30 October,2023 08:02 AM IST | Mumbai | Sunil Gavaskar
Pakistan players react to the Umpire’s Call that went against them during their match against South Africa in Chennai recently. Pics/Getty Images
While this ICC World Cup has had some expected results, there have been only two matches that have been nail-biting and gone down to the wire.
The South Africa v Pakistan match, while not going to the last over was a nail-biter as Pakistan were just one wicket from a win. The other heart stopper was the game between the Trans Tasman rivals Australia and New Zealand which finished in Australia's favour off the last ball of the 50th over.
Also Read: Chameera to replace injured SL pacer Lahiru
These were just the kind of finishes the World Cup needed for the other results, which were pretty much on expected lines. There were surprises, of course, with a spirited Netherlands putting one across the South Africans once again repeating their win in the T20 World Cup in Australia last year.
Afghanistan, lording over England and then defeating Pakistan, were also results that were not really expected. Just like it takes batters some time to understand how to go on from 20s to 30s to get to a century, these wins could well be the start of an understanding of the winning formula for Afghanistan. They play such exciting, full hearted cricket and are such a joy to watch. Their fielding, especially the catching can be frustratingly amateurish and has cost them wins in the tournament. If they had held on to those chances they could well have been in the top half of the points table rather than where they are now.
The South Africa v Pakistan game had loads of controversy about the DRS and the umpire's call. The DRS was brought in mainly to avoid the absolute howler of a decision that are sometimes seen in the game.
It was brought in during the time when I was Chairman of the ICC Cricket Committee. There was a lot of animated discussion about this before the committee accepted to recommend it to the Executive Board to bring it into the game. I was of the opinion that since it was to get rid of shockingly bad decisions it should be a referral between the TV umpire and the on-field umpires.
At that time players who showed any dissent against an umpire's decision got pulled up before the match referee and could get fined for doing so. So I was against the players challenging the decision and asking for a referral. What if a player in the heat of the moment forgot that his team had used up its allotted reviews and openly asked for a review? Wasn't that showing dissent and should he then be lined up before the match referee? For me therefore the best way to use the DRS was if the TV umpire saw a wrong decision and so could come in before the next ball was bowled and reverse it. The committee eventually decided that teams should be allowed three reviews per innings.
Today the controversy is about the umpire's not out call staying even if the review shows the ball clipping the stumps. The argument is that if a part of the ball is seen brushing the stumps then the bails are going to fall off with the impact anyway, so the batter should be given out and there should be no umpire's call. I can assure you that if this comes about every Test match will finish in two days, even a T20 game may not last the full innings. At the highest level with bowlers being accurate the ball is going to clip the top of the stumps or the sides of the off and leg stump and virtually every referral will show that. So, it is essential to keep the umpire's call in the game otherwise most games will finish very quickly and within the stipulated time or overs.
The rules and playing conditions are the same for all the teams and the luck of the game can go either way. Umpiring errors are also part of the game, just like good batters getting out to full tosses or half-pitchers and top fielders dropping simple catches. Nobody is perfect, and errors are what make every sport interesting.
So let the umpire's call stay.
PMG
