India v England, 2nd Test, Mumbai, 3rd day

England asked for Bairstow reprieve

Sidharth Monga

November 25, 2012

Comments: 146 | Text size: A | A

The Wankhede Test had a tryst with minor controversy when Jonny Bairstow was given out caught at silly point even though the ball had hit Gautam Gambhir's helmet before he completed the catch.

The dismissal came in what turned out to be the last ball before lunch, and everybody - the batsmen and the umpires - walked off satisfied with the dismissal. According to England sources, their director of cricket, Andy Flower, approached the match referee, Roshan Mahanama, to ask for the decision to be reversed. Mahanama informed him that as Bairstow had left the field of play, the decision could only be withdrawn if India's captain, MS Dhoni, withdrew his appeal on the umpires' request. Dhoni, with the support of his coach, Duncan Fletcher, chose not to do so.

The only replays shown before the break were inconclusive, and more importantly unsuspecting. No one had explored the possibility of an unfair catch going into the break. Thirty-five minutes later, replays in the live transmission confirmed the ball had indeed hit the helmet. Law 32 is clear that a catch is not considered fair if the ball hits a fielder's external protective equipment before the catch is completed.

The Law, 32.3 (e), says: "A fielder catches the ball after it has touched an umpire, another fielder or the other batsman. However, it is not a fair catch if the ball has previously touched a protective helmet worn by a fielder. The ball will then remain in play."


Jonny Bairstow drives on the off side, Mumbai A v England XI, Mumbai, 1st day, November 3, 2012
Jonny Bairstow fell for 9 but the legitimacy of his dismissal was called into question © Getty Images
Enlarge

At the end of the day's play, Gambhir said he knew the ball had hit the grille before he completed the catch, but he was not completely aware of the Law. "It happened in such a quick time, that by the time I realised it…" he said. "I personally felt when we went into lunch that once it hits your body and then the grille, that's out. Just didn't come straight off the grille. It just happened so quickly that later on I got to know. I haven't had a word with MS that whether we wanted to call him back or not."

This would not have been a big issue but because the new batsman had not yet walked in and there was a 40-minute break in action, there was scope for the officials and captains to get together and correct the decision. However, after lunch, Samit Patel, the new batsman, walked out with Kevin Pietersen. The scenes were reminiscent of Trent Bridge in 2011 when Ian Bell was reinstated during the tea break after being run out, but the outcome here was different.

India do have recent history of calling batsmen back. At Trent Bridge, Bell seemed to have wrongly assumed the last ball before tea had gone for four, and had started to walk off for tea when India ran him out. The umpires ruled Bell out, but England asked India to reconsider their appeal during the tea break. Twenty minutes later, India walked out to the crowd's jeers, which turned into cheers when they realised Bell had been recalled.

In an ODI in Brisbane in February this year, R Ashwin mankaded Sri Lanka middle-order batsman Lahiru Thirimanne after having warned him previously, but when the umpires asked India if they wanted to continue with the appeal, the stand-in captain Virender Sehwag withdrew it. Sehwag later said, "It's soft, but that's the way we are."

Sidharth Monga is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Sidharth Monga

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by kjkool82 on (November 27, 2012, 5:35 GMT)

Only thing any of the players involved in ths are guilty of is a bit of naievity. Not the greatest thing for them not to know the rule, but if Bairstow walked then so be it, end of story. Do have to say that I am starting to lose respect for Andy Flower continually running to the match referee when things arent going his way. Toughen up princess, it all levels out, did you by chance pull young Mr Trott aside after his claimed catch in the first test? I think not.

Posted by ahassan on (November 26, 2012, 19:41 GMT)

ICC should make DRS compulsory for all the teams and bear it's cost also. ICC is a rich body and should do all it can to run the game smoothly. Australia and South Africa are playing with DRS and there are no controversies. Check the reports of the Captains and Managers and you will come to know that series' with DRS run more smoothly than the series without DRS.

Posted by Meety on (November 26, 2012, 5:54 GMT)

@ pitch_curator on (November 26 2012, 03:49 AM GMT) - no matter of whether you think the Punter "no-catch" was a catch or not, it NEVER bounced!! The ball bouncing was never the issue, it was he caught the ball before it touched the ground. I believe he caught that, but am happy to go with the umpire's decision regarding benefit of the doubt.

Posted by pitch_curator on (November 26, 2012, 5:44 GMT)

@ Humprey Hollins -- Wasnt Bell aware that you need to complete the run and stay in your crease till the ball becomes dead and the umpire calls over?? Then what was he doing running around like an idiot on the field when the ball was in play? THAT is called cheating because he would have run an overthrow if the ball was not collected cleanly by Dhoni.

Posted by xylo on (November 26, 2012, 5:03 GMT)

If there is one thing that England could ask, that would be a book on the laws of the game and ask everyone to read it.

Posted by Fast_Track_Bully on (November 26, 2012, 5:00 GMT)

@ Front-Foot-Lunge. ha ha ha it is clear that you have hidden agenda against India. Read the last paragraph of this report and comment. India won fir -play award for its acts in the field. And regarding appealing, I just wonder how can you forgot the appealing for every ball from Engalnd bowlers from ball 1!!. Its a pure tactics from England and ICC should ban those players for it. English players think they do not have to obey the rules! what a shame for the gentleman's game!

Posted by   on (November 26, 2012, 4:51 GMT)

Front-Foot-Lunge- Seems like you are an expert in Spirit of the Game - especially India. I hope you are referring to the fact that some of the players may be inebriated after consuming alcohol. If however you are referring to the Bairstow decision,

I am thinking you are a Pommie supporter and & as such you don;t like it. wake up son and get your facts right. Jog your memory to Ian Bell being recalled, Thirimanne being called back, BTW, what about a certain Mr. Trott persisting with his appeal, even after he clearly dropped the ball. If you are looking for an excuse- pls at least give an exciting and original one.

Posted by baskar_guha on (November 26, 2012, 4:49 GMT)

@Front Foot Lunge

No reasonable-minded person takes what you say seriously even if you are making a valid point. Such is your bias, bordering on prejudice, that come through your comments.

Posted by Rahul_78 on (November 26, 2012, 4:36 GMT)

Flower going to the match referee and asking the reversal of the decision does make sense. What doesnt make sense is match referee instead requesting the umpires to ask MSD to reconsider his appeal. Why should a law maker and a judge be asking the inquirer to withdrew his appeal just because they are not certain of their decision or in fact have erred in making the right decision. This is not fair on MSD. In today's environment when each and every ball, wicket, decision is dissected to the hilt by pundits and fans it puts a lot of pressure on the captains to walk the fine line of morality. Captain is not a dictator or president who should have power to overrule the decisions made by the highest bodies.

Posted by RajitD on (November 26, 2012, 4:31 GMT)

@ Foot-Foot-Lunge and Death Knell. Did you see what Trott did in Ahmedabad? And what happened to Bell last year? Let the on field umpires decide, and stop this whining.

Posted by cricket-is-best on (November 26, 2012, 4:31 GMT)

@front foot lunge..u must be jealous of the fact that india are one of the fronntline team so far as spirit of cricket goes...who won spirit of cricket award last year ? ian bell incident..just once when india decided to go with the rules and "not decide to be soft" u go on saying what u want...!!! what about jonathon trott claiming that catch??

Posted by   on (November 26, 2012, 4:19 GMT)

This shouldn't be an issue of "did they cheat or didn't they". The notion of teams playing fair is arcane in modern professional sport. The Indian team shouldn't have been asked to reverse their appeal. If the dismissal was clearly in breach of the laws of the game, the decision should have been reversed. The involvement of the appealing team shouldn't be required. DRS is spreading throughout world sport, and will continue to do so. The constant thoughout it is that there needs to be clear video eveidence to overturn the decision on the pitch. In this case, there was and it should have been.

