Tweet
How outrageous is this:
The ICC has changed the result of the controversial Oval Test between England and Pakistan in 2006 from an English victory to a draw, following pressure from the Pakistan Cricket Board during the annual ICC meeting in Dubai.
"The board decided the result of the match should be altered. The change is from an England win as a result of Pakistan's refusal to play to the match being termed abandoned as a draw," the ICC said. "The board's decision is based on the view that in light of the unique set of circumstances the original result was felt to be inappropriate."
Inzamam-ul-Haq, who was Pakistan's captain during the Test, welcomed the ICC's decision. "I am very happy about it. This decision and the fact that we were cleared of ball-tampering charges proves that we were correct in our stance," he said. "This proves that what happened there was because of one man (Darrell Hair). It is sad that he is still there."
The Test was originally awarded to England by umpire Darrell Hair after Pakistan did not come out to field after tea on the fourth day, following accusations of ball-tampering.
Pakistan had, at the time, been in a strong position in the match, having secured a first-innings lead of 331 and removed four England batsmen second-time around. There was nothing at stake in the series, with England already leading 2-0 after wins at Headingley and Old Trafford, but the eventual forfeiture was the first in the history of Test cricket. The removal of England's win could affect their standing in the ICC Test Championship - they are currently third on 110 points, one ahead of their next opponents, South Africa, on 109.
The result had huge off-field ramifications as well. Hair went on to be suspended from the ICC elite panel, and though that decision was overturned last year when he took his employers to the High Court in London, the initial decision formed the basis of Pakistan's appeal for a rethink of the result.
And here's an excellent commentary on the whole sordid exercise
Forfeit a Test and you leave with draw
By Malcolm Conn
July 04, 2008 THE International Cricket Council is about to make Test cricket the perfect game - no team should ever lose again.
In a decision which would achieve even greater levels of farce for this hopelessly compromised body, the ICC announced, at its annual meeting in Dubai, teams can refuse to play and not lose the match.
England's Daily Mail reported from Dubai that: "Cricket's rulers effectively wrote a cheats charter yesterday when they wiped out England's controversial 2006 victory over Pakistan at The Oval and redesignated it as a draw."
This is the only interpretation possible from a move to change the result of Pakistan's sit-in against England from a forfeit.
While the politically tangled ICC, made up of the presidents and chairmen of the so-called 10 Test-playing countries, finds it impossible to act decisively against a corrupt and weak Zimbabwe, it can continue to discredit the game by flouting its laws.
Law 21.3 states in part: A match shall be lost by a side which in the opinion of the umpires refuses to play. That's exactly what happened two years ago during the fourth Test at The Oval after umpires Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove charged Pakistan with ball-tampering and awarded a five-run penalty to England.
Pakistan bowled another 16 overs on the fourth day then went to tea but refused to return after the break in protest.
Twenty minutes after the scheduled restart and after an inquiry from the umpires to Pakistan captain Inzamam-Ul-Haq questioning if his side was going to take the field, Hair and Doctrove awarded the match to England, creating yet another furore.
Inzamam was cleared of ball-tampering by an ICC disciplinary hearing but was banned for four one-day matches for bringing the game into disrepute by initially refusing to resume play, reinforcing the now retired skipper's record as one of the worst behaved players in the game.
Hair was dumped from umpiring major matches, with only England and Australia opposing the action, despite the ICC having no legal or constitutional right to treat an umpire the way it did.
Then chief executive Malcolm Speed opposed the sacking, and later opposed the cover-up of a recent damning audit on Zimbabwe. He was also dumped as a result. Former England fast bowler and BBC commentator Jonathan Agnew summed up the view of many despairing cricket followers.
"Under the laws of any sport, if you refuse to play, you lose the game," Agnew said.
"Match abandoned, they're saying, as a draw - well, abandoned on what grounds? It wasn't the weather, it wasn't anything else, it was that Pakistan wouldn't come out to play for whatever reason. That game has now been classified as a draw, so if you're losing, you sit in the dressing room, don't come out and you can get away with a draw."
A report from the ICC meeting in Dubai quoted a source as saying: "England and Pakistan have agreed to declare The Oval Test as a draw to maintain the dignity of Pakistan in world cricket, especially after the ball-tampering charges were dropped."
Dignity is a word that can never be associated with international cricket or the ICC.
There was absolutely no dignity in the way India twice threatened to abandon its tour of Australia last summer after Ricky Ponting followed ICC instructions by reporting Harbhajan Singh, the now physically abusive Indian spinner.
Facing the prospect of losing millions in television rights, there was certainly no dignity in the way Cricket Australia rolled over and forced Ponting and his team-mates to downgrade the charge, much to the chagrin of the players.
