Fix this ICC, before it’s too late

There are dot-ball anomalies that the International Cricket Council needs to address before they end up causing severe embarrassment

Imagine this scenario.  World Cup Final.  Two runs to win off the last ball.  Jos Buttler hits one to cover and starts running. Kane Williamson dives and takes the catch. NZ celebrate. Buttler walks off crestfallen until the TV umpire checks the replay and discovers that the catch was not cleanly taken.  It’s a tie.  Super Over coming up.

But hang on…going back to November 1, the precedent has been set.  Identical situation, dropped catch but it’s deemed a dot ball.  So NZ win the World Cup. Chaos ensues.

That’s exactly what happened on Tuesday night at the Gabba.  Buttler was dropped, they took the single but after the replays, when the catch was disallowed, Buttler was back on strike and it was deemed a dot ball.  How can that be possible?  It was a dropped catch, just like when Moeen Ali dropped a straightforward catch later in the game and the batsman was awarded the run.

This is an anomaly that the ICC need to address before it ends up causing severe embarrassment. To borrow from George Orwell, are all dropped catches equal or are some more equal than others?  Why was England denied the run that resulted from Williamson’s drop?  Fair enough—if it was deemed a fair catch, dot (wicket) ball and the new batsman is on strike.  But why was England disadvantaged for Williamson’s miss?  If this happened on the last ball of the game, would the ruling still be the same?

There is an argument to suggest that as soon as the umpire calls for a TV replay, the ball is dead.  Or as soon as a player asks for a referral. This argument is flawed.  What happens if there is a bump ball or a contentious catch in the outfield and the batters come back for the second run because it’s a huge field like the MCG?  If a fielder was quick-thinking enough, they would claim the catch even if they knew they hadn’t caught it. After the replay rules that it was not a fair catch, using this latest precedent, the runs would not be awarded but it’s not even deemed a dead ball that needs to be re-bowled.  It’s a dot ball. 

Take it one step further: Ben Stokes was out lbw in the last over.  On replay, it was umpire’s call.  What if the ball went for a boundary or even one run?  If the DRS referral showed the ball was missing the stumps, are the runs awarded?  Is it deemed a dead ball or a dot ball?  That mistake by the umpire could determine the World Cup.

The ICC or MCC may have to reconsider what the ruling is when it comes to referrals and at what point the ball is deemed dead. Otherwise, it becomes open to a smart cricketer gaming the system to ensure that as soon as he makes the appeal or claims the catch, even if later proven to be a farcical appeal, any subsequent runs or a change of striker is deemed invalid.

My mid-day piece from a few months is worth reprising in light of what we’ve seen thus far. At the time, I warned against teams taking liberties against the new ball on October pitches in Australia.  My exact words were, “As tempting as it may be to fill your team with bash merchants, the pitches at that time of year, especially after an incredibly wet winter, will require some circumspection and a more conventional Powerplay approach than what statisticians might glean from merely looking at Big Bash numbers.”

Almost every game thus far, with the exception of Finn Allen’s early assault against Australia on the very first night, has vindicated my theory.  This isn’t Asia—you can’t just blaze away at the start as insurance against the ball getting softer and reverse swinging at the death.  The team that wins the Cup will be the team who don’t lose too many wickets early and rely on almost doubling their score in the second half of the innings. Likewise, bowling attacks need to use their most lethal bowlers upfront to break through because it really doesn’t matter who it is—your best will still go the distance at the end so use him at the start when he is at his most dangerous.

In that same article in July, I made the point that it would be sheer madness to jettison Virat Kohli.  His record on Australian pitches where conventional batting is key, is second to none. I said it then and I’ll say it now (quoting a famous philosopher) that “a champion is one who is remembered. A legend is one who is never forgotten.” 

Clearly, some over-enthusiastic fan took that too far when trying to connect with King Kohli at the Crown Hotel!

Michael Jeh is a Brisbane-based former first-class cricketer 
Send your feedback to mailbag@mid-day.com
The views expressed in this column are the individual’s and don’t represent those of the paper.

"Exciting news! Mid-day is now on WhatsApp Channels Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!