ISLAMABAD, 7 November 2006 — The removal of Darrell Hair by the International Cricket Conference in Mumbai as an elite umpire has come as an eternal relief to cricket-mad Pakistanis.
The print as well as the electronic media has gone the full distance to highlight the removal of the controversial Australian in keeping with the mood of a nation otherwise fuming over the Bajaur tragedy these days.
“ Elite Darrell gets Hair cut, at last’’, screams a front-page headline in The News, while The Post shows a bald-headed ,bespectacled chubby official under a banner headline— “Umpires panel Hair-less as ICC sacks Aussie.” Not agreeing on certain issues including on which day to celebrate Eid Il Fitr the Pakistani nation rose as one against the decision of the Australian umpire to penalize Pakistan for ball-tampering at the Oval Test against England.
For a change, the entire nation was furious over Hair’s unjust and injudicious act performed in front of scoreless TV cameras busy beaming the dramatic proceedings live to the world.
Imran Khan,Pakistan’s best-known cricketing personality, went to the extent of wanting to take Hair to the court of law for a befitting punishment. The Oval fiasco even paled in comparison to the opposition’s no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, bringing into sharp focus a fact that cricket is not a sheer sport in Pakistan. It’s a passion intense enough to fashion our lifestyle. Unable to bear the insult, Pakistan captain Inzamam ul-Haq, cool as cucumber as a batsman, chose not to appear at the ground at due time in protest. This was enough for a revengeful Hair to remove the bails — and do it contemptuously to satisfy his whims— and announce forfeiture, something that had never happened in the 129-year history of Test cricket. Only a day before I was contemplating a piece on Hair, imagining him as someone deriving delight out of Pakistan’s growing cricketing woes, little did I know that the International Cricket Conference has already decided to remove him as an elite umpire.
In the words of a discerning fan, who was right at the Oval and saw an untold sordid drama unfolding, ‘’poetic justice has been done’’. I could not have agreed more.
Without Hair , Inzamam would have been leading Pakistan at the Champions Trophy in India. And it is only reasonable to assume that it would have been a different story rather than Pakistan surrendering rather meekly to South Africa, a team outplayed in the semifinal by West Indies .The Pakistan Cricket Board would have been spared the ignominy of digesting the indiscipline of Mohammed Younus, refusing national captaincy considered to be an ultimate honor for any sportsman, and reappointing him the following day once PCB chairman Shahryar Yar Khan was replaced by Dr Nasim Ashraf. Pakistan’s cricket was turned topsy-turvy. According to reports, the motion was tabled by the Asian bloc comprising Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh and supported by South Africa, Zimbabwe and the West Indies. Australia, Hair’s home country as well as ICC President Malcolm Speed’s, voted against joined by New Zealand and England. On the face of it, it would seem that the colored nations acted in unison( believing South Africa is free from the curse of apartheid, thanks to Nelson Mandela, the most revered individual on earth) to defeat the whites as if to prove once more that blood is thicker than water. We still remain human beings .
Which means we are still in the process of becoming human. We have yet to become one in terms of fair play, justice and equality. We have yet to overcome racial shortcomings and other petty prejudices. And overcome we will, judging by human evolution. The verdict against Hair is another step forward.
I received a revealing e-mail from an old dear friend in which an evolutionary biologist predicts that by the year 3000, all humans will be “coffee-colored.” This could well spell the end of history, in terms of racist bigotry’, says the researcher at London School of Economics, adding: “ The whole world is heading toward a uniform brown-tinted skin tone which will come about by year 3000.’’ Imagine Hair’s trial taking place in 3000. The verdict against him would have been unanimous 10-0, rather than 7-3. Isn’t it? Hair, a 56-year-old veteran of 76 Tests, who has chosen to settle in England in search of fame and fortune, exposed himself when he asked for half a million dollars to quit umpiring. No wonder, he was taken to task even by English critics like Geoff Boycott and Dickie Bird. But Hair went on to act differently, behaving as a victor during a press conference after an ICC inquiry conducted by match referee Ranjan Madugalle which cleared Inzamam of ball tampering. Enough said. Money makes the Hair go, cricket is just a part of life. Nothing like being gracious and magnanimous .Narrow mindedness never pays. Nor does arrogance. They backfire. Long live cricket, which knows no barriers and was created to promote human harmony.
