Inzi’s acquittal restored pride
Inzamam and Pakistan have got what they were seeking: they would feel that justice was done, their honour has been restored, and the four-match ban was a small sacrifice for their valiant hero who had stood up to be counted.
Inzamam refused to take the field in forth test match against England at Oval, when Darrell Hair accused Pakistan team of ball tempering and that match was awarded to England, as Pakistan forfeited the match. Read my post Darrell Hair : culprit caught again.
Ovalgate has got the resolution that most people wanted, and it was hardly a surprise. No one seriously believed the ball-tampering charges against Inzamam-ul-Haq’s team would be, or could be, proved, and everyone expected Inzamam to get some sort of a ban. A crisis has blown over, and cricket has come out smiling.
It has been seen to have dispensed justice. Dropping the ball-tampering charge would make it look fair in the eyes of fans in the subcontinent, and the punishment to Inzamam is proof that the law has been upheld. ICC chief match referee Ranjan Madugalle and adjudicator for this case said:
“Hair acted on a mere suspicion; he acted in haste (his fellow umpire wanted to wait); he could have avoided the crisis had he chosen the diplomatic route; and since there was the equal possibility of the ball being damaged naturally, the umpires were wrong in penalising Pakistan”
Everyone can now get on with the business of cricket. For good measure, it has also announced that Darrell Hair will not officiate during the Champions Trophy. That would make, apart from Pakistan, who haven’t wanted Hair for quite a while, even India, the powerful hosts of the Champions Trophy, happy.