In terms of likeability Darrell Hair is at the other end of the scale. In our part of the world we don’t like him at all and we need to be careful while offering reasons for it. I have heard the word ‘racism’ come into it and that is sad. We use it too lightly, it is our first shelter now. But even racism has to bow to achievement and the more we achieve in our part of the world, the less relevant racism will become.

That doesn’t mean Hair’s attitude is acceptable. He is domineering, rude and uses his authority like it were a fly-swatter. Rather than saying “lets not get there” he is liable to say “if you get there this is what I will do to you...” An umpire cannot be a tyrant. The law makes him witness, policeman and judge and that is a rare combination that good men wear lightly.

An umpire, like a good doctor, needs to calm people not provoke them and Hair is provocative. Maybe the ICC needs to have an Umpires Code of Conduct like it has one for the players!!

But is that good enough reason to condemn him in this case? We haven’t seen the ball, no journalist has, no columnist has. If Hair is indeed wrong, he will be condemned but what if he is right? I think we need to hold our judgement till a verdict is arrived at.

And I think international sportsmen should spare us the “honour” bit. One of the most disquieting things about sport in recent times is the realisation that virtually everybody cheats. The World Cup of football was full of it and I know of no cricket team in the world that doesn’t go up in appeal in a wonderfully convincing manner when they know a batsman isn’t out.

... contd.