IT'S YOUR VIEW! Add your comments here and we'll print the best replies. We may edit letters

What a sad day for cricket. Distinct lack of communication from the officials, broadcast should have been made to inform the public as to what was happening. I feel very sorry for Pakistan, unless the umpires were 110% sure the ball had been tampered with, then the benifit of the doubt should have been given to Pakistan. Play after tea should have resumed with Pakistan registering a protest and carrying on until close of play, then reviewing the situation from that point on.
James Coates, Edinburgh

Is it possible that the heavy roller England used brought more sand particles to the surface and therefore made the wicket more abrasive for Petersen-type whacks into the ground... as we saw just before it started to reverse?
David Reid, Deal, Kent.

In Faisalabad last winter, Inzamam was incorrectly given run out when taking evasive action. Darrell Hair was wrong on a point of cricket law to make the referral in this case. What was his punishment? Has he ever apologised to Inazamam? Football referees are demoted or sent home for one error of judgement. Yet, here we have a professional umpire showing ignorance of the laws of the game and, far from being punished, he is allowed to officiate in more Tests involving Pakistan. The result is hardly surprising. Let's hope the ICC shows some common sense at last and imposes no further penalty on the Pakistanis. Most cricket lovers want to see their full team contesting the one day series.
Laurie Winston, Edgware

For the people who do not know CRICKET, they can say it was a MISTAKE by the UMPIRE. For those who know, they very well know its not JUST FIVE RUNS that the umpire deducted from the total, in fact he ACCUSED Pakistan of CHEATING without any evidence just by seeing the ball. It's not a mistake, it's DEFAMATION, and the Umpire will see the PCB in a Court of Law for Defamation of a country.
Umar Khan, Rawalpindi

Until all the evidence is in then everyone is making a lot of hot air, not helped by the chairman of the PCB. He said that the Pakistan team intended a few minutes protest, well they were off for at least 15 mins and Woolmer has said this morning they intended a 30 minute protest. The PCB Chairman said the ball could have been damaged by the sixes and all the boundaries. Well, firstly the ball in question was never hit for six (replaced at the end of the 56th over). Pieterson hit two sixes later off the replacement ball (overs 62 and 63). Also between Cook being out (when the umpires would have seen the ball) there were 25 deliveries bowled. Only one four was hit and there were four other scoring shots. Then Hair looked at the ball and must have decided something had happened in those 25 balls. I appreciate Pakistan players feeling hurt. However, if they want to protest by not being on the pitch then they should accept forfeiture of the match. That is a strong statement to make.
Dominic Hordern, Cambridge

It is such a sad day for cricket. Umpires have become bigger than the sport. Without any evidence you call a team cheats and expect them to behave normally? Umpire Darrel hair has proved beyond any doubt that he loves to be central figure in the match even if he becomes a villain. This guy is a source of embarrassment for ICC. Can't ICC get rid of this fellow?
Arshad Munir Khan, Multan, Pakistan

A comedy of errors, the major casualties being the spectating public and the spirit of the game. To what extent should the ICC impose dictatorial rigidity of the rulebook? And at what cost - to the potential detriment of cricketing-nation relations, and public's ensuing mistrust in the game's Governance? Frankly, I am unimpressed with the way that the Pakistan team conducted their post-tea 'sit-in' (akin to Arthur Dent's reaction to the Bypass scheduled to be delivered through his home - HGttG); grievances should have been aired at the time of the allegation, and the team should have walked off then and there - and rightly so. The post-tea sulk was, in my humble opinion, 'too little too late'. From a communications stanpoint - where were the communications to the spectators? Did the ECB not deem it appropriate to take measures to inform the c. 15,000 spectators (braving the elements to boot) that there was a potential issue? Accountability needs to be enforced, and in a timely manner.
Al Chowdhry, London

