The $500,000 question

The $500,000 question

Leader
Saturday August 26, 2006
The Guardian

Commentators often urge cricket's governing bodies to modernise and to speak with one clear voice. In the past week the Australian umpire Darrell Hair appears to have unwittingly pushed the sport towards doing both. It was Hair who, with the agreement of his fellow umpire Billy Doctrove, penalised the Pakistan cricket team for illegally tampering with the match ball during the fourth test against England at the Oval on Sunday. When Pakistan protested, Hair awarded the game to England, setting off an international furore that has continued for the rest of the week.

Some lauded Hair as a judicial enforcer, upholding cricket's ancient laws. But those claims were eroded after yesterday's publication by the International Cricket Council of communication it received from Hair after the game ended - in which he first offered to step down in exchange for a payment of $500,000. Incredibly, Hair then emailed the ICC to say that following accusation against him of racism, "the sum indicated in my release offer is being revised". The effect of these revelations has been to unite cricket as rarely before: former umpire Dickie Bird yesterday described Hair's demand as bigger than Bodyline, the 1933 controversy when England's fast bowlers gave Australia's batsmen a battering.

Hair's desire for a huge pay-off gives the Pakistan cricket authorities a lever for calling into question all of his decisions taken on the fateful day of the test. It also offers the ICC authorities a way out. The ICC should as quickly as possible drop the charges of ball tampering and bringing the game into disrepute against Pakistan's captain Inazmam-ul-Haq. It should also apologise to Inzamam and, in the light of what has transpired, downgrade any sanction against Pakistan for its dressing room sit-in to a slap on the wrist.

The good news is that Pakistan should now complete the rest of its tour of this country, something the England Cricket Board, mindful of the lucrative revenue from the coming one-day series, will be glad to hear. But the longer-term repercussions are less simple. The ICC should now hold an inquiry into Hair's conduct - and there is a strong strand of cricket opinion that expects he is unlikely to officiate in another test. But the ICC must also change the degree of authority that umpires have over a match. Major sports no longer consider a referee's decision to be final. Modern technology and the higher stakes involved means that the days when the umpire alone had the last word have long gone.

well said

one Viewer from Balochistan on Indus TV (I think he is x-president of Balochistan Cricket Board) said, they are ready to pay US$500,000 if Hair is ready to quit

Some more absolute rubbish!

"Hair's desire for a huge pay-off gives the Pakistan cricket authorities a lever for calling into question all of his decisions taken on the fateful day of the test."

Huge pay-off?? Even an idiot could work out the $500,000 is about what he would have earned over the next four years.

Only that he was on contract for 18 more months, not 4 years. Add to that the demand that the payment be made by a date that happened to be before the hearing and for no one to find about it, not even the rest of the ICC

The 4 years mentioned was conservative.

Darrell Hair is only 54. Steve Bucknor is 60.

The question is; why? Why did he demand the money instead of just going to the hearing and defending himself? He is a lawyer for God's sake! Open up your eyes Donny bhaijan.

But why should he be paid for a non-existant contract?

Steve Bucknor has officiated in the 6 years between the age of 54 and the age of 60.

No profession pays someone speculatively.

If someobody made a complaint against me at work and I wasn't prepared to defend myself I wouldnt expect my employers to give me the money I expect to earn until retirement age in one lump sum direct into my account within the next 10 days AND KEEP IT A SECRET!!

Step back for a minute and look at the situation without the Aussie specs!!

He has just 18 months left till his contract expires. How was he so sure that his contract would be renewed by the ICC?

Given his umpiring in recent times, I would say it was very optimistic. Umpires before have been removed from the elite panel.

Hair's judgement and his integrity have indisputably been brought into question. As such his actions on Sunday now become even more dubious. If it becomes a battle of Hair's word against Pakistan's, who can believe Hair?

One more thing:

Hair said in an interview in April, that he planned finishing after the World Cup:

“I’m not so sure that after another 12 months I’ll have the passion to keep enjoying it.”

That does exactly support his assertion that the next 4 years would have been his best years.

Why not SL , Pak & India team play a benefit match for Hair to honor him for bringing great honor to this game and their players and definitely more than $5,00,000 can be collected for this and can be given to Hair as his retirement expense .Murali is the best person to hand over the cheque of $5,00,000 and Inzi is the best person to hand over a momento to him