Inzamam charged in cheating row

Cricket:  Pakistan captain Inzamam-ul-Haq has been charged with bringing the game into disrepute by the International Cricket…

Cricket:  Pakistan captain Inzamam-ul-Haq has been charged with bringing the game into disrepute by the International Cricket Council.

Inzamam is deemed responsible for the actions that led to his team forfeiting the fourth Test against England at The Oval yesterday.

Pakistan did not return to the field after the tea interval in protest at the umpires' decision to change the ball on suspicion it had been tampered with.

Inzamam will now face a hearing before match referee Ranjan Madugalle on Friday in London, when he will answer the disrepute charge as well as one for changing the condition of the ball.

READ MORE

Inzamam could be banned for up to four Test matches or eight one-day internationals if found guilty of bringing the game into disrepute.

He could also be fined his entire match fee or handed an extra one-game ban if it is proved the ball was tampered with.

The charges were brought by on-field umpires Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove after consultation with third and fourth umpires Peter Hartley and Trevor Jesty.

Madugalle was not officiating in the match but has been asked to conduct the hearing as the game's referee, Mike Procter, is likely to be called upon to give evidence.

Madugalle refereed the first three matches of the series.

Play was halted during England's second innings when Hair and Doctrove became suspicious about the condition of the ball.

They ordered it be changed and England were awarded five penalty runs. Pakistan were incensed and initially refused to return to the field after the tea interval.

The match was then abandoned with England awarded victory and a 3-0 series win.

Pakistan coach Bob Woolmer said of the incident: "I think there was a genuine feeling that, by inference, we had been cheating.

"I personally asked every member of the team, under oath basically, whether they had at any time scratched the ball during the innings and to a man they said no.

"I went to ask to see the ball. I looked at the ball and came to my own conclusions. I didn't see any undue tampering with the ball - and in 38 years I have seen tampering with balls.

"It had been hit into the stands on numerous occasions by Kevin Pietersen. I didn't think there were any undue marks, but that is a personal opinion.

"Having asked my team I can concur with them there was probably just damage from concrete and whatever."  Agencies