In the game of cricket the umpires are required to stand in judgement as to whether a batsman is out, a bowler has bowled within the rules of the game and that all the other rules have been adhered to. The players and officials of the teams have to accecpt this judgement while the match is being played or the game will descend in to chaos. Sometimes umpires will make mistakes for genuine reasons but the umpire's word must be final. If the proof people here are talking about is required for this rule, why not for every other rule or decision the umpires take? Are we going to stop the game for every caught behind, lbw, run out, no-ball, wide etc just to to make sure the umpire has proof? Are we going to allow teams to walk off in a huff every time there's a decision they don't agree with?Regardless of whether or not Darrell Hair made the correct decision, Pakistan broke cricket's most important rule... the umpire's decision is final!
Andy G, Manchester

No one had a problem with England reverse-swinging the ball last year at the Ashes. The bowlers, along with the bowling coach, were called Geniuses!!! And now all of a sudden, just because Pakistan are doing it, there has to be ball-tampering involved??!?!?!? If it is proved that Duncan Fletcher or any England official went to see the umpires to tell them to keep an eye on the Pakistani bowlers for ball tampering, then surely charges must be brought against that person... BUT THEY WON'T BECAUSE DOUBLE STANDARDS EXIST!!! If it was the other way round, and England had been accused of ball-tampering, do you think same events would have happened as yesterday??? NO!!
Qamir Riaz, Oxford

Pakistan maintain they wanted to carry on playing after their protest which they say was in the form of delaying the game a few minutes. The umpires came off the pitch and asked the team if they were going to come out and play. We are told they informed the umpires they would be coming out. If that was the case, why, when the umpires and 2 England batsman returned to the middle of the pitch was the Pakistan wicket keeper sat on the balcony with no gloves on reading a newspaper? That to me does not look like someone ready to play cricket and I think it's only when they realised when the umpires came off again that the game could be over and made their way onto the pitch to try and place the blame elsewhere. I cannot fault the umpires, they followed the rules and gave Pakistan every chance to resume the game. If they are not going to abide by the laws of cricket then I feel the umpires took the right course of action.
Sean O'Donohue, Bolton

Umpire Hair has not done himself any favours, but the real issue here is the arrogance of the Pakistani team. Whilst it pains me to say it, these guys do have a real 'chip' on their shoulder and they should just adhere to the rules of this great game. Whatever the circumstances, it is WRONG to break the rules of the game and therefore the Pakistan team should be held to account for this outraguous and childish tantrum i.e. not coming out after tea on time. They should have risen above it like true sportsmen. I just hope the watching world doesn't think the whole country is like these pathetic idiots!
Abdul Shareef , Gujranwala, Pakistan

I think if Darrell Hair was a racist, then he would never have become an Elite Umpire. Remember that their job is to protect the game. He was just trying to uphold the rules of the game. Pakistan should have found a better way of demonstrating their anger. They were in the winning position and they blew it.
Jonathan Recaldin, Sevenoaks

The real losers in this whole episode are the thousands of young children across the globe who have seen an international cricket team seemingly disregard a key lesson we are taught as children - "the umpires' decision is final" - which is not just a lesson in self control and respect for the cricket field but for broader life as well - I have admired your cricket for years but in this match all I can say is shame on you Pakistan for having a lack of regard for the game's spirit and the message your actions have sent to our future players.
Richard, Leeds

I am totally dismayed at what occurred in the 4th Test at The Oval. Darryl Hair has once again covered himself in controversy and once again against an Asian team. At what stage did Hair suspect ball tampering? I don't buy the argument of the cameras might not have picked up the "alleged ball tampering." Believe me if there was evidence it would've been splashed all over the papers. A question I would like to ask is if the roles were reversed would the decision be the same? Would Hair have suspected ball tampering?
Nadeem Mann, Liverpool

So the ICC sit pontificating in the cricketing mecca of Dubai, whilst the game they protect on all our behalfs is allowed to degenerate into the sort of anarchy that professional football has become. What a sad state of affairs. I can fully understand the Pakistanis' reaction to being accused of ball-tampering, and have a considerable amount of sympathy with them. Unfortunately, whether the umpires are right or wrong, they must be backed up by the governing body (some hope with the revenues from the Asian sub-continent at sake!) If the scapegoat of this whole affair is umpire Hair, then where do we go next? A sit down protest from a batsman who has been given out caught and who doesn't think he got an edge? For the sake of the game, the umpires must be backed by the ICC. Privately, they may decide never to appoint umpire Hair again, but at this time the authority of the umpire must be upheld. Otherwise cricket just becomes like football, where the players are dictating the rules!
Martin Beames, Haywards Heath

