Decision for good of the game

[DesiChap]

Procter was under pressure after being ticked off LP Sahi Calcutta: The body language of Match Referee Mike Procter during Sunday night’s disciplinary hearing in Sydney had been such that it appeared he was “under pressure†to punish Harbhajan Singh. “Procter, clearly, looked under pressure to act... That impression was unmistakable,†somebody who attended the hearing told The Telegraph. Harbhajan, as it turned out, got banned for three Tests when the one-time South African allrounder and coach held him guilty of hurling a racist abuse at Andrew Symonds. Speaking on Tuesday afternoon, the gentleman added: “I wouldn’t like to speculate on the reason, but Procter’s behaviour could’ve had something to do with an incident in the lead-up to the second Test (at the SCG)...†Procter declined to comment. Contacted in Sydney, he merely said: “I don’t wish to say anything except that the last two days have been distressing... I hope you understand it’s a delicate time.†Tough times is more like it. For, soon after Procter spoke to this newspaper, he learnt that Chief Referee Ranjan Madugalle would join him before the next Test (in Perth) as “facilitator.†At the very least, it’s a lack of confidence in him from the International Cricket Council (ICC). The “incident†between the first (MCG) and second Tests, one learns, relates to Procter being ticked off by ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed for giving Yuvraj Singh a clean chit. Yuvraj, who’d stood his ground in the first innings at the MCG, was charged with showing dissent but Procter accepted his plea that he’d shown “disappointment†and not dissent. That didn’t amuse Speed. Talking exclusively during the SCG Test, Speed said: “I’ve had a chat with Procter... I’m not in favour of redefining dissent. If a batsman waits at the crease after being given out then it’s dissent, not disappointment.†Nothing stops the chief executive from having a word with any Match Referee, but the ticking off would’ve put Procter under pressure to act in the next hearing involving an Indian. Speed has, over the years, been viewed with suspicion by the Indian Board and the present regime played its part in ensuring the Australian didn’t get another extension. So, later this year, the ICC will have a new chief executive and some with big influence are lobbying for an Asian to succeed Speed. Footnote: That Procter disregarded the “independent testimony†of on-field umpires Steve Bucknor and Mark Benson, both of whom maintained they hadn’t heard the word “monkey,†will form an integral part of Harbhajan’s strong counter to the ban. http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080109/jsp/sports/story_8760719.jsp

[varun]

Speed has got something in for India or what ?

[yoda]

Malcolm speed...makes bucknor look more competent.

[bnaick]

In that case, Procter should've summoned Clarke, Dravid and Ganguly :)

[aussiefan]

Procter was under pressure after being ticked off LP Sahi So, later this year, the ICC will have a new chief executive and some with big influence are lobbying for an Asian to succeed Speed.

what are you talking about? Pawar is already slated to be next ICC chief..... if you're going to quote rubbish, at least you can pick up obvious errors ( not including whole unsubstantiated statement at beginning ) in the story as well.... :finger:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[varun]

Pawar is set to become ICC President ... Speed's -who currently holds the position of CEO -succesor is not yet decided.

The ICC President position is a total puppet-position. Does anyone remember Ehsan Mani ? :hysterical:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[aussiefan]

still got to be a very prestigious, influential position

[DesiChap]

Bird says Bucknor should quit Bird says Bucknor should quit AFP LONDON, January 8: Legendary English umpire Dickie Bird believes Steve Bucknor has "gone on too long" and that it is now time for him to retire from international cricket. Bucknor found himself involved in a major controversy after making several debatable decisions during last week's second Test between Australia and India in Sydney. An incensed India demanded the 61-year-old Bucknor be replaced for the upcoming third Test in Perth and, on Monday, the International Cricket Council (ICC) said New Zealand's Billy Bowden would take the West Indian's place. Bucknor has stood in a world record 120 Tests but Bird believes age has finally caught up with the Jamaican, one of the officials whose failure to correctly interpret bad light rules led to the farcical finish in darkness of April's World Cup final in Barbados. "When you get to that age... I have said to Steve, 'Don't go on too long, get out while you are still respected'. I think he has gone on too long," added Bird, who retired from the international game in 1996, having stood in a then record 66 Tests, told Sky Sports on Monday. India were also angered by the decision of Mike Procter, the match referee in Sydney, to suspend off-spinner Harbhajan Singh for three Tests for racially abusing Australia all-rounder Andrew Symonds. They effectively put their tour on hold as they launched an appeal against the bowler's punishment. Bird, who during the course of his career was well-known for his ability to defuse on-field tensions between players before they escalated into major incidents, said Bucknor and on-field colleague Mark Benson could have done more to prevent matters getting out of hand in Sydney. "I think the umpires should have got the captains together on the field in front of everyone and said, 'Let's get on with this game and play it in the correct spirit and finish the Test without any problems'." He added: "If they (India) feel that an umpire is not up to I think they have the right to say so. That is my view of it." "But I do believe if umpires are appointed to a Test match they should see it through. That has not happened in this instance." Meanwhile former England fast bowler Andy Caddick, still playing first-class cricket for Somerset, said umpires weren't helped by being put under pressure by players. "It is part of the sport, it is what it has evolved to," the 39-year-old told BBC Radio. "You try to influence the umpires. Some days you'll get a decision and some days you won't." He added: "Umpiring under the scrutiny of TV is a very difficult job to do. Umpires do get things wrong and players get things wrong, unfortunately it's always the umpires that stay in the limelight." "Players will try to influence the umpires' decisions. It's up to the individual umpire to be strong enough in character to sort that out - but perhaps the players need to be reprimanded rather than the umpires." As debate continues throughout the cricket world regarding 'sledging' - the practice of players trying to verbally intimidate their opponents - Caddick said it was something top-flight performers had to accept. "It's professional cricket, things will be said - that's life. At the end of the day there is always someone trying to get one over you and if verbally's the way you want to react to it, so be it." "At the end of the day if you're a strong enough character you'll get over it. It's part and parcel of the sport." http://cricket.indiatimes.com/Bucknor_should_quit_Dickie_Bird/articleshow/2684257.cms