The ICC has changed the result of the controversial Oval Test between England and Pakistan in 2006 from an English victory to a draw, following pressure from the Pakistan Cricket Board during the annual ICC meeting in Dubai.
"The board decided the result of the match should be altered. The change is from an England win as a result of Pakistan's refusal to play to the match being termed abandoned as a draw," the ICC said. "The board's decision is based on the view that in light of the unique set of circumstances the original result was felt to be inappropriate."
Inzamam-ul-Haq, who was Pakistan's captain during the Test, welcomed the ICC's decision. "I am very happy about it. This decision and the fact that we were cleared of ball-tampering charges proves that we were correct in our stance," he said. "This proves that what happened there was because of one man (Darrell Hair). It is sad that he is still there."
The Test was originally awarded to England by umpire Darrell Hair after Pakistan did not come out to field after tea on the fourth day, following accusations of ball-tampering.
Pakistan had, at the time, been in a strong position in the match, having secured a first-innings lead of 331 and removed four England batsmen second-time around. There was nothing at stake in the series, with England already leading 2-0 after wins at Headingley and Old Trafford, but the eventual forfeiture was the first in the history of Test cricket. The removal of England's win could affect their standing in the ICC Test Championship - they are currently third on 110 points, one ahead of their next opponents, South Africa, on 109.
The result had huge off-field ramifications as well. Hair went on to be suspended from the ICC elite panel, and though that decision was overturned last year when he took his employers to the High Court in London, the initial decision formed the basis of Pakistan's appeal for a rethink of the result.
And here's an excellent commentary on the whole sordid exercise
Forfeit a Test and you leave with draw
By Malcolm Conn
July 04, 2008 THE International Cricket Council is about to make Test cricket the perfect game - no team should ever lose again.
In a decision which would achieve even greater levels of farce for this hopelessly compromised body, the ICC announced, at its annual meeting in Dubai, teams can refuse to play and not lose the match.
England's Daily Mail reported from Dubai that: "Cricket's rulers effectively wrote a cheats charter yesterday when they wiped out England's controversial 2006 victory over Pakistan at The Oval and redesignated it as a draw."
This is the only interpretation possible from a move to change the result of Pakistan's sit-in against England from a forfeit.
While the politically tangled ICC, made up of the presidents and chairmen of the so-called 10 Test-playing countries, finds it impossible to act decisively against a corrupt and weak Zimbabwe, it can continue to discredit the game by flouting its laws.
Law 21.3 states in part: A match shall be lost by a side which in the opinion of the umpires refuses to play. That's exactly what happened two years ago during the fourth Test at The Oval after umpires Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove charged Pakistan with ball-tampering and awarded a five-run penalty to England.
Pakistan bowled another 16 overs on the fourth day then went to tea but refused to return after the break in protest.
Twenty minutes after the scheduled restart and after an inquiry from the umpires to Pakistan captain Inzamam-Ul-Haq questioning if his side was going to take the field, Hair and Doctrove awarded the match to England, creating yet another furore.
Inzamam was cleared of ball-tampering by an ICC disciplinary hearing but was banned for four one-day matches for bringing the game into disrepute by initially refusing to resume play, reinforcing the now retired skipper's record as one of the worst behaved players in the game.
Hair was dumped from umpiring major matches, with only England and Australia opposing the action, despite the ICC having no legal or constitutional right to treat an umpire the way it did.
Then chief executive Malcolm Speed opposed the sacking, and later opposed the cover-up of a recent damning audit on Zimbabwe. He was also dumped as a result. Former England fast bowler and BBC commentator Jonathan Agnew summed up the view of many despairing cricket followers.
"Under the laws of any sport, if you refuse to play, you lose the game," Agnew said.
"Match abandoned, they're saying, as a draw - well, abandoned on what grounds? It wasn't the weather, it wasn't anything else, it was that Pakistan wouldn't come out to play for whatever reason. That game has now been classified as a draw, so if you're losing, you sit in the dressing room, don't come out and you can get away with a draw."
A report from the ICC meeting in Dubai quoted a source as saying: "England and Pakistan have agreed to declare The Oval Test as a draw to maintain the dignity of Pakistan in world cricket, especially after the ball-tampering charges were dropped."
Dignity is a word that can never be associated with international cricket or the ICC.
There was absolutely no dignity in the way India twice threatened to abandon its tour of Australia last summer after Ricky Ponting followed ICC instructions by reporting Harbhajan Singh, the now physically abusive Indian spinner.
Facing the prospect of losing millions in television rights, there was certainly no dignity in the way Cricket Australia rolled over and forced Ponting and his team-mates to downgrade the charge, much to the chagrin of the players.
Comment