As a spectator and a paying customer, I have a right to be upset over the handling of this affair. As an onlooker however, who does not have all the facts in this case, I am not in a position, to pass judgement on the correctness of the action in the middle. But the game of cricket as a whole will suffer if the cricketing bodies, foremost the ICC, do not see to that the paying public is properly and quickly, informed and/or compensated.
Rolf Ruesing, Newton Abbot

Why excuse Pakistan%u2019s behaviour in respect of the alleged ball tampering? If they felt aggrieved they should have protested in the correct manner and the correct time. To refuse to play is the childish response to events that you don%u2019t agree with. The umpires made a judgement call, which they are entitled to do. Also, why are all the commentators consider ball tampering such a heinous form of cheating but consider other forms all right i.e. claiming a catch when you know it hasn%u2019t touched either bat or glove, or the ball hasn%u2019t carried, or the batsman not walking when he knows he has hit the ball?
Ed Moss, Swaffham

It is very unfortunate for the game of cricket. Upmire Hair took the decision in haste. This will have a negative impact on the game of cricket. I am surprised to see that even match refree's efforts to restart the game went in vain. ICC has to think over the whole issue and especially umpires should also be made answerable & penalised for making errors. I hope this incident will not have any impact on the ODI series. My appeal to all cricket-lovers "Let's FORGET this incident" and look forward to a thrilling ODI series.
Ijaz, J&K, India

Whatever the rights or wrongs regarding the evidence of ball tampering, I still believe Pakistan took the wrong approach to their protest. I believe they have shown a lack of respect towards the paying fans and the England team in the action they took.
Mark Almond, Southport

The manner of Pakistan's protest was utterly wrong. It looks like they may have a grievance but they should have made their their protest in a different way. Otherwise you will have teams staying in their dressing rooms or walking off the pitch if catches behind are not given or lbw's given if the batsman edges it onto his pads etc.
Barry, Dublin

There is only one loser in all of this and that is the great game of Test Cricket. What a shame after such a resurgence over the last 12 months.
Dave, Kenilworth

Mr Hair had absolutly no proof that the Pakistanis were cheating. It is more likely that the damage to the ball occured when Kevin Pieterson and co were smacking the ball into the stands, surely that would cause some sort of damage to the ball!
Steve Brown, Hull

If the ball is not in a condition to play then change it... after all our Kevin did smack it against the boards a few times.. but if the rules give no flexibility it implies there was cheating... maybe the rules need a thought and not a case for a "Hair cut"!!!
Simo, London

Following on from something that Michael Holding was saying yesterday was that crushed mints can change the surface of the ball. I hope I am correct in thinking that bowlers and fielders use saliva to shine up the ball. Inzi is often chewing gum, my theory is that maybe the minty stickyness of the gum has gone from the chewed chewing gum and slowly moved over to the ball to change its surface. (I personally dont think on purpose) but it has been misconstrewed. Is this a feasable possiblility??
Phill Hopkins, Waterlooville

Im astonished reading some of these messages. Sky went through all yesterday's play min by min on each camera and did not find a shred of evidence of ball tampering. Pakistan were right to protest. If the umpires have some "other" evidence then let's see it. Yet again the fans have been made to pay!
Khuram Munir, London

The chronology of events shows that Mr. Hair is an egotist, insensitive and unapproachable person. A few hawkish personalities like Darrell Hair whether in sports or in other establishments are responsible for many of the conflicts of our times because they don't give any significance to the term "negotiation". If Mr. Hair, the other hapless umpire and the ICC don't come up with the names of the Pakistani players they think were responsible for ball tampering, the BCCI and other cricket boards should express their solidarity with PCB and press for the immediate removal of Darrell Hair from the game of international cricket.
Sumeet, Bangalore

