Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zayno14
I don't think you get the point tealeaf..Pakistan protested becuase they were branded cheats without any evidence! So i don't have a clue why you have used this example..It wasn't the five runs that incensed them it was the accusation with no evidence..
|
What sort of logic is this statement? Both umpires looked at the ball and decided that it had been unfairly tampered with. On that decision they awarded 5 runs to England and a change of ball; the old one being kept. The Pakistan team had every right to appeal to the match referee afterwards and the suspect ball would have been available as evidence. Should the match referee subsequently have decided that there was insufficient proof of deliberate gouging, then a statement would no doubt have been issued. In the unlikely event of England succeeding in a runs victory, then Pakistan would at least have been able to claim a moral one; instead, they have sullied the name of cricket and dragged the name of their country further into the mud.