Posted by pitch_curator on (November 26, 2012, 3:49 GMT)

@ Punters_mate -- Exactly. That is the reason I wonder why Ponting was claiming the bounced ball as a catch in the Sydney gate match. Also I wonder why Gilly appeals for a catch when he CLEARLY knows that the ball hit the pad and NOT the bat. Also, I dont know why Warne and Mcgrath appeal when they KNOW that the ball pitched outside leg or hit the bat before the pad..Just wondering..

Posted by Johnny_129 on (November 26, 2012, 3:43 GMT)

@ Front-Foot-Lunge on (November 25 2012, 10:53 AM GMT) - Hang on, mate! Ball coming off a helmet is a technical issue - there is no obligation on Dhoni to overturn an umpiring decision. Andy Flowers righteous approach would be better spent on the umpire - he is just trying to take advantage of Dhoni's good conscious - Dhoni had withdrawn an appeal and recalled a batsman in the England series. Would Andy Flower ever think of approaching an Australian dressing room when Ponting was at the helm?? He would have been banished in a unceremonious fashion...with a few 'F' words flying around! As for excessive appealing...I think the English bowlers had many more ridiculous shouts. Furthermore, please review TROT'S 'CATCH' in the first test - that would definitely be the BEST HIGHLIGHT OF CHEATING in any series!!!! Thank you....come again! ;o)

Posted by simonviller on (November 26, 2012, 3:39 GMT)

What a controversial rule ! The pads ,gloves , boots ,arm-guards and helmet are all external protective gear I would say ,but the helmet is singled out .What a load of nonsense !!! I think that rule should be changed and very very soon .

Posted by pitch_curator on (November 26, 2012, 3:36 GMT)

@ Front foot lunge -- Maybe sky is not broadcasting this match or you have not been watching it. Any dolt watching the match would have seen that it is the English team who have been appealing for every ball. Check out Monty panesar appealing for a bat pad when the bat is about half a kilometer away from the ball. For that matter check cricinfo's commentary of the second over of this match.Claiming catches that were not??? Just in case you do not know Trott is playing from the English side (although he is from SAF lol). He was the one who was claiming the bump ball as catch. The english who invented the bodyline are complaining about the spirit. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Posted by Yayathy on (November 26, 2012, 3:33 GMT)

What will happen if the ball is rebounded of a Singh's turban? Given out or not?

Why the world's eyes is on India. What justice did we get after almost 5 years of that sydney Saga? After which how many times India has been kind on the opposition batsmen.Sourav once gave runner to a batsmen whose elbow was injured. India are always soft so which people keep attacking shamelessly.

Posted by pitch_curator on (November 26, 2012, 3:29 GMT)

@ Mixters -- Dude get your facts correct. DRS has created as many issues as it has solved. The hotspot has been found wanting on more than a couple of occassions. Anyway, the point I was making is that an odd decision in a match will always be controversial. Unless 3-4 clear decisions have gone against you and you suspect fouplay, team directors and coaches should stop running to the match referees office at the drop of a hat.

Posted by Ravs1504 on (November 26, 2012, 2:55 GMT)

whatever!! stop crying like babies!!!

Posted by satish619chandar on (November 26, 2012, 2:45 GMT)

Ok Legends. the umpires never noted and what the hell makes Andy to move to referee to reverse the decision? The decision is made.. DOT. If so, for every wrong decision, the coach should go to the refree and ask the other captain to reverse the decision? A big mistake made by the umpires but still, Andy has no business to visit the referee to reverse the decision. How long are they going to bully like this?

Posted by Mannan.81.pk on (November 26, 2012, 2:19 GMT)

I found the claims ridiculous that only India has a long history of not following the sportsmanship spirit. On this occasion, Dhoni definitely should have called back the batsman when he was contacted by the umpires but all other teams including England are guilty of violating one or another principles of playing cricket in a fair way.

I would suggest that England and Newzealand are the most whining sides in the world

I am not an indian btw.

Posted by   on (November 26, 2012, 1:52 GMT)

Dont question India's game spirit,india always have been on receiving end.I think everyone forgot Ian Bell incident and Thirimanne incident.England should look into their past for game spirit,had they forgotten running out of Inzamam by Harmisson even when he was in the crease but justing feet in air to save himslef from the fierce throw from the bowler.

Posted by   on (November 26, 2012, 0:50 GMT)

Its a very clear rule amd I cant believe that Gambhir is unaware of it.I thinkt that this is called cheating.

Posted by 2.14istherunrate on (November 26, 2012, 0:14 GMT)

It is hardly beyond the bounds of possibility that in these days of mass communication and high tech everyone playing first class cricket knows the laws of the game and shows their knowledge by sitting a standard exam in the subject as well as attend a couple of lectures from umpires. Idealistic? No I do not think so. It seems simple to arrange though no doubt people who don't want this sort of knowledge being imparted would find obstacles. I find it odd that this sort of scheme is not in place and it would make it impossible for someone such as Bairstow to think he could be out under the circumstance. Also and obviously India need DRS more than anyone so why resist longer? Re the spirit of the game it's only a year since India won the ICC award for 'spirit of the game'. Only a bit longer since Bell was reinstated at Trent Bridge. I have not seen the incidents referred to by others though.

Posted by maddy20 on (November 26, 2012, 0:10 GMT)

@Front-Foot-Lunge Oh really? So Trott picking up the ball from the ground and appealing is in the lines of spirit of cricket? Bresnan and Broad standing in the middle of the crease while batting and running on the pitch so much that, the umpire had to come down and warn them? Is that within the spirit of cricket? England repeatedly make schoolboy like errors and expect to be recalled. If they had an issue they should have talked about it to the umpire straight away, instead of running to the opposition's camp while they are having their lunch. And you English are in no position to talk about spirit of cricket after all the nonsense your players and experts mouthed at us during the England tour!

Posted by samudralakiku on (November 26, 2012, 0:09 GMT)

@ Front-Foot-Lunge - You should wonder why England is the only team going to the opposition asking for reversal of decision long after the decision is made. I bet they would not have reversed the decision if they were in the same position. They are not saints in the first place.

Posted by 07sanjeewakaru on (November 26, 2012, 0:09 GMT)

I saw India at the reseving end of this in the 2008 Sri Lanka series when two catches taken by Malintha Warnapura hit the grill before it was taken.

Posted by Kolpak1989 on (November 26, 2012, 0:05 GMT)

I think the real question here is why is this the rule? I could understand it if the helmet were placed in the outfield, rather than being worn by the fielder. But this seems ridiculous to me. How is it any different to the ball taking a deflection from the fielder's body and then being caught? The rule is obscure, and if you're not even sure that the ball touched the helmet my feeling is that common sense should prevail and Gambhir should be entitled to claim a catch.

Posted by TAPOREE on (November 26, 2012, 0:01 GMT)

I am not supporting any team here I am supporting good cricket. I am in USA and was awake whole night to witness good cricket. I enjoyed Gautam's catch as much as I enjoyed KP's classic innings or Monty's aggressive bowling. Coming to the issue of this catch, In USA there is a saying that If you don't know the rules and laws of the road, don't get behind the wheels. Jonny Bairstow should not be playing as a batsman if he doesn't know the rules and regulations. Frankly speaking I don't know why Flower approached game referee or the captain of India, I think it was a very unprofessional move. Instead of doing that he should have taken Jonny to a computer and asked him to read rules and regulations. In the first test between Bangladesh and West Indies, I think it was Kieron Pollard who was caught at square leg but he refused to leave the field and rightly so because the ball after leaving the bat kissed the helmet of short leg fielder before resting in the palms of catcher.

Posted by Meety on (November 25, 2012, 23:54 GMT)

As far as I am concerned, Dhoni does not have to recall Bairstow. I am also satisfied by Ghambir's response - yes he knew it hit his helmet, but in the heat of the moment didn't think of the "unfair" catch law. MSD recalled Bell last year & India got flogged into submission, it was up to the umpires to have checked that - an issue that does not directly affect UDRS. Bairstow could of stood his ground - he didn't, case closed IMO. @Front-Foot-Lunge on (November 25 2012, 10:53 AM GMT) - you haven't got a clue buddy! YOU should be "suspended" from commenting on this site! @vickybapat on (November 25 2012, 10:59 AM GMT) - I was agreeing with everything you were saying UNTIL your 2nd last comment, totally un-called for!

