessary. For 100 years prior, the old law on chucking worked perfectly fine. Like every law penned, it was not perfect and enforcement of it was not perfect. Fairness, not perfection, is the reason we have those laws in cricket. Some bowlers inevitably got away with a suspect action but more often than not the Umps were able to get it right under the powers given to them pre-15 degree era.
And look where we are now. The ICC is reining in their stupidity in a ban 'en mass'.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 Oct 2014 14:27 #218759
by Googley
oh, I agree with your assessment of the ICC's moronic move by allowing the 15 degree. I am not defending that in anyway shape or form. As you said, that opened a can of worms for the modern day pelters.
And yes, Murali hand never straightened out, thus no need for 15 degree allowance. A simple statement by the ICC explaining the Murali's action was clean and the appearance was due to a body deformity would have been suffice.
And yes, Murali hand never straightened out, thus no need for 15 degree allowance. A simple statement by the ICC explaining the Murali's action was clean and the appearance was due to a body deformity would have been suffice.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 Oct 2014 15:00 #218766
by ketchim
Here is a repair to Hair instead of a lawsuit .
I recommend this to the Sikh bearded wonder !
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTn00xL2p5dyeJhiDe6_b1BwmRkmzBd680uMPALrzbptMk7wUNhqQ
I recommend this to the Sikh bearded wonder !
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTn00xL2p5dyeJhiDe6_b1BwmRkmzBd680uMPALrzbptMk7wUNhqQ
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Forum
- Rally Around West Indies!
- We dont like Cricket. We love it.
- 'If Hair tries to damage my reputation, I'll seek legal action'
Time to create page: 0.231 seconds
| ||||
Powered by The Krotek
Copyright © 2022 West Indies Cricket Fans Forum. All rights reserved.
- Menu
- Staff Login