Darrell Hair, the controversial Australian umpire on the ICC Panel, must be a relieved man after the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), the law-making body for the game, decided, following its two-day meeting in New Delhi, that the fateful decision taken by him to award the 2006 Test at the Oval to England against Pakistan should be upheld and made to stand. And this, despite the ICC having struck it down and ruled that Hair was wrong and the result should be a draw. Hair was suspended, and threatened to take legal action against the ruling body of the game, but after parleys, was reinstated in October 2007.

The MCC meeting chaired by former England Test captain and chairman, Tony Lewis, decreed the ICC had no right to change the result and Hair’s decision would stand.

The official statement stated: “The ICC has no powers under the laws of cricket to decide that results should be altered, whether it feels it “inappropriate or otherwise”, Lewis said. According to him, “The ICC’s decision is wrong and sets a very dangerous precedent. Cricket is the worse for this decision.”

This is a slap on the face for the ICC, which, of late, has been under pressure from the Asian bloc for favouring what has always been known as the “White” bloc. And hence, a recent trend has been to favour the former, because it seems to control the purse strings.

The Indian board has for long been the richest and the word has gone round that you offend the BCCI at your peril. But there is major resentment building, especially against the BCCI, which has been trying to ride roughshod. The Asian countries have never appreciated Hair the umpire, though many cricketers rate him as one among the very best.

But there is an impression that he has a colour bias, for which there is no real basis. The initial reaction when he decided Pakistan had forfeited the Oval Test was, he did so out of bias and never gave the Inzamam-ul-Haq-led Pakistan team the time or the opportunity to explain. But that is not the umpire’s responsibility. He has only to go by the laws of the game, which he did.

Now, with the MCC vindicating him and upholding his decision, Hair has every right to hold his head high. His colleagues on the ICC elite panel can take strength from his stand. It shows that implementation of the laws cannot be influenced by purse strings. No wonder Raman Subba Rao, a former England Test cricketer and respected administrator, once called the ICC a “post office”!