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 22:48 GMT)

The Bairstow incident reflects pretty badly on all concerned, I'm afraid: on Jonny himself for being too lazy to acquaint himself with the laws which govern the sport via which he earns a considerable income, on the England management for not realising immediately that the decision was incorrect, on Dhoni & the Indian team for not recalling Bairstow even after it had been explained to them in some detail that their initial appeal had been unlawful, but most of all on the three umpires involved - particularly on Aleem Dar, who had a clear & unimpeded view of the catch, & whose only possible justification for not turning down the appeal lay in the fact that he was obviously totally ignorant of the relevant law. For an umpire on the Elite Test Panel, such ignorance is completely inexcusable. What on earth's happened to Aleem? Not so long ago, he made fewer errors than any other umpire apart from Simon Taufel, yet in this series alone he's already made five or six monumental howlers.

Posted by Chris_P on (November 25, 2012, 22:36 GMT)

Well, only the fieldsman would have known if the helmet was touched first for sure & I have my own strong feelings about that. Overall, I hope it doesn't affect the results, because this was clearly a wrong decision, but, as DRS or other technology isn't being used, it is up to the umpire's call.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 22:12 GMT)

I'm not quite sure where Front Foot Lunge is coming from with his comments on India's excessive appealing and not playing within the spirit etc. I think he is getting confused with a certain other sub-continent team, as I have always regarded Indian cricketers as among the fairest, most reasonable and gentlemanly players in the game. The BCCI present themselves as arrogant and ignorant, but the Indian team are not. They have always been fair opponents. And let's be honest, our own Stuart Broad and Monty Panesar have both been fined for excessive appealing in recent years.

Posted by CricketingStargazer on (November 25, 2012, 21:38 GMT)

What controversy? The umpire gave it. The batsman walked without querying. And Indian television took care not to show replays until much later. The batsman can't complain and there is no DRS anyway. Accept it and move on.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 21:35 GMT)

@Front-Foot-Lunge - According to your comment, England should be banned from the game. Remember Trott's appeal after dropping the catch? And Stuart Broad is legendary for excessive appealing and on-field misdemeanors. He had the guts to check VVS Laxmans bat for vaseline in the middle of a match and you guys conveniently viewed it as party to the spirit of the game.

Not to mention Graeme Swanns appeals and Bell's recall oh yes....agreed by India.

Please clean your own backyard before posting such comments.

Posted by 200ondebut on (November 25, 2012, 21:01 GMT)

Umpires ar there to make the decisions - and without DRS more are shown to be wrong than with it. Can't really blame India for claiming the catch - after all how many other dismissals are there each year when the fielding side know its not out. I'm not sure anyone really believes the "i'm not sure of the rules" quote - but how many players in test cricket would hold their hand up and either own up at the time or say afterwards they knew it ws not out but kept quiet. We can thank Australia for this state of affairs - they introduced this type of approach (then again what can you expect from a bunch of convicts)

Posted by Jaggadaaku on (November 25, 2012, 20:58 GMT)

Well, during the first innings of India in same match, Zaheer Khan was also given out by umpire Aleem Dar. However, the replay clearly shows that the bat was about half foot away from the ball, and the ball only hit the foot and caught by Bairstow at short leg and he given out. Why match referee and umpires didn't ask England captain to withdraw their appeal/decision? Indian captains always proved they are very generous to English batsmen. Once upon a time G.R. Vishwanath recalled the English batsman-Bob Taylor after finding the decision was wrong. Last year, Indian captain Dhoni recalled the English batsman-Bell and let him play again. Now tell me just one incident where English captain has done something similar to Indians? I am sure, you wouldn't find it.

Posted by Jaggadaaku on (November 25, 2012, 20:57 GMT)

Well, during the first innings of India in same match, Zaheer Khan was also given out by umpire Aleem Dar. However, the replay clearly shows that the bat was about half foot away from the ball, and the ball only hit the foot and caught by Bairstow at short leg and he given out. Why match referee and umpires didn't ask England captain to withdraw their appeal/decision? Indian captains always proved they are very generous to English batsmen. Once upon a time G.R. Vishwanath recalled the English batsman-Bob Taylor after finding the decision was wrong. Last year, Indian captain Dhoni recalled the English batsman-Bell and let him play again. Now tell me just one incident where English captain has done something similar to Indians? I am sure, you wouldn't find it.

Posted by crystosis on (November 25, 2012, 20:29 GMT)

Why is a troll like front foot lunge allowed to comment unabated ?..Moderation or whatever it is clearly not working here..

Posted by TendulkarDgr8 on (November 25, 2012, 20:14 GMT)

Lets look at it the otherway round.. Lets assume Bairstow was LBW on the last ball before Tea and was not given... Now if dhoni went to Flower said Bairstow should have walked and he should not come back to bat would it be correct?? Even saying this sounds ridiculous... So why bias when it comes to calling a batsman back?? This is serious cricket and I would say the teams should go to any limits within the rules of the game to win it... And the question of DRS does not even come up here cause even DRS requires that you appeal against the umpires decision instantaneously... Not from the dressing room after seeing the replays for a number of times...

Posted by ABRAR-JANJUA on (November 25, 2012, 20:11 GMT)

Mr Dhoni & Company would happily give a chance to Jonny Bairstow had they score 500+ ..where is sportsman Spirit Mr.Dhoni and Mr. Ghambir?????or you don't know meaning of Sportsman spirit>?

Posted by yorkslanka on (November 25, 2012, 19:57 GMT)

@henchart- where do you get that fact from?stop talking utter rubbish, if that is the case, why do we win the fair play award from the icc so many times..dont try to put us down to deflect from your own teams misdemeanours..

Posted by yorkslanka on (November 25, 2012, 19:57 GMT)

@henchart- where do you get that fact from?stop talking utter rubbish, if that is the case, why do we win the fair play award from the icc so many times..dont try to put us down to deflect from your own teams misdemeanours..

Posted by yorkslanka on (November 25, 2012, 19:57 GMT)

@henchart- where do you get that fact from?stop talking utter rubbish, if that is the case, why do we win the fair play award from the icc so many times..dont try to put us down to deflect from your own teams misdemeanours..

Posted by mykale on (November 25, 2012, 19:29 GMT)

AAndy Flower is as imprudent as ever!!! he needs to accept that Bairstow walked out satisfied.

What is any of the umpire gave him out LBW on the ball that is not going to hit the stumps?

Posted by mykale on (November 25, 2012, 19:26 GMT)

Seems like this guy (ANDY FLOWER) only knows to walk in match referee's office and ask to reverse the decisions. Last year he did the same think against INDIA in England, where India called Ian Bell back after his run out, and after that he scored double century.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 19:25 GMT)

Hang on a minute. vickybapat, presumably an Indian supporter from what he/she posted said: "Its the color of the skin that matters. Nothing else." Has cricinfo vetted this comment before allowing posting? Would they have allowed it had an obviously England supporter said it? Does racism only work one way?

Posted by ProdigyA on (November 25, 2012, 18:45 GMT)

Has england ever recalled a batsman in history except for begging for mercy and later whining about it. If people have seen trott's catch in yhe first test n how he goes on to appeal for it, that is something its just plain shameless. If anything he would be the first person to know that he dropprd the catch, no mercy for him there. Here GG can be given benefit of doubt that he was not aware of the law n at least he was honest to accept it.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 18:40 GMT)

I'm a Sri Lankan.India is not breaking the spirit of the game. Ashwin-Thirimanne incident,bell's runout....India called them back.

Posted by ProdigyA on (November 25, 2012, 18:36 GMT)

@Frontfoot - thanks to u, u r creating a new low for english cricket fans by coming up with upsurd excuses. Did u forget how low the brits went by changing the rules of the game just cause they couldnt play spin. The ECB would do it again if it had the power that it had before. Now the Power/money is with BCCI yet never misuses it. Coming to your comment about appealing, did u forget how broad was begging for balls that would have missed the stumps by miles and FYI there were many decisions that went against Indians. Did u forget the looser Trot who appealed for a catch inspite of rolling over it, no benefit of doubt can be given in his case. I saw the true colors of many English fans last year but u man have just broken all records n fallen to a new low.

