Re: Darryl Hair


"R. Spanditt" <dnarmstrong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:f85d0bb3-b84d-4ef6-9cfe-870ad36474cb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 12, 10:02 am, "dechucka" <dechu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"R. Spanditt" <dnarmstr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:a7ba2151-c7c2-4997-b3b2-80aa98fcfe50@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 11, 10:07 am, "dechucka" <dechu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





"R. Spanditt" <dnarmstr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:31f7f7cc-ec2d-44d3-b281-91513f42469d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 10, 10:59 am, "dechucka" <dechu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"R. Spanditt" <dnarmstr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:a7667b96-65a5-4ef2-ad26-bc290c79a84a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 9, 12:38 pm, "dechucka" <dechu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"R. Spanditt" <dnarmstr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:0adac857-2173-4fab-85a3-c2cf7dc33bd8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 9, 9:27 am, "dechucka" <dechu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"pip" <1...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:N5OdnfJO7-1dudTVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"dechucka" <dechu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4848473a$0$30365$5a62ac22@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"pip" <1...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:CtGdnR0O7eKiI9rVnZ2dnUVZ8gOdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"dechucka" <dechu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4847084f$0$30393$5a62ac22@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"pip" <1...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:WfGdnV-Zte4LO9vVnZ2dnUVZ8uSdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"dechucka" <dechu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:48468200$0$30397$5a62ac22@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do you want the game played by the Laws of cricket ( as
Hair
applies
them )

I'd prefer that the game was played by the Laws of cricket
as
written - not as Hair applies them.

but he applies them as written which seems to be most peoples
on
this
ng problem with him. Please indicate where he hasn't applied
the
Laws
Are you saying that every decision that he makes is correct?

If there are any decisions that you believe are incorrect then
he
has
not applied the Laws as written.he

he has read the Laws about Umpires

Or do you believe that he is perfect?

he is not perfect, makes mistakes but is always correct Read
the
Laws

I have had a read of the Laws and can't find anything that says
that
"Hair
is always correct".

Can you point me to the Law that states this?

try 27.9, if an Umpire makes a decision and does not withdraw it
promptly
it
is final- Hide quoted text -

+you're mixing up your interpretations of the words 'correct' and
'final'. a decision might be final but isn't always correct - like
not
calling murali for a no-ball when he bowls his standard off-break.

basically the umpire is always right even if he is wrong.

+So... right can be wrong at the same time?

Yes

+If you're talking about umpires in general, why did you specifically
refer to Hair in the first place..

because that is who the thread is about- Hide quoted text -

=the comment referred to hair when the premise applies to all umpires,
who apparently have never, ever, ever made an incorrect decision. if
it's not incorrect, what do you call a decision when the correct
decision should have been the opposite, then? actually, don't bother,
i'm not entertained by your useless sense of rationale

Even if an Umpire ( this applies to all Umpires ) makes a mistake and
gets
it wrong his decision is correct. It for the people on RSC to bitch and
complain bout them not the players on the field or the officials during
the
game. Further more it is up to the ICC Umpires to appoint Umpires
independently.

Your paranoia about certain Umpires who correctly apply the Laws is
clouding
your judgement like normal- Hide quoted text -

+What paranoia are you referring to?

Read your past posts and you may see a pattern developing


They're all in response to someone who has no idea?

It's a silly argument really.. what you're saying is that if a batter
smashes a full-toss for four, the bowler appeals and the umpire gives
him out LBW, then that is the correct decision (because it's the
decision the umpire made). You have no leg to stand on.

by the Laws of the Game he is correct and you will read about it in the old
fish and chip wrapper the next day, in the records and in Wisden. I
understand what you are saying but the Umpires decision is final and so it
should be


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Hair Employment Tribunal case starts next week
    ... Hair and Michael Beloff QC (Belof is head of Cherie Blair's old ... Doctrove supported the forfeiture of the game at ... official channels for Pakistan to make complaints, ... what more could the umpires do? ...
    (uk.sport.cricket)
  • Hairs approach was flawed
    ... My sympathies in the stand-off between umpires and the Pakistani team ... referee, the PCB chief, matters came to such a pass that Pakistan ... what happened is a travesty of the game. ... I see no reason why Hair did not use it to his advantage. ...
    (rec.sport.cricket)
  • Re: Hair Employment Tribunal case starts next week
    ... that 1) there were two umpires involved; ... of the game; and 3) Pakistan did NOT follow the laws of the game. ... Hair was being a bit of a pedant where a more ...
    (uk.sport.cricket)
  • Re: Darryl Hair
    ... written - not as Hair applies them. ... Are you saying that every decision that he makes is correct? ... who apparently have never, ever, ever made an incorrect decision. ... Further more it is up to the ICC Umpires to appoint Umpires ...
    (rec.sport.cricket)
  • Wait no longer
    ... The mutterings started as soon as the umpires refused to come out from their ... They grew to a clamour when the game was awarded to England. ... from the Pakistan commentators, but I wasn't. ... Darrell Hair ...
    (rec.sport.cricket)
Loading