BOB WOOLMER was feeling so distraught on Sunday night that he considered resigning as the coach of Pakistan.

“If I had done, it might have been wrongly interpreted as an admission of guilt, but I was not happy about being involved in what occurred at the Oval. I love cricket, its ethics and its traditions, and this has rocked my sensibilities,” he told The Times. He changed his mind after discussions with his wife, Gill, and friends yesterday.

Woolmer’s view is that any allegation of ball-tampering should be explained by the umpire to the captain on the pitch at the time it occurs. “This incident is harming cricket and that is what I do not like,” Woolmer said. “Considering that the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) wrote to the ICC before the series, asking, in so many words, that Hair should not stand, if possible. I did not have the chance to talk to him on Sunday. However, if I do this week, naturally I shall ask him what proof he had that there was tampering to the ball.”

As a former player accustomed to colleagues gouging the ball — one of his former Kent team-mates would pick at it repeatedly — Woolmer examined the one on Sunday and could not see any marks that would not have been made in the normal course of 56 overs being bowled.

“There was hardly any reverse swing at all, including when Alastair Cook was out, and Sky could not find any footage of tampering,” he said. “Mike Procter (the match referee) allowed me to see the ball and in the code of conduct breach report to Inzamam, he cited no individual bowler or fielder over the condition of the ball. Therefore, the captain had to take responsibility.”

The upshot of the present sensitivities in the Islamic world is that this kind of decision is potentially inflammatory. “All the Muslim players are sensitive individuals who are very opposed to terrorist activities,” Woolmer said. “To accuse Pakistan of cheating brings these tensions to the fore. I wonder whether Darrell realised the consequences of his actions. Indeed, when he spoke to Inzamam in the dressing-room when he came in for less than 30 seconds to try to persuade us to take the field, he was abrasive and short.

“When Inzamam questioned him over why the ball was changed, he said he was not there to discuss that, only to find out whether Pakistan would be taking the field.

“It is no secret that relations with him have been strained over the past year, and that attitude in part turned Inzamam against going on to the field. It was a case of an irresistible force hitting an immovable object. The next 20 minutes were spent by the chairmen of the PCB and the ECB, as well as myself, trying to persuade him to go back out.

“It was not true that Zaheer Abbas, as manager, was locked out. I had asked every player to swear on oath that he had not tampered with the ball. They all did and as they are a very religious bunch, I tended to believe them. I always feel the game should continue, but bearing in mind the accusations of ball-tampering and cheating, I was torn between my principles and a desire to help the side.”

One suggestion he put to the players was that, while he agreed that there should be some form of protest, it would be better if the players went and sat down in the middle for five or ten minutes and hence the match would not be forfeited. “But they were all highly sensitive about being charged with cheating, as was Waqar Younis, our bowling coach, who I am sure still harbours a grievance after being accused of ball-tampering 14 years ago.

“Maybe we could have handled the situation better and I must apologise to the spectators, but the players were eventually prepared to go out and play. While my initial reaction was to resign, I have now reconsidered this. I enjoy this talented bunch of cricketers and a trip to West Indies for the World Cup (next year) would be hard to miss.”