"Cricket's rulers caved in to pressure and intimidation from the sport's biggest powerhouse by reaching a shabby compromise that ensures India's tour of Australia will go on whatever the consequences to their authority," screamed a column in Daily Mail.

"It is simply that India, who generate more money from cricket than all the other Test nations combined, are indisputably running the world game, not the governing body," Paul Newman wrote.

"How can the ICC decide to sack Bucknor from this series, even though he had a shocker, when their own Standard Playing Conditions dictate that 'neither team will have the right of objecting to an umpiring appointment'? he asked.

"Bucknor deserved better than to be ruthlessly tossed aside by the ICC at the whim of India's powerbrokers."

The newspaper also carried another column which said the ICC has dumped a black umpire to appease a team accused of harbouring a ‘racist’.

"A shudder must have run through every white coat, every match official in every sport, as Bucknor became the scapegoat," Paul Hayward wrote.

Calling cricket's one of the worst crises as ‘Bolly-line crisis’, The Times said the ICC had appeased India by removing Steve Bucknor.

'ICC yields to Indian fury to save tour' ran a headline in the Guardian saying India have yet to taste success against Australia in this series, but they certainly recorded a convincing win over the International Cricket Council.

"Bucknor had been in the Indians' crosshairs for several days and yesterday paid the price," wrote Alex Brown.

India's counter charge of Brag Hogg having used abusive language directing towards Anil Kumbke and MS Dhoni was also projected by the Briotish media as tit-for-tat action.

"There is more than a touch of pettiness in this tit-for-tat exchange, especially as most Australian sides of the past would have been reduced to ruins if players had been censured for such mild language," wrote Simon Briggs in the Daily Telegraph.

He, however, said the ICC decision to remove Bucknor was a practical step.