LONDON, Sept 26: West Indian umpire Billy Doctrove, who officiated the controversial fourth Test at The Oval between Pakistan and England last month, initially disagreed with fellow umpire Darrell Hair over the replacement of the ‘tampered’ ball on the fourth day of the match, sources said on Tuesday.

Hair and Doctrove changed the ball in the 56th over of England's second innings on that fateful afternoon at The Oval which erupted into a major row later in the day when Pakistan refused to take the field after tea in protest over the decision.

The Test was later forfeited in England’s favour, the only instance of its kind in cricket’s entire history.

But according to sources, Doctrove in his match report on the incident wrote that he was initially of the opinion that the umpires should allow play to carry on for a few more overs to help identify the cause of the change in the ball's condition.

Eventually, though, Hair is thought to have reasoned that if both umpires were in agreement that the condition of the ball had been altered then they should change it immediately. Doctrove then agreed and the ball was duly replaced.

Legally, this development has no effect on the case but Pakistan's lawyers, DL Piper, are expected to seize upon this initial difference in opinion to argue that Hair had acted in haste.

"This is a key aspect of the defence and it is a strong point in favour of Pakistan that the tampering charges are unjustified," a source pointed out.

If the ball tampering charge is not proven, then Pakistan are likely to argue in favour of dropping the second charge against Inzamam, of bringing the game into disrepute by refusing to play. Pakistan's contention will be that one led to the other, that they were first falsely accused and thus had no choice but to protest.

It has also emerged that Mike Procter, the ICC match referee, failed to inform Pakistan of their forfeiture soon after the decision had been taken by the umpires in the afternoon.

"Hair instructed Procter to tell Pakistan that they had forfeited the game in the afternoon. Procter failed to do so and officially, much later at around 10 pm, did they learn that the Test had been forfeited," claimed the source.

The ICC has refused to confirm or deny these revelations.

—Agencies