Pakistan captain Inzamam-ul-Haq and the team were within their rights to protest. Did Darrell Hair actually see a member of the Pakistan team tampering with a cricket ball? Has he got proof? If yes then where is it? I was watching, whole world was watching, no one noticed apart from Mr. Hair. First, if England got the ball to reverse swing and Hair found a scuff on the ball, what do you think he would have done? Do you think he would have claimed that the English tampered with the ball? Pakistan were right to protest against Hair's ludicrous decisions.
Naveed Akhtar, Rawalpindi

In almost every game of cricket, test or otherwise umpires make mistakes, most people believe in the swings and roundabouts theory, some you win some you lose. There are set rules if a team feels it has been treated unfairly. However in any sport I know of if you don't want to play, you lose. By this action alone I would ban Pakistan for a good period of time.
John, St Johns Antigua

I think that Pakistani team was well within their rights to protest as they were accused of cheating without any evidence at all. Even the match referee, Mike Proctor later on found nothing un-usually wrong with the ball, with the ball being 56 overs old, and Kevin Pietersen being in the form that he was, the condition of the ball was the way it is suppsoed to be when you get hit all over the ground. And somehow it always seems to be Darrell Hair with the controversial decisions against Pakistan, just like the one that he made in Pakistan's home series against England last winter in which Inzy was given out while he was merely trying to defend himself, and he also was the one who first accused Shoaib of chucking. I think it's pretty safe to say that he is a racist and should not be allowed to officiate in any more matches by the ICC.
Omer, Islamabad

From my childhood I heard that the cricket is the game of gentlemen. For that we need to accept the decisions of umpires to keep this saying! But whenever there comes the point of pride of nation, one should take steps to come over it. Now coming to this situation. Pakistani team was right to stay off the pitch. Umpire Darrel Hair has to provide proof of ball tampering because its a matter of national pride.
M. Imran, Stuttgart, Germany

Why is there so much talk of the umpires being wrong? Whilst the Pakistani team don't like the decision, the umpires are in control of the game. What happens next, do they decide when they are out LBW,or caught? I think not. The umpires did nothing wrong in respect to the rules, other than they gave the Pakistan team two chances to return after the Tea interval. Let's not lose sight of this, had they returned after the first refusal, maybe they would have made a point, instead of now basically calling the umpire a cheat or worse inferring he is a racist. The umpires during the course of a game are judge and jury, is that not the beauty of our much played and loved game? If the umpires had made a mistake, they are only human, what the Pakistan team did was totally unfounded, there are no rules or indeed any spirit of fair play in their actions. Come on ICC, show your metal and implement the rules against them.
N Thornton, Dewsbury

A lot has been said on this horrifying episode. I believe the ICC should be held accountable for letting this whole affair get out of hand. There is no point in having a match referee who (all due respects to Mike Proctor ) has no control over the situation. It is high time that the ICC realize there is a widening gap between it and the game itself.
Dr. Syed Iftikhar Ahmed, Jubail, Saudi Arabia

The blame for the debacle of the Oval Test lies soley on Darrell Hair's shoulders. He thinks he is a law on his own. Without proof how could he accuse Pakistan of ball tampering. None of the sky cameras of which there are 26 can proivde any evidence that the ball was tampered with. Mr Hair should be removed from the elite umpires list so that the game of cricket does not go through another controversy. Inzi's only fault is that he should have led his team off the field the moment Hair decided to change the ball. I feel sorry for the paying public and the millions of TV viewers who have missed out on a exciting finish to a good game of cricket.
Khalid Vayani, Feltham, Middlesex

Pakistan did not do the right thing by staying off the field of play and it cost them the match, however, if you accuse someone of cheating, you need to be able to prove it and as yet, I haven't seen any evidence that any of the Pakistanis tampered with the ball. With so much technology and cameras, it's hard to believe that anyone would be stupid enough to try and get away with it... especially after Shaid Afridi got caught pirouetting on a length!
Martin Jones, Buntingford