Posted by mixters on (November 25, 2012, 18:34 GMT)

@vickybapat I do remember that test and GR Vishwanath did the right thing and you all claim him to be the perfect gentelman. I remember Gavaskar claiming always to be the perfect gentelman but remember him trying to lead the other opener of the field with him when given out LBW in a test in Adelaide stopping the game until the Team manager removed him from the ground and sent in the number three. THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. Some players have always done the right thing (Gilchrist) some players do not (chappell). But if you play the color card someone will always trump you with the hypocrite card.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 18:27 GMT)

India have done nothing wrong even Zaheer khan was given out then what and if its like that then India always play by the spirit of the game so u all just watch every game and blame your country not India as many times Indian batsman are given out and in this series England batsman shout for nothing so watch it and then comment

Posted by jackiethepen on (November 25, 2012, 18:21 GMT)

Not really the same as Bell's dismissal as Bell was not actually batting - it was Morgan who had hit the ball and driven it for what was believed to be a 4. The Indian fielder thought at first the ball had hit the boundary. Bell and a few of the fielders were walking off for tea when the ball was controversially thrown back to Dhoni who was in fact nowhere near the stumps, he then walked back down to the stumps and took the bails off. Bell was technically out because the ball was still live but his dismissal was considered to be not in the spirit of the game. The Indian team apparently took that decision collectively. Bairstow was unlucky if the law states the ball cannot hit the helmet and be out but he walked because he had edged the ball to Gamghir who took a fumbling catch. However he was the batsman in play and no one else was involved.

Posted by usernames on (November 25, 2012, 18:13 GMT)

Heh, some things never change. I think, in fact, that India have been pretty laid back on these issues. They probably could have made a big issue out of the Trott's non-catch, and with the muscle they have, that would have been heard. They chose not to. Ian Bell, Thirimanne, et al. all are cases where Indian team just backed off. Oh, by the way, Front-Foot-Lunge, maybe you remember Paul Collingwood? Daniel Vettori? Run out? Spirit of cricket? The Defeat? Yeah, by your logic, England should have been deprived of their Test status right then and there, aye? What absurd logic! Also, I think the English are making too much out of this--Bairstow is such an abysmal player that he wouldn't have made any difference either way.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 18:13 GMT)

Yawn! Yawn! Yawn! Well done vickybapat for trotting the same old rubbish when things don't go your teams' way. So for all you budding contributors out there when you have absolutely no reasonable argument just throw in the race card. Shameful ! For the record, as far as I'm concerned Bairstow shouldn't have been out but he was given out, he walked off, end of story. Some decisions you get and some you don't. get over it.

Posted by RameshSubramaniam on (November 25, 2012, 18:02 GMT)

I don't understand the spirit of the game at all... If umpire give the batsman out, and in the replays, if it shown as n.o, which captain is calling the batsman back? What is the difference between appealing for a catch knowing it is not out and this incident. I am afraid, Andy flower is setting up the wrong trend of speaking to the referees (though with in the law) every time. When sledging become part of spirit of cricket? Indian spinners over appealed? How about broad? When Dar gives the decision like what he gave in the test match, everyone will appeal without knowing when he is going to give out and when not out?

Posted by ahassan on (November 25, 2012, 17:50 GMT)

All umpires are human beings and they can make mistakes but it does not mean that a mistake cannot be corrected. Whenever there is a chance to correct a mistake, it should be done. Mahanama did the right thing when he left it for Dhoni to make a decision. Dhoni and Fletcher should have shown some sportsman spirit and called Bairstow back. Of course it was their right to refuse Fowler's request but had they agreed to it they would have been praised by everybody. Such decisions can put a young talented player's career at stake and Bairstow was very unlucky here.

Posted by svenkat02 on (November 25, 2012, 17:47 GMT)

What nonsense law is this? Do they expect a short leg/silly point fielder to not wear a helmet and then take blows on their head? If a short leg fielder wears a helmet, then the helmet should be considered as part of his body and a catch that is taken after its hits the helmet should be given out.... The law itself is rubbish!!!! When you can give a batsman out if the ball just touches his gloves (which is also protective equipment), then you should give a batsman out if the fielder catches the ball that rebounds of the protective equipment that he is wearing.....

Nothing wrong in what India did! And @Front Foot Lunge: Bugger off! When Bairstow was out, the game was very much in balance with India still in it. So stop making stories.....

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 17:46 GMT)

Look who's talking about the spirit of the game? I think they've forgotten Trott's appealing after grounding a catch.

Posted by samincolumbia on (November 25, 2012, 17:41 GMT)

Dhoni recalling Bell last year when India toured England...You will never find an English captain having done that in the history of the game. On the contrary, they are masters in breaking the laws and spirit of the game and not practising what they preach!

Posted by samincolumbia on (November 25, 2012, 17:37 GMT)

It looks like England is the only team that can break laws with impunity...be it stuffing their team with foreign players or claiming grounded catches after it's bounced knee height. Gambhir was unaware of the rule just like Bairstow was. It's as simple as that. Why are the one-eyed english fans assuming that Gambhir knew about the rule?

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 17:21 GMT)

@Front-Foot-Lunge: Kindly Read: India do have recent history of calling batsmen back. At Trent Bridge, Bell seemed to have wrongly assumed

(it was sheer stupidity and noting else)

the last ball before tea had gone for four, and had started to walk off for tea when India ran him out. The umpires ruled Bell out, but England asked India to reconsider their appeal during the tea break. Twenty minutes later,

India walked out to the crowd's jeers, which turned into cheers when they realized Bell had been recalled.

Till The time India call England's batsman back they are team with good team spirit but when they dont then it become questionable tactics and A new LOW for cricket gets created...

Moral of the story is if you dont follow cricket and dont now the facts (history) stay away from commenting MATE....

Posted by 1_234 on (November 25, 2012, 16:38 GMT)

Is it "Bairstow in catch controversy " or "India in catch controversy "?

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 16:25 GMT)

Can we please please please ban this thing called 'spirit of the game'? It's really of no use if everything is going by the laws of cricket and puts honest cricketers in bad light even when they do nothing wrong.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 16:18 GMT)

Actually disgusted after reading most of y'all's comments,saying "India doesn't play in the spirit of the game".Well as far as Cricket's concerned India have been fairer,we could say even unnecessarily.Many of yu will remember the reversal of a vital decision where Ian Bell was called back at 130-something,where he was actually not out.And in Australia where Dave Hussey was very clearly handling the ball,they called him back,and i don't understand how the hell you can call India not playing in the game spirit.England've never had the morality to call back an actually NOT-OUT player while India've done it more than once.If you don't know anything,don't speak it out.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 16:11 GMT)

Front foot-lunge:It's not some case so major as such to suspend a team from playing cricket,and as far as the world's concerned India's spirit of the game is perfect.Last year in the tour of england,Ian Bell's dismissal was called off,And in australia a very obvious case of Handling the ball was too called off.But England doesn't have the morality to call off a decision which is actually not out.It's pretty obvious that At least dhoni didn't know about that rule or he would've definitely called Bairstow back x :P :)

Posted by MakaveliDon on (November 25, 2012, 16:11 GMT)

@Front-Foot-Lunge give it a break mate, you've made your point about 4 or 5 times now. The English fans are really not the people to talk about the "spirit of the game". England have been guilty of some dirty tactics in the past and now that have suddenly got a taste of their own medicine they act like a bunch of babies..grow up please.

