Outspoken ICC President in hot water

by ELMO Rodrigopullein Australia

There is the possibility of 2015 World Umpires suing the President of the International Cricket Council, Bangladeshi President Mustafa Kamal.

The umpires are seeking to take extraordinary action against one of their own. Kamal caused uproar within the ranks of the world game’s governing body with his comments following his country’s defeat to India in a quarterfinal game. It was all over a controversial decision by umpires Ian Gould and Aleem Dar that saved India’s century-maker Rohit Sharma his wicket suggesting the officials had entered the game with an agenda.

Caught from full toss

During India’s innings, Sharma had been caught from a full toss from Rubel Hossain in the 40th over. But a no-ball was ruled due to the heightof the delivery.

Replays had indicated that the ball had only been at waist height when it hit Sharma’s bat. It upset the Bangladeshis and Kamal led the barrage when speaking to touring journalists.

Kamal was asking whether that decision and others were made were ‘deliberate or not’ and he launched an attack on the umpires’ integrity and implying that they had been favouring India in the adjudication.

Umpiring was very poor

Here’s what Kamal said: From what I have seen, the umpiring was very poor. There was no quality in the umpiring. It seemed as if they had goneinto the match with something in mind. I am speaking as a fan, not as the ICC President.

‘Umpires may make mistakes. The ICC will see if this was donedeliberately. Everything is on record. The ICC has to investigate and inquire the issue to see it there’s anything to it’.

ICC President David Richardson issued a statement: ‘The ICC has noted Mr. Mustafa Kamal’s comments, which are very unfortunate but made in his personal capacity.

More considerate

‘As an ICC President, he should have been more considerate in his criticism of the ICC match officials whose integrity cannot be questioned.

The no-ball decision was a 50-50 call. The spirit of the game dictates that the umpire’s decision is final and must be respected.

Any suggestion that the match officials had ‘an agenda’ or did anything other than perform to the best of their ability are baseless and are refuted in the strongest possible terms.’

Apparently the umpires- Ian Gould of England and Aleem Dar of Pakistan were furious and believed that the remarks were defamatory and whether to sue Kamal over the post-match remarks was discussed.