SA v Pakistan, 1st Test, Johannesburg, 2nd day February 2, 2013

Pakistan angry over Hot Spot decisions


Pakistan were left privately seething as four incidents involving Hot Spot technology went against them during a mauling by South Africa in the first Test at the Wanderers.

Although none of the match participants or team administrators would comment on the technology, the Pakistan manager and coach were seen in animated discussion with the third umpire after the day's play. Dav Whatmore later told the media: "Any comments will be done in the right channels."

Whatmore was visibly upset after Misbah-ul-Haq was given out on review in the morning session. Jacques Kallis appealed for a catch at the wicket which was turned down on-field but South Africa referred. The camera showed only a faint mark which disappeared quickly and the decision was then overturned by the TV umpire Steve Davis. Misbah also showed his annoyance as he walked off.

Pakistan's anger was heightened because a similar decision against the South Africa batsman, Faf du Plessis, was upheld as 'not out' yesterday. Pakistan reviewed an appeal for caught behind by Rahat Ali against du Plessis when he was on 21 and given 'not out' by Billy Bowden. Despite a faint mark on Hot Spot, the decision was upheld.

Later on, an appeal for caught behind against AB de Villiers resulted in the same decision. De Villiers indicated that he padded the ball away but even that did not show up on the Hot Spot camera.

The final incident took place when de Villiers survived again on review in the second innings. He was given out lbw to Saeed Ajmal and immediately gestured to his bat to indicated he had hit the ball. Although the Hot Spot camera did not show an edge, the decision was overturned and de Villiers continued batting.

At the post-day press conference Whatmore was reluctant to talk about Hot Spot. "I wouldn't like to comment on that because it is part and parcel of umpiring decisions but any comments will be done in the right channels," he said.

Neither did he use the issue to play down the total dominance of South Africa's pace attack, led by Dale Steyn, who finished with 6 for 8. "I've never seen two hours of relentless, incredible pace bowling such as I have witnessed today," he said.

SuperSport's producer Louwrens Rensburg told ESPNcricinfo that the Hot Spot cameras were in perfect working condition. He added that in the current "atmospheric conditions," which included heat and bright sunshine faint edges would only show up slightly.

A match official confirmed early in the day that the umpires and match referee, Jeff Crowe, were satisfied with the technology available to them.

Sky TV promoted more sensitive Hot Spot cameras for South Africa's series in England last summer that they claimed were more reliable.

Firdose Moonda is ESPNcricinfo's South Africa correspondent

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Hardik on February 3, 2013, 16:24 GMT

    Ban this DRS. Ridiculous!

  • Johnathon on February 3, 2013, 16:11 GMT

    You guys need to understand that the 3rd umpire also has access to the mike which he turns up very loud to hear and use during these decisions. It is a combination of hot spot (which by itself is not too reliable) and NOISE. Based on the two, the umpire makes the decision. If nothing shows on hot spot, but there is a NOISE when the ball passes the bat, it is out. Hot spot itself is not very reliable for small nicks

  • Bimal on February 3, 2013, 16:05 GMT

    Now that is enough evidence for India's stand regarding DRS.....Make it flawless and then counter point

  • Girish on February 3, 2013, 16:05 GMT

    Got to give credit to Whatmore for airing any compliants through appropriate channels.

  • Asaad on February 3, 2013, 16:00 GMT

    It doesn't matter how faint the edge is, as long as there is an edge of any sort, and decisions are CONSISTENT throughout the sport, the DRS as imperfect as it is, is still better than no DRS.

    But this does the raise the prospect that certain teams, and certain ranks, mean that all 50-50 calls go in your favor.

  • Rupesh on February 3, 2013, 15:44 GMT

    These are just DRS growing pains. Turning hotspot into judgement calls is asking for trouble. There have to be specific policies, decided in advance, about what counts as out and what doesn't. What is "faint"? Come up with a threshold. Above the threshold, it is a nick. Below the threshold is unclear and you stick to umpires on-field decision.

  • Hanif on February 3, 2013, 15:25 GMT

    I saw the first SA innings hotspot decisions. I was not satisfied. Even though the 3rd umpire gave FdP not out I thought there was a faint edge. The commentators started to discuss this after a few overs and it became a hot topic. I think it was DB or FdP edged to keeper, he walked and umpire gave him out. THe broadcaster showed the hotspot very briefly and took it off. When I rewound and saw it again there was no hotspot showing (even though the batsman clealy edged it and walked off himself). What is going on???? I think the 3rd umpire should be checking every edge, appeal or no appeal.

  • uncle bob on February 3, 2013, 15:12 GMT

    Pakistani fans and players are making unnecessary excuses for the ugly performance of their batsman. DRS is intended to help the game of cricket and has exactly done that. In the circumstance, the correct decisions were made using DRS/hotspot/tracker/hawkeye/ third umpire etc. Thanks to $15000/ day technology, we are able to minimize howlers. Technology is the future of cricket. Pakistani fans should learn to accept it. BCCI should also learn to accept it. lol....

  • Shakti on February 3, 2013, 13:41 GMT

    Amazingly,Whenever India or Pakistan tour South Africa,decisions turn tough tours into nearly impossible situations.South Africa always get the better of decisions.If you need proof,have a look at how many times Andrew Flintoff had to dismiss Jacques Kallis to finally get him given out on South Africa's previous tour to England.That does make averaging 56 a lot easier.

  • abhijeet on February 3, 2013, 13:12 GMT

    @moBlue. You have hit nail on the head. Noboay sees the argument. They only see who is making it. So far I have got not answer to the question "Why shoudn't we just use a TV replay instead of Hotspot/Hawkeye/Virtual Eye if it is only to correct a howler.". I haven't got an answer to the question "Why should we pay $5000 a day to these companies when a fair number of member nations are in a financial strife". Jayzuz. May be you can try to answer it