Posted by swat1999 on (November 25, 2012, 16:09 GMT)

ICC must make sure all the Test match is played under DRS. ICC members country must realize the importance of DRS especially India

Posted by wiku on (November 25, 2012, 16:08 GMT)

@Front_Foot-Lunge, it's england who doesn't play with the spirit, right from the days of bodyline bowling. remember collingwood? vettori allowed him to play when he was run out due to a clash with nz fielder, but he didnot do the same when the same thing happened to nz batsman. we need not go that far. recall last indian tour of england. Ian bell was clearly run out and that's entirely his fault. later they shamelessly came to indian dressing room to beg for a wicket. india never begged for a wicket, even in controversial sydney test. by the way how could trott even claim such a catch? gambhir just did not know the rule

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 15:56 GMT)

Its unfair to say that India is not with in the terms of the game. Remember 2011 world cup where Sangakkara has called twice for the toss and MSD accepted it apart from what has sited above? Also remember the Sydney test fiasco, where India has clearly been cheated by Aussies and every decision of the umpires was taken with in the spirit of the game !!! Stop crying over India. With some luck, England were in this position. Remember that Plumb LBW of Cook, turned down by umpire Aleem Dar who is clearly out of form. India has also taken that with in the spirit of the Game. Stop crying guys. Grow up !!!

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 15:52 GMT)

Indias entire approach to this series has been reprehensible both on the field and off it. Their "lording" it over cricket as a game, their chidlish demands on rules applied, training facilities offered, umpiring facilities, preparation of grounds and now on the pitch their incessant appealing and arguing with umpires...They deserve to lose. Their MASSIVE financial arrogance has beginning to grate, they are turning cricket into a farce. They are the spoilt brats of cricket. Overpaid, spoilt and indulged both as a board and as a group of players off the pitch and on it. The rest of the ICC should split from the BCCI. Cricket may be financially poorer as a result, but fair the heritage of cricket itself will eventually be much richer for ditching the "overlords of cricket"..India and the egos of the BCCI.

Posted by manuprasad_07 on (November 25, 2012, 15:48 GMT)

Why are there so many ppl intent on whining about India's decision. Bairstow deserved to get out n if he had been saved it would have been nothing but pure luck! India would have been very unfortunate to have that decision turned down. What is not within the spirit of the game is the England team asking India to reconsider its decision- everyone knew he deserved to be out and appealing against it is sort of like whining because luck wasn't on their side. If indeed the umpires had noticed it before they had walked off the field and ruled him not, then all the flak would be directed against England and Bairstow, maybe even the umpires. The particular clause in the rulebook is to avoid situations where the ball is well on its way to the ground and miraculously gets deflected by a helmet n ends in a catch. Its not meant for outright situations like these. England are just trying to use a loophole in the law to their advantage and there are many whiners supporting them.

Posted by Rahulthevirufan on (November 25, 2012, 15:47 GMT)

look who are talking about us being against sportsmanship i remember similar incident happening in lanka during mendis debut series when dravid got out after ball had clearly came off helmet of fielder but umpire gave out he remained out & didnot whined about it. Bell was recalled when he was indeed out, u can't act dis foolish in a game of cricket. BUT WHAT ABOUT ENGLAND VS NEWZEALAND ODI in 2008 when GRANT ELLIOT was ran out after being BLOCKED by SIDEBOTTOM, & collingwood didnot recalled batsman. Though full on "MCC/ ICC SPIRIT ENGLISH TEAM" got there reward as they failed to defend 4 off 1 ball to 11th batsman by OVERTHROWING it for 4.

Posted by MostCulturedAussieSirLesPatterson on (November 25, 2012, 15:39 GMT)

@Front-Foot-Lunge - I'm guessing you are one of them whinging poms, right?

Posted by Gupta.Ankur on (November 25, 2012, 15:37 GMT)

I would be might un-happy if my coach has to goto Referee begging for a reprieve....I would see that as "not having enough faith" in the team.

Last year also, england's captain had said that they wouldn't call anyone back , but still they go around asking for reprieves...

Shows how much faith they have in their own abilities both home and away.

Posted by disco_bob on (November 25, 2012, 15:34 GMT)

Obviously he should have been ordered back after the break because it was a case of the umpires not knowing the rules. This is not at all like an incorrect call by the umpires for example an lbw upeal upheld because the umpire did not detect some bat in it, which is nothing to do with them not knowing the rules of lbw.

I can think of no international sport where a player could possibly be given out or an incorrect decision could be upheld by the umpire or referee based solely on the referee not knowing what the rule was.

I understand the difficult if in this case there was no break and therefore correcting this egregious and utterly incompetent error by the umpire, but there was a break and the match referee had no reason to not correct this mistake.

Posted by rahulnair2402 on (November 25, 2012, 15:28 GMT)

Front-Foot-Lunge are u kidding me. What are you blind, ignorant or simply anti-Indian to even suggest that India are not playing within the spirit of the game. HELLO i hear a BELL ringing in my head. Yes I am talking of Ian bell's dismissal and his return in last year's test match. Also what about Jonathan Trott's appeal in the last game. Don't tell me that was within the so called spirit of the game. Please don't talk rubbish. Someone has said 'its better to shut your mouth and let others wonder whether you are a fool or not than to open it and clear all their doubts'.

Posted by Mitch1066 on (November 25, 2012, 15:21 GMT)

Well I'm sure one day India will get decision like that and it cost them match but they have done good honest thing in past just happens be this time they chose not too

Posted by MWaqqar on (November 25, 2012, 15:21 GMT)

With technology available for giving correct decisions, why should not be used. If Ind has reservations about LBW decisions why tech is not being used for other decisions. After all tech is being used for line decisions in Ind matches. The argument that wrong decisions even out is illogical, two wrongs do not make a right.

Posted by sandy_bangalore on (November 25, 2012, 15:19 GMT)

@ Vickybapat: GR vishwanath incident happened decades back. India are one of the biggest whingers in world cricket, and they chose to make noise only if it suits them

Posted by GRVJPR on (November 25, 2012, 15:18 GMT)

Should a Team be suspended whose coach always keep begging for giving not out to batsmen. England players don't know the rules of the game, Bell gets run out becuase he is in hurry to Drink tea, Absolutely Pathetic from england. This is putting deliberate presurre on match officials. Dhoni Should Kick Flower out of dressing room. England is Shame for test cricket

Posted by pom_don on (November 25, 2012, 15:13 GMT)

Re. decisions by the umpire right or wrong DRS might have sorted a few of these decisions out & at least made it perhaps not 100% accurate but nearer 100% than it is now, it can only be good for the game. I think BCCI shouldn't be given a choice either accept DRS or just don't play tests in India, end of story.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 15:03 GMT)

Andy Flower is the only one I have seen so consistently go up and try to bully the match referee, fully knowing that the referee has no rules of cricket at his command to punish such behavior which brings about disrepute to cricket and its highest official when a test is in progress. Shame on you, Andy, even if you, sometimes, have a point. And you are setting a wrong example for many youngsters who are watching you. Many in India had been preserving respectful memories of you for the way, you single-handedly salvaged the Zim team with your bat, years ago. Why spoil that name at this age and stage in your career?

Posted by Andross on (November 25, 2012, 15:02 GMT)

Well I think the LAW should be rewritten. It's ridiculous, how does it make any practical difference bouncing off the fielder's Helmet, to his boot, or chest or head? The five run penalty for hitting a helmet left on the ground is fair enough, but this law sounds like a relic from back when the attitude was 'real cricketers don't wear helmets'. The game has moved on since then.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 15:00 GMT)

have u seen zaheers dismissal in 1st ininngs!!!!!!!!! its more horrible than bairstow

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 15:00 GMT)

The officials (umpires, match ref,) should have taken a stand and made right a wrong decision. India obviously cannot be faulted cause the batsman himself thought he was out. However, it is well within the umpires right to call the batsman back (like in the case of being out off a no ball). You got to feel for Bairstow who is fighting for his place though.

Posted by GRVJPR on (November 25, 2012, 14:48 GMT)

England have hit the new LOW in cricket. Their test cricketers doesn't know the rules of the game. We saw how Ian bell was clearly run out but their shameless captain and coach begged to Indians to call him back. And englands captain cook was Plumb LBW in both innings but shamelessly stayed on.