With the majority of the comments on this page seeming to criticise Darrell Hair, it would seem only right to set out that the procedures the umpires followed, not only Darrell Hair, were precisely as set out in the laws of the game. There has been no outright denial from the Pakistan team or camp, that any tampering had taken place, yet there has been a statement released saying they do not want Darrell Hair to stand in any future tests that Pakistan play in. Where for instance does it say that players should be warned, a step that the majority of your commentators suggested. Why should it be on camera? Although Sky Sports' coverage of the game is streets ahead of others, how many times throughout the course of a day's play do we have cameras panning around the ground, looking at the players balconies, the clouds etc? Because there is a lot of cameras on the ground they cannot cover absolutely everything, so the alleged tampering may have been missed, even by Sky.
Dave Elliott, Bristol

First, if England got the ball to reverse swing and Hair found a scuff on the ball. What do you think he would have done? Do you think he would have claimed that the English tampered with the ball? Second, you have to remember Pakistan were in the lead in this game and more likely to win, they had another 4 sessions in which to bowl out England and chase down the runs. Let's not forget the new ball was due in 8 overs! Pakistan was in control of this game but gave that all up because they were accused of being cheats.
Tom, Manchester

Pakistan captain Inzamam-ul-Haq and the team were in their rights to protest. Did Darrell Hair actually see a member of the Pakistan team tampering with a cricket ball? Has he got proof? If yes then where it is I was watching, whole world was watching, no one noticed apart from Mr. Hair. Yes it's not good for game but before making accusations one should know where i'ts going to end. To make the matter worse, ICC is supporting Mr. Hair. I am resting my case. To be answered by ICC.
Suhail, Dubai

If the ball gets into a bad state because of excessive shining, or bouncing of the ball, then a penalty of 5 runs seems reasonable since it could be argued that the state of the ball is normally the responsibility of the fielding team. This is the same penalty to the ball being hit into a helmet. No one should be accused of cheating and this should be a normal, albeit rare, part of the game. If this is not clear from the current laws then they need to be changed. The umpire has followed the rules, made his decision and (with the state of the match) an insignificant penalty applied.
Ralph Williams, Bradford

I think after talking to lot of people I can safely say on behalf of all the Pakistani public that whatever INZAMAM did was right and we totaly BACK him. We should not be playing any more matches under the umpiring of Hair, no matter they award the match to the other team, even if that is a world cup final. PAKISTAN have mentioned before to ICC that they don't want to play with Hair umpiring. Rameez correctly said the other day "He (Hair) thinks that he is a policeman." INZI you are the man...
Atiq ur Rehman, Islamabad, Pakistan

This match was looking at a classic finish that would have been remembered but instead thanks to lack of communication and sheer stupidity from both the umpires and the Pakistani team will be remembered as the day that cricket lost its status as a "gentleman's" game. Gentlemen would have reached an agreement that suited both sides, and got on with the game. The umpires had every right to give the game to England, as Pakistan had every right to stage a protest. Unfortunatley both actions were done with too much haste and not enough thought.
Charlie Cook, Leeds

Pakistan was both right and wrong to not take the field in objection to a ruling. There are avenues for dealing with grouses with umpiring decisions. However, Pakistan took a moral stance, and stood up against what they felt was an injustice to the spirit in which they played the game. I fully support their right to protest and object to a decision that labelled them cheats, inferred from the umpires' decision without a shred of evidence. The ball in the eyes of match referee Mike Procter was not meddled with. The correct decision, according to the rules of the game was made in the end to award England the match.
Stefan Hemmings, Kingston, Jamaica

I do have some amount of sympathy with the Pakistani players but they went about their protests in the wrong way. They should have completed the match and then protested afterwards. You have to ask would they have refused to come back on if that game was to win the series bearing in mind what a strong position they were in.. I think probably not!!!
Andrew, Manchester

