Re: Defiant Inzi's done cricket a great service
Inzi I agree is not the greatest of thinkers or tacticians but if as you say he had taken a stand there and then and led his team off the field when the ball was changed by Hair he could have landed himself in more trouble. There's no way Inzy could have kept a close watch on all his players and if he had walked out straight away and there had been camera-evidence of a player 'working on the ball', Inzi's a** would have been on the line.
There are a few positives to come out of the forfeiture:
1. A likely change in cricket laws whereby the referee and not the on-field umpires will decide whether or not a match is forfeited
2. A likely change in the ball-tampering laws whereby any penalty is preceded by an official warning to the fielding team
3. The myth that the umpire is always right has been broken. If an umpire is going to make a huge decision, which affects the whole fabric of the game, he had better have some evidence to back it up or be ready to face the music.
One or two bad decisions happen in every game and all international sides must accept that but when there are run of the mill bad and biased decisons you simply can't take them lying down. It was n't just the Oval test but even at Headingly Hair and Doctrove's poor decisions on the first day (clear edges not given out, plumb LBWs not given, Pietersen was reprieved and he went on to add 130 odd runs), turned the game upside down. More than Hair's biased decisions it's his brusque manner and insulting attitude towards PAK players that was so frustrating. The players felt insulted by his whole attitude and they had lost confidence in him.
Darrell Hair has carried on with his bullish attitude and has failed to show any contrition even after Madugalle overruled his decision to call Inzi for ball tampering. Even though the decision has gone against Hair, he's still acting as though he is not aware of what he's done.
If Pakistan had peacefully completed the match under protest after a short protest at tea, they might have won the game (and even been cleared of the ball-tampering charge later), the ICC would not have felt the need to remove him from the panel of umpires for CT and Hair would have simply carried on in the same way causing more trouble and frustration later.
As a result of Pakistan's forfeiture, Hair's very future as an international umpire is on the line.