Posted by voice_of_reason on (November 25, 2012, 14:39 GMT)

@Front-Foot-Lunge Bairstow should know the laws and should not have walked off. England appeal plenty when they know it's not out, as do all the other teams. Trott claimed a catch after he'd grassed it and it bounced back into his arms. If anyone needs to be banned, it's Trott. Stop being holier than thou.

Posted by jk167 on (November 25, 2012, 14:26 GMT)

I can't believe what all the fuss is about........if he is a 'walker' then by all means he should feel extremely sorry for himself but until all the English players (and indeed all players from all countries) start to walk when they nick one through to the keeper then Andy Flower (or other coaches) should not be pleading with the opposition to show 'sportsmanship' and do the 'correct thing'. Consider the following identical situation...........If KP nicked one at any stage in his innings and was given 'not out', would Andy Flower go into the oppostion's changing room during the next break and say 'we are very sorry but KP tells us that he should have been given out earlier, we will forget about the 60 runs he has scored from that moment and I have also made sure that the umpires have been notified and he has been offically given out in the scorebook! In my opinion the same logic applies to Ian Bell's run out saga in 2011........toughen up Andy Flower and stop whinging like a school boy

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 14:23 GMT)

@front-foot-lunge.... u r either blind ... or u dont watch the ind - eng cricket matches .... jst read this article itslf.... u vl find abt indias spirit f cricket... and england...wat was trott doing in the 1st test.... claiming a catch , when it actually bounced.... englands appeling was evn worser... they appeal fr evrythng... even if they know its not out , they appeal.... and indians got many wrong decsns against them... so wen they know it s out and umpire doesnt gv it out , naturally they appeal more... watch the game and use some common sense b4 commenting...

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 14:22 GMT)

Haahhahahah, India the destroyer or spirit of cricket!!!! When having thier backs to the wall ..its called desperation ...for anything that is. Johny Bairstow should have been reprived,really.......But by not repriving him the test has become more interesting, else India would have probably been still 50 runs beond and loosing by an innings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!India is no where near to Pakistan team, their batting may have the big names, but maybe they are too big to fit in the team now, bowling is pathetic!! Go england

Posted by FlashAsh on (November 25, 2012, 14:19 GMT)

Can everyone please calm down about this technicality!! MD & Fletcher knew the rule and chose not to re-instate! It was their choice and I believe its Fletcher we should all be looking at not MD or IND spirit!

Fletcher has had a bad run and if ENG can walk in tomorrow clean up IND cheap and hit winning runs then his job will be well and truly on the line!! He's just playing his old mind games and ENG should be ready for it! I think Monty & Swann have done just that

So please as ENG supporter lets see Bairstow hit winning runs (hopefully Cook & Compton!) and Fletcher get his due reward! No hang on!! at this rate ENg want Fletcher to remain IND coach!!

1 - 1 is screaming to be made!! No whitewash for IND!

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 14:12 GMT)

if india was not playing vt the spirit f the game , wat abt englnd.... they appeled fr a catch against zaheer when the ball was miles away from the bat.... and that blind umpire gave it out...... some times luck goes in ur favour..some times not....

Posted by landl47 on (November 25, 2012, 14:07 GMT)

I'm not sure why this decision and Bell's recall are being compared here. In Bell's situation he was clearly out within the laws of the game, so his recall was a matter of generosity by the Indian captain. Bairstow was not out according to the laws of the game, but was given out by the umpires. That happens all the time and although it's bad luck on the batsman, that's the way cricket is played. Flower's request for the decision to be reversed was actually an attempt to introduce the DRS through the back door, since the umpires on the field made the decision based on what they saw. There are two lessons to be learned from this: 1. Like Challagalla, I think the law should be changed if the helmet is being worn. Otherwise, allowing a catch off the wqicketkeeper's pads but not off the helmet is contradictory- both are protective equipment. 2. India must be told emphatically that the DRS is to be used and other countries should refuse to play them unless it is.

Posted by bhanuma_nagadeep on (November 25, 2012, 11:47 GMT)

isnt it bairstow's fault to leave when the rule says umpire cant change the decision .... why is flower approaching referree in such cases?? do flower agree to reverse a decision if indian batsmen is given lbw wrongly by the umpire!!

Lastly, why are english batsmen in a hurry to leave the field everytime!!! Cant flower teach them to stay back instead approaching the referrees!!!

Posted by jmcilhinney on (November 25, 2012, 11:44 GMT)

@Front-Foot-Lunge on (November 25 2012, 09:15 AM GMT), your comments are always embarrassing to me as an England fan and this as much as any. India are definitely not any less sporting than any other international cricket team and have shown great sportsmanship on many occasions. Even as an England fan I was very much in two minds about Bell being recalled and I really don't think that they should have let Thirimane off. I applaud their sportsmanship on both those occasions. I agree that there has been some excessive appealing from India this series but England are not innocent on that front either. Also, you can't accuse Gambhir of cheating on this occasion and let Trott off the hook. I give them both the benefit of the doubt. I doubt that Trott saw the ball hit the ground and, in the heat of the moment, was mostly just hoping that it didn't. Unless the ball thudded into Gambhir's helmet he likely wouldn't have known either. Things are always clearer on slow motion replay.

Posted by Front-Foot-Lunge on (November 25, 2012, 11:35 GMT)

Should a team be suspended from International by the ICC if they consistently break the spirit of the game? India have certainly earned this punishment, with this series stained by excessive appealing from the Indian spinners, questionable tactics and claiming catches when they're not. A new LOW for cricket has been created, thanks India. Whenever their backs are to the wall we see tactics like this.

Posted by Front-Foot-Lunge on (November 25, 2012, 11:34 GMT)

India's long run of not playing within the spirit of the game continues. Whenever they've got their backs to the wall we see something like this.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (November 25, 2012, 11:34 GMT)

I feel bad for Jonny Bairstow under the circumstances but, let's face it, he did make the mistake and probably deserved to be out so it would have been a big stroke of luck to have been reprieved under those circumstances. I have no problem with Andy Flower asking India to reverse the decision but I also have no issue with India not reversing the decision. Assuming that Gambhir didn't know that the ball had hit the helmet, India acted in good faith in appealing. The umpire made a decision and everyone abided by it. Maybe India should have reinstated him as technically he was not out but, by the same token, Bell technically was out and they did reinstate him, so they even out. Given that India have probably got the worse of the umpiring decisions so far, I don't see that they should be expected to overturn the umpire's original call on this occasion and live with them on others.

Posted by nitintin1987 on (November 25, 2012, 11:31 GMT)

@front foot lunge.. Jus know ur facts clearly b4 sayin nethn..

last year whn ind toured eng....we recalled ian bell when he was run out..dat was well within the spirts of the game..

2ndly as written in the blog above.. (In an ODI in Brisbane in February this year, R Ashwin mankaded Sri Lanka middle-order batsman Lahiru Thirimanne after having warned him previously, but when the umpires asked India if they wanted to continue with the appeal, the stand-in captain Virender Sehwag withdrew it. )

so it jus shows dAt we have always played within the spirits of the game.. NOT LIKE YOU ATLEASt....When Jon trott knew the ball had boucd on the ground..but still he was appealing for a catch in the last test..

so you guys learn to play the game in spirit first..

Posted by one-eyed-but-keepinitreal on (November 25, 2012, 11:30 GMT)

Clearly a raw nerve has been touched. This is not about incorrect decisions. Ghambir has been hit twice in front of leg stump in this inning and survived. I haven't seen Trott's supposed no catch but I can understand how fieldsmen may claim them without cheating...usually the eyes are obscured so they appeal based on feel. I think most people are smart enough to follow this logic. You can be wrong and appeal without cheating. I once saw Adam Gilchrist walk when he missed a ball by 3 inches(Bangladesh, he hit the ground, the ball turned enough to be caught by second slip). This is not the same as incorrect lbw decisions. Some people like to choose which decisions should have been changed without considering all (DRS anyone?). There is quite a bit of "naughty boy syndrome" deflection going on here. Questions need to be asked about Ghambir's integrity. He obviously knew the ball contacted his helmet it was right in front of his eyes. He would have most certainly felt it.

