|
|
| August 24, 2006 | Thursday | Rajab 28, 1427 |
One-day series on after ICC puts off Inzamam hearing
LONDON, Aug 23: Pakistan captain Inzamam-ul-Haq seems certain to face England in five One-day Internationals and a Twenty-20 match after the ICC’s decision on Wednesday to postpone his disciplinary hearing on ball-tampering and disrepute charges.
The International Cricket Council announced that its chief referee, Ranjan Madugalle, was unable to attend Friday's case as he had to stay in Sri Lanka for personal reasons, reportedly because a family member is ill.
The ICC said it would be ''extremely difficult'' to stage a hearing while England and Pakistan play each other in a one-day series until Sept 10.
It has not set a new date for the case to be heard.
That means Inzamam, who could be suspended for up to four Tests or eight One-day Internationals if found guilty, looks certain to play in all five games as well as Monday's Twenty20 match in Bristol.
The one-day series could now spark security issues off the field.
Because Pakistan officials say that umpire Darrell Hair insulted their country — as well as their team — with accusations of ball-tampering, there's a possibility that fans may stage protests at the grounds.Although former South African all-rounder Mike Procter was the match referee, he could not adjudicate on the case because he is due to be a witness.
“The difficulty relates to the availability of Ranjan Madugalle to chair the hearing as he is dealing with a private and personal matter that requires his urgent attention,” ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed said on Wednesday.
“Pakistan and England, as the host country, have both expressed a preference for Ranjan to hear the case and on that basis we have agreed to the postponement.”
Speed said the ICC had looked at other alternatives to hear the case but decided that Madugalle was the most appropriate person.
“We are yet to decide upon a new date, but the intense nature of the upcoming One-day International series between England and Pakistan is likely to make it extremely difficult to fit in a hearing during that period,” Speed said.
The hearing arises out of amazing scenes on Sunday's fourth day of the final Test at The Oval.
Hair ruled that the fielding Pakistan players were guilty of tampering with the ball and punished the team by awarding England five extra runs. Inzamam and his players protested their innocence by initially refusing to take the field at the start of the day's final session.
Although the players eventually left their changing rooms, Hair and fellow umpire Billy Doctrove had called an end to the game and England was awarded a victory on the basis that Pakistan had forfeited the game. That meant England won the four-Test series 3-0.
The ICC announced on Monday it had charged Inzamam with allowing his players to tamper with the ball and also with bringing the game into disrepute by leading the boycott.
The Pakistan Cricket Board then called a news conference saying its players were innocent, protesting that they had been forced to forfeit the game and demanding that the ICC never appoint Hair to umpire any Pakistan games in the future.
It was the first time in 129 years of Test cricket that a match had been won by a forfeit, and leading figures from both sides acknowledged that the chaotic end to the Test had badly damaged the image of the game.
Pakistan has previously been unhappy with Hair, while the Australian also received death threats after he repeatedly called Sri Lankan spinner Muttiah Muralitharan for throwing during a Test match 11 years ago.
The ICC said, however, it was not up to individual countries to decide who should umpire their games.
“It remains the role of the ICC and not our members to appoint umpires to Tests and One-day internationals,” Speed said in a statement issued hours before the postponement of Inzamam's hearing.
He also said the result of the Test would stand.
“It is not the role of the ICC to overturn the decisions of umpires, the people who are enshrined in the Laws of Cricket as the sole judges of fair and unfair play, the ultimate arbiters of the game,” Speed said.
“In this instance the decision made by Billy Doctrove and Darrell Hair to award the match to England was correct under the laws.”—AP
|
|
