Header Ads

5 Jobs That Darryl Hair Should Not Apply For

We, here at The Match Referee, are good folk, always looking out for how we can be of assistance to the less fortunate in our community. Because Darryl Hair now resides in England and does not maintain a blog, he is not part of our community - technically. But, who am I to get technical about such trivial issues. The poor man has lost his job and I believe it is our duty to help him select a new means to earn a living. Its the least we could do for anyone who belonged to the cricket community.

I openly admit to knowing very little about the man. However, I have seen plenty of him on TV and believe I have observed enough qualities to allow me to help him.

Anybody that embarks on a job hunt must firstly know what type of job they want. I am not privy to Darryl's wish-list, so I made an executive decision to help him out by compiling a list of jobs that would be unbecoming of his stature and unsuited to his personality:
  1. Systems Accountant - High Profile Role: I know for a fact that Darryl shuns the spotlight, so this job is out straightaway. Additionally, the job requires a "keen eye for detail" and the ball tampering incident has proven that Darryl's eyes just are not what they used to be. Coke will just have to look elsewhere.
  2. Account Executive - Public Relations: the company seeks someone with a "can-do" attitude. Darryl possess this in abundance, as he has shown us in calling Mutiah Muralitharan many times for chucking. However, after the public relations disaster of demanding a golden handshake from his employers, I do not believe Darryl is an ideal fit for this role.
  3. Restaurant Manager: I considered this job for Darryl because from his ample frame, I have developed the view that he likes food. Unfortunately, the advertiser seeks a person able to handle complaints in a "diplomatic" manner. Hence, this job is struck off the list because Darryl would be struggling when if he has to provide an example of a time when he has handled a dispute in a diplomatic manner. Sorry, no restaurant for you mate.
  4. Victoria Police: this appealed to us immediately, anybody would think that Darryl has all the qualities to become a good cop. Then we realised that the Victorian police requires their officers to display "integrity" and "respect". After the Darryl's last Test match, I reasoned that his "integrity" was shot and he couldn't really say that he displayed much respect for the Pakistani team.
  5. Pakistan Government: I thought the position of "Communication Officer" in the "Women Development Division" would be ideal for Darryl since it requires someone who can "organise media coverage" for a project - an activity that Darryl is highly proficient in. However, setting foot anywhere near Pakistan at present could be a life-threatening scenario for Darryl, so this job definitely does not make the cut.

Darryl Hair is a talented man. He will most likely be able to find a new career, all on his own. I merely hoped to assist him in a small way, during what would be deeply troubled times for the former international umpire. After all, what is the point of friends if they can't help you out in a time of need, no?

Tags for this post:


I said...

Well. Hair interprets law correctly. If that pisses the lawless Third World off, it's only natural.

Ayush Trivedi said...

I can't quite deduce the exact angle you are coming from. The hearing after The Oval fiasco found that there was not a shred of evidence to prove the incident that Hair alleged to have occurred. The very incident that he used as reason to bring the most insulting and humiliating charge against an innocent man and team. Hardly an act that indicates that he "interprets the law correctly".

Its obvious that you have grouse against the third world, thats your prerogative. However, even reasonable humans from "lawless" countries are bound to be outraged if their integrity is unfairly and publicly questioned and public humiliation results.

I said...

Hair interprets law correctly. When he called Murali for
chucking, he was following the 'bending the arm' definition.
That he did not "intentionally" bend it and only by 12.5' not 12.501' is a minor detail.

Reg. the England v Pakistan match: The rule: the umpire has the right
to take action if he is convinced that the ball has been tampered
with. There is an element of subjectivity right there. He does not have to prove it in a court of law when making his decision.
Disagreements should be dealt with, after end of play. The rule also says the umpire can award the match if the players are not back on the field after a certain time. He did ask Inzamam if he wanted to forfeit and got an yes in response.

Ayush Trivedi said...

Whether you agree with his action or not, Murali has been found to have a legitimate action by an independent organisation, time and again.

Hair seemed to be the only person convinced that tampering had occurred. Everyone that testified at the hearing, including Boycott and Hughes, did not believe tampering had occurred.

To officiate in a cricket match should not be akin to running a Kangaroo Court Umpiring decisions should be based on facts that are supported by conclusive evidence. The term benefit of the doubt comes to mind.

It has been plainly exposed that Hair acted on a whim and would have effectively disgraced an innocent team, had he not been pulled up at the hearing.

Powered by Blogger.