I think the umpires were out of order, they had no proof of ball tampering and as a result have cast a slur on the whole of cricket. I think Pakistan were right to make their protest and the umpires should be called to account for their actions. I would like to thank the Pakistan team for staying on to complete the one day matches.
Brian Hook, Cardiff

I believe the series so far was played in a great spirit of the game by both sides. However, Inzy and his men have every right to protest in the way that they did. I believe the fellow players around the world would have stood by Inzamam as many also disapprove of Darrell Hair being in charge of an international test match. He is an umpire who has lost respect from most Asian players such as Muralitharan, Shoaib Akhtar and a few others as they have been accused of "chucking" the ball where later he was proved to be wrong. Therefore , Pakistan's pride and honour was on the line.
Zeeshan Hanif (Proud Pakistan Supporter), Nelson

I'm a died-in-the-wool England fan, so much so that I'm going to Aus this winter but now my sympathies are with the Pakistanis. If there is evidence of ball tampering, the paying public are entitled to have seen or heard it by now since WE directly pay the umpires wages (yes, I know about sponsorship and so on but there wouldn't be any of that without supporters). If there isn't, clearly the umpires are in the wrong and should have been made to apologise. When DID the umpires get more important than the game?
Bronwen Walmsley, Louth

I agree Pakistan had a reason to protest. However they should have waited until the end of the day's play, therefore not spoiling the day for the thousands who had paid a lot of money for tickets. It was such an anti-climax.
Ashley King, Petersfield

Whatever the rights or wrongs of the umpires' decision, regarding the ball, the Pakistan team were entirely at fault with regard to what followed. I understand that they were warned by Mr Hair, of the consequences of not returning to the field and still refused to do so. When they did eventually come out, they must have known that the umpires were not going to return, after all they know as well as any other cricket follower that the umpires always take to the field first. The Pakistan re-entry to the arena was therefore just for show and an attempt to get the sympathy vote. By then it was too late, whatever sympathy they would have had, disppeared with their childish actions. We CANNOT have umpires' decisions treated this way. Otherwise, it's back to the playground!
Alan Pearson, Perian, Spain

Pakistan were right to protest against Hair's ludicrous decisions. However, I feel they went about it in the wrong way. It would have been much better for the nation of Pakistan to have defeated England and then to have protested; perhaps by refusing to play under the "Anti-Pakistan Laws of Darrell Hair". He is the one who needs to be punished. You just cannot do something which isn't within the laws of the game!
OTK, Edinburgh

As far as I can determine, no actual evidence of any of the Pakistani players tampering with the match ball, has been produced or witnessed. If any "offence" with the ball had taken place, I am sure that the people at Sky would have had it on camera, as almost nothing is missed in this hi-tech age of multiple cameras. We need to hear a statement from the Umpires as soon as possible, but will the ICC sanction this? The ONLY positive from this debacle, is that new laws will be required to ensure that this farce never happens again.
Roger Whichelow, Maidstone

A very sad day indeed. The series has been played in a very friendly atmosphere with the teams getting on well and now this. The ICC are to blame as they're the ones in charge of running the game - what was Mike Proecter doing - waiting for the ICC in Dubai to tell him what to do? When England won the ashes last year it was great bowling using the reverse swing cleverly and when Pakistan use it - it's cheating, please!
R Zuberi, London

When the England batsmen and umpires returned to the field, Darrel Hair flicked the bails onto the ground, but the other umpire put the bails at his end into his pocket. This indicates to me that while Hair was certain that the game was over, the other umpire was not so sure.
Steve Ellison, Wigan

Perhaps the darkest period in the history of cricket, and this umpire has something wrong with the sub continent teams, 1995: Murali chucking row, then the Shoaib chucking row and more recently the controversial run out of Inzi in the Pak-Eng test series in Pak. It seemed yesterday that in charge of not only the match but also the whole ICC is Darrell Hair as no one, not even Mike Proctor, did anything to rectify this horrible situation of cricket. It's time that some action is taken against such umpires before this gets out of hand.
Hussain, Lahore, Pakistan