Posted by challagalla on (November 25, 2012, 11:18 GMT)

One thing for sure, these 2 tests certainly make a very compelling case for introducing DRS in all series .I just hope BCCI wakes up and realises that. They will if Dhoni makes a strong case for it. I sometimes wonder if BCCI consulted the Indian players about it.

Posted by challagalla on (November 25, 2012, 11:14 GMT)

Bairstow was not out by the rules of cricket. Yet he himself thought he was out if you see the replay clearly. He did not even hesitate to walk. I don't think Gambhir was wrong to appeal as these things happen in the heat of the battle. I very much doubt that he was even aware that Bairstow was not out. Dhoni was not wrong to recall Bairstow as the batsman walked off. He could have recalled him but I guess the team think tank decided against it. Thats fair enough. I personally think the law here needs to be changed. The fielder was wearing protection for safety and a catch taken of the protection should be allowed. After all a catch off the wicket keepers pads is clearly out. Anyway make no mistake by the laws of cricket Bairstow was not out and it is the fielding captains prerogative to recall him or not. I personally think he should have but either way it is fair enough.

Posted by one-eyed-but-keepinitreal on (November 25, 2012, 11:07 GMT)

@baskar_guha...don't just select the 'facts' that you would like to look at. You forgot some pretty important ones. Have a look at the cricinfo match summary. Questions were being asked by the commentary team. It was not just some obscure law drawn from the cobwebs of the rule book. In the bobble of the ball, perhaps the batsman and the umpires did not consider the helmet. But Ghambir would have clearly felt and seen the ball.

Posted by vickybapat on (November 25, 2012, 10:59 GMT)

@DeathKnell, you can go on and on with everything that has gone against India, people are not bothered. But once anything has gone against England, everyone is going on the top. 1. England has *always* refused to call back any batsman given out. 2. India has *never* gone begging to the match refree.

Recalling a batsman is nothing new to India. If someone remembers the Golden Jublee test on this very ground against England, captain GR Vishwanath recalled Bob Taylor for a caught behind. Taylor went on to score vital runs and England won. But does anyone care? Of course not. Its the color of the skin that matters. Nothing else.

Posted by Front-Foot-Lunge on (November 25, 2012, 10:53 GMT)

India's long run of no playing within the spirit of the game continues. Whenever they've got their backs to he wall we see something like this.

Posted by Gupta.Ankur on (November 25, 2012, 10:53 GMT)

I am really suprised that Andy flower once again went to the umpires and indian captain "begging" for a reprieve....

Catch was taken, bastman walked, umpire raised his fingers and that's it! Cook was lbw in both of his epic innings and i wonder if Flower saw that replay and went to Dhoni to appeal for it and umpires to give it out.

Its ridiculous that england always finds ways to create controversy....I heard no mention of Trott's false claims anywhere....

Posted by one-eyed-but-keepinitreal on (November 25, 2012, 10:39 GMT)

I think some people have lost sight of the main issue. I am by no means an English supporter. However, I do not believe that Flower approached the umpires just to have an incorrect decision overturned. I think he was clearly concerned about giving the fieldsman who claimed (I can't believe unknowingly...Ghambir) An unfair catch a chance to redeem himself.

Posted by baskar_guha on (November 25, 2012, 10:34 GMT)

Lets look at the facts -- batsman walks as soon as the catch is made; umpires don't refer like they can if they choose to; England pours through the rule book and decides they should appeal the decision about 30 mins after the event; Dhoni says no thank you. Clearly, quite a few minutes passed by after the event, no one even thought much of it until someone checked. To call the decision to not recall unsportsmanlike on Dhoni's part is a bit of a joke.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 10:27 GMT)

trott clamed a catch, when ball hit rite in front of him? does that count as "trying to cheat"? The thing is Bairstow dnt know the rule. He should have stayed on the ground instead he walked off.

Posted by one-eyed-but-keepinitreal on (November 25, 2012, 10:26 GMT)

@thayagu5432 if you can't see the difference then I don't think logic can open your eyes. Think of it being more like knowingly (granted sometimes a fieldsman does not know) claiming a catch that has clearly bounced. It's not about what may be shown later. But what could have clearly been discerned at the time, that is, Ghambir would have clearly known that the ball hit his helmet.

Posted by englishboere on (November 25, 2012, 10:23 GMT)

The whole rule is ridicules, if he did not wear a helmet and the ball hit his head and was caught the the batsman would be out. Does this mean that if a fielder wears a shin pad and the ball hits the shin pad first, is then caught, the batsman is not out. As far as I am concerned if the ball bounces off the fielder and does not touch the ground before it is caught, the batsman is out. Stop winging and get on with the game.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 10:23 GMT)

This has to be weighed against bad LBW decisions - especially the non-guesswork aspects, such as the ball pitching outside leg stump. If a batsman had been given out in circumstances such as that, would Flower have tried to have the batsman reinstated? A lot of head-shaking for sure, but I reckon the decision would have stood. A lousy level of umpiring in this match, and woeful ignorance of the Laws (perhaps on Gambhir's part, too, let's be charitable!), but it should have been left there. I bet Bell doesn't wander off before "time" is called, I bet Michael Vaughan stopped reaching down for the ball as if he was in the nets after he was given out Handled the Ball... and Jonny Bairstow will have learned from this!

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 10:22 GMT)

Yes I agree with all those who say "stop being a cry baby". Andy Flower is slowly losing the plot (job maybe!!) so he is acting like an overpaid official. Remember not so long ago Kevin Pietersen was fired by Strauss/Flower, supported by Broad. Where do those mentioned stand now??? And for good measure all those who did not want KP to play again, I hope NONE OF YOU ARE WATCHING. own up like English gentlemen if you are watching here in the comments column. thanks well played Maritzburg College.

Posted by DeathKnell on (November 25, 2012, 10:20 GMT)

guys hold on...cook was while he was in 80s - LBW for Ohja..imagine the result then.. it wud have been Eng trailing by atleast 100 in first inn.. Zak was not out, which everyone knows (except A.dar)..you cud add another 10-15 runs....Aleem dar is way below par in this series...JB cud have raised his dbt, hope he knows some rules as well (or KP watching from other end)...so just blame it on eng - rather than trying off-field stunts (by flowr the cry-baby)....with all kinds of technologies Dravid was in the same sitn, when he was given out while nicking show lace...so calm down....

Posted by Full-Blooded-Wallop on (November 25, 2012, 10:16 GMT)

But the rule even says A player is caught out only if the ball has touched some part of bat or gloves but in Zaheer's case it was light years away from both. So would fletcher go to the englan'd dressing room for asking to take appeal back?

Posted by Thyagu5432 on (November 25, 2012, 10:01 GMT)

@Reggaecricket: Spot on! How different is this compared to an LBW decision which was given against batsman which later we all found out because of the TV replay that there was an edge? Can the batsman ask for a reprieve? However, the issue in today's cricket is that even when the batsman knows that he is clearly out, he will still wait for the umpire to say so. Cook would know that his toe would have been crushed if that ball had directly hit his toe rather than hit it on its way up but still he chose to appeal. So Dhoni has not done anything wrong because it is still in line with the spirit of the game, as it is today.

Posted by one-eyed-but-keepinitreal on (November 25, 2012, 10:00 GMT)

@Punters_mate, eloquently said. There is a difference between pushing the spirit of the game and cheating.

Posted by dinosaurus on (November 25, 2012, 9:58 GMT)

Some of these comments may give a clue why India prefers not to use the DRS. Umpiring howlers shake the game, and may lead to an undeserved victory. Of course they may also lead to an undeserved defeat. If you see yourself as a winner, you may not like to have to acknowledge (even if only to yourself) that your win was undeserved. On the other hand, if you are more comfortable with seeing yourself as a victim (and loser) you can take comfort from being the victim and console yourself with pointing out how you were a victim of unfairness (though you decline to use a system with a proven record of reducing the number of howlers).