[fineleg]

What if Bird says "Technology must be used more"? Will he say that to the chagrin of the charm of the game? Shepherd has said that, lets hope Bird also voices that.

[suraj]

Great points by Bird- the sad part is that it should have been the administration (ICC) making the decision based on his competency rather than waiting for the man himself to announce his intentions to the world

[Brainfade]

The PC world at work Speed or not, the PC world is working overtime these days. You can make racist comments against the majority race, but the moment someone says something remotely racist against a minority, everyone is up in arms. Remember the US politician who got in trouble for using the word "niggardly" a few years ago? It seems that the nations that indulged in slavery and apartheid are overcompensating for their past sins.

[Ram]

Dont give these "Sources told" article a damn... But Procter's decision is indeed baffling. I cant imagine how he could hand out a ban, without having proof to back it up. In this case, the possible proofs could have been, -- The stump microphone having picked up Bhajji's words, but clearly we dont seem to have such sort of evidence -- The Australian players' or particulary, Andrew Symmonds words. -- The on-field umpie having heard the insult -- Bhajji himself having accepted to the on-field umpires, in the few moments after the incident that he made that comment and is sorry for it. Maybe, just maybe, the last one could be the clincher. From what i could gather from videos, Bhajji definitely looked VERY apologetic right after the incident.

[Rajan]

Dont give these "Sources told" article a damn... But Procter's decision is indeed baffling. I cant imagine how he could hand out a ban, without having proof to back it up. In this case, the possible proofs could have been, -- The stump microphone having picked up Bhajji's words, but clearly we dont seem to have such sort of evidence -- The Australian players' or particulary, Andrew Symmonds words. -- The on-field umpie having heard the insult -- Bhajji himself having accepted to the on-field umpires, in the few moments after the incident that he made that comment and is sorry for it. Maybe, just maybe, the last one could be the clincher. From what i could gather from videos, Bhajji definitely looked VERY apologetic right after the incident.

Then why SRT is so confident that Harbhajan has not said that?

[beetle]

>>>-- Bhajji himself having accepted to the on-field umpires, in the few moments after the incident that he made that comment and is sorry for it. Maybe, just maybe, the last one could be the clincher. From what i could gather from videos, Bhajji definitely looked VERY apologetic right after the incident If that was the case...do you think they wouldn't use it to justify the ban. HGerby was probably saying sorry for touching Lee's butt.

[Sachinism]

he may have looked apologetic, but it may be due to another reason if bhaji had admitted to the actions and apologized for it, why would he be denying it now

[Sachinism]

well said harold

[DesiChap]

Decision for good of the game Decision for good of the game Comment by Robert Craddock January 09, 2008 THE sacking of Steve Bucknor as umpire for the third Test between Australia and India in Perth has saved the series. The decision is sad but it simply had to happen. The International Cricket Council, so often criticised for its handling a major crises, did well to draw deep breath and make a tough call. No one likes to see an umpire sacked but nor should they be untouchable. Everyone else in the sporting world is constantly under the threat of being dropped if they underachieve. Umpires should be no different. The 10 men on the international umpiring panel tend to drift around the world with not a lot of accountability for their form lapses. The call to drop Bucknor in the middle of a series may seem cringingly bad timing, but desperate situations sometimes call for unconventional methods. Poor umpiring drags lowers the tone of a game and pits sides against each other; dodgy decisions are at the heart of most disputes. Bucknor and his four other colleagues who got the rain rule wrong in the Cricket World Cup final are lucky to be umpiring at all. Confidence in Bucknor had dipped so low during the second Test that Australian batsman Michael Clarke bizarrely waited for the umpire to give him out when he edged the ball to first slip in the second innings. If a batsman thinks he has a chance of being given not for one of the most routine dismissals ever seen on a cricket field, you know all confidence in the umpire is gone. As ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed said, the body had to find a way of reducing tension between the warring Australian and Indian teams. Relieving Bucknor of his duties has done the trick. In dropping Bucknor, the ICC has acted swiftly and decisively and deserve credit for that. The ICC has often been accused of being bystanders when the fat is spitting out of the frying pan, but you can not say that here. Speed took a long while to gather his thoughts when asked whether the decision to drop Bucknor could set a dangerous precedent, in that sides who have a grievance with an umpire could ask for their removal. He agreed it was a fair question, but felt strongly it would not become a frequent event. http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,23025162-23212,00.html

[Guest dada_rocks]

Naah ... Dalmiya was also a ICC President ... sabko hila ke rakh diya tha ... it depends on the person. Some one like TN Seshan turned EC into a high profile Beurocratic position in a matter of few yrs .. :D

Sir aapne billion dollar ki baat kahi hai..:two_thumbs_up: