Reversal of fortune

I'm glad Michael Holding acted on his feelings and quit the ICC Cricket Committee. The decision to change the result of the Oval test is one of the most bizarre rulings I've seen this body make. Notice the broad outlines of the precedent that has been established: the outcome of a match is not felt to be the correct one by one of the teams for a variety of reasons; an appeal is made; the outcome is reversed. Consider the following minor variation: a match is played and ends amidst great controversy; one team loses and charges an umpire with bias and incompetence, demanding that he be replaced for the next game; the umpire is replaced, thus implicitly acknowledging the veracity of the charges laid against him; later, the team files a request with the ICC Cricket Committee suggesting that since its charges have been 'proven', the result of the controversial game be changed. There are only a few differences between the Bucknor and Hair cases. Should the BCCI ask for a draw in the Sydney test, given all their procedural and substantive complaints? The mind boggles. What have the ICC done?