England

This is getting preposterous! If the umpires knew yesterday that Inzi had tampered with the ball they should have said that straightaway. Especially as the Laws require the umpire to be satisfied that a PLAYER has changed the condition of the ball, not just say that the condition has changed.

Bringing an additional charge when it could have been made yesterday sounds like the ICC and the umpires backing up together together to make sure that something sticks.

Unless, of course, Inzi is being charged because he is the captain.

It will be very interesting to see what actual evidence is produced. And WHO will actually be guarding the prime piece of evidence, the ball itself? Clearly as the prosecutor, judge and jury, the last people to have it are the ICC - I hope they have already passed it to someone independent for safe keeping, as it presumably will be examined in connection with the charges against Inzi and his team.

Hi, I am finding it hard to follow these threads cause seems so many post are "posting is currently queued for moderation...", can we please reply without swearing or calling people names? Would help the flow in reading the threads.

Thanx

Him being charged is proof that they must have evidence of ball tampering and that the were wrong to sit in.

Inzi charged for tampering with the ball.... now that makes me laugh...
thay jus wanted to blame some one & look who they blamed.... Hair must be sacked..... this guy is no good for cricket

Lip up Fatty.

looks like Inzy is being accused because the umpires know that tampering took place but cannot pin it on a particular player (suprising, I admit given the 26 TV cameras, but people can be very sly)

Therefore, I postulate this:

The umpires looked at the ball when Cook was out.
The umpires looked at the ball three overs later and decided the condition had changed significantly and that there were obvious marks (to which the ex-analyst Simon Hughes testifies).
Therefore, they change the ball.

The ball had not been hit to the boundary in those 3 overs, nor hit for six, thus the condition could not have changed so markedly in any other way than a pakistan team member altering it.

If this scenario is the case (its the only way i can see that the umpires would be justified in their decision) then no actual evidence of a single player commiting the deed is required.

Inzy (unfortunately for him) is being (quite correctly) as captain of the side and thus responsible for the sides actions

not sure i made it clear, but i think its all a huge shame

Altho Imran 'Bottle Top' Khan does not agree with the action taken by Inzi yesterday, he reckons the PCB & Inzi should sue D Hair. The ICC are now making specific charges against PCB and Inzi. They would be mad to do this without specific evidence. And if these charges are proved & D Hair is right... let's hope he will also consider counter-sueing. One thing is for sure about D Hair, he knows the rules.
It is only a game though peeps, and no-one on these message boards knows the truth..... YET!

"looks like Inzy is being accused because the umpires know that tampering took place but cannot pin it on a particular player (suprising, I admit given the 26 TV cameras, but people can be very sly)

Therefore, I postulate this:

The umpires looked at the ball when Cook was out.
The umpires looked at the ball three overs later and decided the condition had changed significantly and that there were obvious marks (to which the ex-analyst Simon Hughes testifies).
Therefore, they change the ball.

The ball had not been hit to the boundary in those 3 overs, nor hit for six, thus the condition could not have changed so markedly in any other way than a pakistan team member altering it.

If this scenario is the case (its the only way i can see that the umpires would be justified in their decision) then no actual evidence of a single player commiting the deed is required.

Inzy (unfortunately for him) is being (quite correctly) as captain of the side and thus responsible for the sides actions"



THIS IS THE MOST RIDICULOUS POST I HAVE READ SO FAR TODAY. . IT IS OBVIOUS PAKISTAN ARE INNOCENT THE ACCUSATIONS AIMED AT THEM ON THE "EVIDENCE" BELONGS IN A KANGEROO COURT BEING RUN BY CHIMPS. . NO PROOF WHATSOVER AS THEY CANNOT "PIN" A PLAYER AS THE PAKISTANIS ARE TOO CRAFTY . SOME PEOPLE CANNOT TAKE THE FACT THAT THE ASIAN PLAYERS ARE CORRECT IN THIS SCENARIO. THE LACK OF COMMON SENSE AND DECENCY IS AMAZING. I APOLOGISE TO THE PAKISTANI PEOPLE IF THIS WUM IS ENGLISH. MOST OF THE ENGLISH CAN SEE THAT THE UMPIRE IS WRONG IN THIS SITUATION!

?

sorry dont understand your post

please explain

I'm no WUM, nor does my nationality have any bearing on the way i've seen things.

wabbit