Who's to Blame

See what used to be The Corridor of Uncertainty for a largely English and England-oriented view of cricket. Some of the cricinfo staff seem to post there regularly.

I have followed Pakistan's ongoing tour of England with much interest. In wake of ball-tampering controversy, I posted my first comment on that blog.

"I have a fresh view of this matter :) .

Clearly, England are to blame here. Had they not taken the field with the umpires when Pakistan clearly refused to do so, the fiasco would never have happened. For whom would Hair have awarded the match then? (Knowing his pompous ass, I bet he would have then declared himself the winner of the match.)

England saw an opportunity to win a game they could not otherwise, and seized it. And look how they are the only party which comes out looking like lambs."

Later I had this to add, "On a more serious note, I must say that I cannot but help feel sympathy for Pakistan, and utter disdain for all the match officials, including the referee. Yes, it would seem valid to ask that if this intransigence by Pakistan is waived, then where do we draw the line? I, however, don’t think it’s a valid question at all. Thinking about what kind of precedent this will set will only cloud the due arbitration. First, the hearing committee needs to decide this case on merit. And, as we have seen here and on numerous occasions before, if an umpire can change the course of a game, he should be held accountable for his actions."