Darrel Hair is responsible for Pakistan's defeat in the series. We being Pakistani strongly condemned his decision regarding ball tampering. We salute Inzi's decision and give him full support.
Zaka, Karachi

If Pakistan were so incensed by the allegation of ball tampering they should have made their protest there and then and walked off the field, which I feel all would accept. The manner of the way they made their protest was unacceptable and the game was correctly awarded to England.
Dave Telford, Consett

The Pakistani team, manager, and PCB has not denied ball tampering, only that they are upset with being accused! Their refusal not to take the field, not once but twice, displays the spoilt child syndrome. The umpires in my opinion, are the sole judges of the game on the field, and I respect their judgement even if I don't like the results. But now the Pakistani team and believe that Darrel Hair is not acceptable too them - utter rubbish! He is a fine umpire, and straight with his decisions. And the same for both sides, you cannot pick and choose the umpires on your own whim!
Stewart Allen, Regen, Germany

Cricket, and the general public, was the loser today. Umpires need to handle such situations with far more delicacy by initially having a quiet word with the captain of the Pakistan team (in this case), to warn him of the consequences of a rapid deterioration in the condition of the ball. After regular checks, if this is not heeded then the ball is to be changed. Overly officious and tactless Umpiring sparked the anger within the Pakistan camp. Their reaction, while unprofessional, was an emotional one based on a heartfelt grievance. The saddest aspect of all in this whole debacle is that in this commercial age we end up in a situation where although BOTH sides subsequently were prepared to continue the game (as with bad light conditions), the rules preclude this as the Umpires effectively can overrride their wishes. Result? We, the public, are deprived of a potentially exciting finish to a good Test Match.
Richard Gloster, London

In any game of cricket played, at any level, the Umpires are the people with the final say on any matter while the game is play. It is their duty to adhere to and administer the laws of the game. Should a player, team or anyone else have a problem with the way in which a metter is dealt with on the field then it is dealt with after the game is over. That is the way cricket works. If you don't like it - then change the rules. Don't blame the Umpires for doing their duty.
Tracey Rudge, London

A very sad day for cricket. Nobody seemed to mention that just before Mr Hair looked at the ball KP had hit two sixes into the crowd!? I'm no expert but I reckon being on the recieving end of a KP maximum would cause a bit of a scuff!
R Todd, Beverley

Absolute disgrace!!! Umpire Darrell should not umpire another game as far as I'm concerned!! And I'm appalled with the views most of the English fans/media/commentators took!! Take off your racist blinkers, all fault lay with the UMPIRE. You cannot accuse anyone until you have proof! In this case none. Inzy looked bemused and dazzled as to what was going on and was right to take his stance, which was a stand-off saying that this aint the first time with this umpire.
Andrew Walker, Birmingham

I admit the whole thing is a shambles but after reading all the papers this morning the general consenus is that it was the umpires who were at fault. No one has really concluded that it ws indeed the Pakistanis who didn't take the field after tea and as the laws state, thus in effect foreited the game. Has anyone actually questioned whether they were indeed ball tampering? Umpire Hair officiates over a lot of matches and thus in his judgement something wasn't correct with the ball - calling this biased and racist against the Pakistani team as a whole seems a little far fetched - after all, why would an Aussie favour England?!
T Warren, London

The worst part of this farce was the chronic lack of information for us paying fans in the ground. The first announcement we got that told us anything was at 6:15 to tell us that play was over for the day!!
Mike Haller, Knebworth

It's not the first time that such accusations have been mentioned in the same breath as Pakistani Cricket. Regardless of that, refusal to play constitutes an automatic forfeit, and in cricketing terms that is as black and white as the LBW rule. If they wanted to make the point that they didn't cheat they should have used the correct channels, not gone on strike faster than a French transport union.
Chris Bray, London

Pakistan were right to stay off the pitch - they had been accused, convicted and punished for cheating with no evidence whatsoever. The laws of the game say the umpires were right as well. What is so frustrating is that no compromise could be reached and we have all been deprived of a thrilling climax to what has been a very good series. I blame stubborness on all sides - but mostly the umpires.
Peter Hall, London