Posted by Nish_US on (November 25, 2012, 9:57 GMT)

Andy - stop this back door business...

Anyways I do not understand, how can the timing of a decision affect the outcome... Out is out no matter when it happens if it happens the first ball of the day or the last ball before lunch.

Every decision should have the fair chance for review, if at all.

By allowing such back door beggings, ICC is opening a can of worms...

Posted by sawifan on (November 25, 2012, 9:56 GMT)

@one-eyed-but-keepinitreal... well said. if Gambhir was an Aussie, the uproar would be deafening. Now, i'm not calling Gambhir a cheat, just that this kind of thing happens with ALL teams. Aussie's are just the easy targets.

Posted by TheBengalTiger on (November 25, 2012, 9:53 GMT)

I think Jonathan Trott should be banned for claiming a catch that clearly hit the floor. Typical behaviour from this English team. I mean South African

Posted by one-eyed-but-keepinitreal on (November 25, 2012, 9:50 GMT)

Anyone who suggests that Ghambir would not have been aware that the ball hit his helmet right under his eyes are living in a fantasy land. Herein is the difference between this and any other umpiring howler.

Posted by TheBengalTiger on (November 25, 2012, 9:49 GMT)

When have England ever called back a legitimately run out batsmen? Never. In fact, Collingwood refused to. Some English are having a very difficult time moving into the 21st century

Posted by Naren on (November 25, 2012, 9:43 GMT)

If the fielding team was Australia and batsman was an Indian, It would have been a great offense to the Spirit of the Game. ICC is useless. Anyway Indian's are scared of using the Review system as they are not good at it.

Posted by Punters_Mate on (November 25, 2012, 9:38 GMT)

Are the Indian fan boys claiming that GG did not realise the ball struck the helmet? The replays indicate some force that GG must have felt. There is the spirit of the game and then there is cheating. GG has some explaining as to why he did not acknowledge the ball hitting his helmet. No different to claiming a catch that bounced.

Posted by richardror on (November 25, 2012, 9:31 GMT)

Firstly, this just highlights the need for DRS. I often wonder what the fans and Indian bowlers think about it, if the rumours are true and it's just a senior batsmen not wanting it. Because, the Indian bowlers have been very hard done by with some decisions (so have England). In general, umpiring this series has been poor. But Flower had every right to ask, not impressed with the fielder who would have known it hit his helmet and known the rules.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 9:31 GMT)

@LillianThomson: Well, if one has to be absolutely consistent, then England should have withdrawn the appeal agains Zaheer Khan too.

Posted by Reggaecricket on (November 25, 2012, 9:31 GMT)

So a decision went against a batsman. What's new about it and how is this any different to a batsman given out to a bad umpiring decision? Are we then going to have the Indian coach rush to Mahanama and ask that Zaheer Khan be sent back out to bat? Umpires and players are equally human, I doubt that Gambir realized it came off his protective gear. Andy Flower needs to stop putting match referees and umpires under so much pressure. You win some you lose some, it all evens out.

Posted by jazzaaaaaaaa on (November 25, 2012, 9:23 GMT)

As soon as something goes against India, its "Not in the spirit of the game" as soon as something goes in India's favour, its "Well India deserved that, England's are crybabies, etc" And I am not even an England supporter.

Posted by henchart on (November 25, 2012, 9:21 GMT)

@Lahiru Devinda:Spirit of the game and Sri Lankans dont go together.Indians and Aussies are far better.

Posted by one-eyed-but-keepinitreal on (November 25, 2012, 9:19 GMT)

Imagine if an Australian had unfairly claimed that catch...the uproar...the indignation. Ghambir would have been patently aware that the catch hit his helmet. It happened right in front of his eyes. Yet all the discussion, on TV, has been about the inexperience of the batsman (Bairstow) or the bad decision of the umpire (no DRS to correct this howler). The fieldsman's integrity has not been questioned.

Posted by mixters on (November 25, 2012, 9:18 GMT)

@pitch_curator Where was Flower at the first test LBW calls. Wondering why India still resists DRS. Can it be they think there financial clout will influence close lbws as well?

Posted by LillianThomson on (November 25, 2012, 9:16 GMT)

Two wrongs don't make a right. Bell should have remained run out last year, and Dhoni needn't have reprieved him. But Gambhir knew perfectly well that he had not taken the catch cleanly today - you can't mistake a vibrating helmet - and this was further evidence that India will stop at nothing to win this series. Last year Bell was a fool who got lucky in being reprieved after he had got himself out. Today Bairstow wasn't out, and was given out when the "catcher" persisted with a dishonest appeal.

Posted by Front-Foot-Lunge on (November 25, 2012, 9:15 GMT)

Should a team be suspended from International by the ICC if they consistently break the spirit of the game? India have certainly earned this punishment, with this series stained by excessive appealing from the Indian spinners, questionable tactics and claiming catches when they're not. A new LOW for cricket has been created, thanks India.

Posted by KimiXI on (November 25, 2012, 9:14 GMT)

It was absolutely fair of Dhoni not taking the appeal back. The only reason they got 20 odd minutes to think about the decision was because lunch was taken at the fall of wicket and Bairstow walked off without protest. This isn't quite similar to the Bell incident.

Posted by Front-Foot-Lunge on (November 25, 2012, 9:10 GMT)

India have just set a new low in the history of the game with Bairstow's dismissal.

They know the rules, and yet they chose to claim a catch when the ball had clearly struck the helmet What a shoddy display of sportsmanship from the home team. They should be totally ashamed.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 8:59 GMT)

It's a matter about the spirit of the game. And most of the Indian and Aussie players won't mind that. Bad luck for Bairstow.

Posted by ajetti on (November 25, 2012, 8:59 GMT)

Andy Flower needs to accept such decisions as part of the game. I am glad India did not oblige again! All said and done I am not a fan of Flower's attitude in these issues.

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 8:57 GMT)

After the wrong claims by Mr Trott and wrongful appeal by Cook for Pujara's catch, I guess India made the right decision and not the stupid one. After all, The Poms just showed us everything is fair in love and war and this is much more than just a war.

Posted by TheBengalTiger on (November 25, 2012, 8:56 GMT)

Oh not this again. Every time theres a wrong decision, why should India withdraw their appeal? Why not England? Seriously, get over yourselves england. Times have changed

Posted by jimbirchall on (November 25, 2012, 8:56 GMT)

This series really needs the DRS....

Posted by A_Vacant_Slip on (November 25, 2012, 8:54 GMT)

Of course the catch was off the grille. Of course Bairstow should not have gone. India should not have appealled the catch it was spectacularly unsporting of them to even appeal the catch they knew perfectly well it had hit the grille. But on this tour India have defined new low in the history of unsporting so anything go. plz publish

Posted by pitch_curator on (November 25, 2012, 8:54 GMT)

Seems to be a habit of the English to keep begging the officials and the opposition captains to overturn decisions. Where was Andy flower when plumb lbw decisions were going against Indians in the first test??

Posted by Narbavi on (November 25, 2012, 8:53 GMT)

So does that mean, say a certain Gambhir gets out lbw edging the ball on to his pads on the last ball of the day, if the indian management approaches their english counterparts, will they say ok to call gambhir back again for the next day's play?? Silly!!

Posted by   on (November 25, 2012, 8:51 GMT)

i really admired flower as a player but this silly things he is doing as a coach like every time going to the referees and 3rd ump like a cry baby is not going down that well with me !!! where's the spirit of the cricket mr flower ????

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Sidharth MongaClose
Tour Results
India v England at Dharamsala - Jan 27, 2013
England won by 7 wickets (with 16 balls remaining)
India v England at Mohali - Jan 23, 2013
India won by 5 wickets (with 15 balls remaining)
India v England at Ranchi - Jan 19, 2013
India won by 7 wickets (with 131 balls remaining)
India v England at Kochi - Jan 15, 2013
India won by 127 runs
India v England at Rajkot - Jan 11, 2013
England won by 9 runs
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days