Sharp Analysis. Straight Talk
RSS RSS

A 'glaring' error from the umpire

Sanjay Manjrekar and Ajit Agarkar on the third umpire's decision to rule Cheteshwar Pujara not out on a bat-pad appeal

November 15, 2013

Play Video
England v India, 5th Investec Test, The Oval, 3rd day Giles: Dhoni adapted technique to conditions
Play Video
Eng v Ind, 5th Investec Test, The Oval, 3rd day 'Moeen Ali's bowling a huge positive'

Posted by vin_samal on (November 16, 2013, 4:00 GMT)

what error everyone taking abt? Was watching on a 50" TV with recording on in a HDMI channel...(Was recording it for my Son who is 1 year old,,since i never got the highlights of that iconic debut) I replay it 10 times,,,I am 200% sure it touched the ground....need proof? i can send you the cut clips of the contact point.. So just enjoy the game...will start in next 2 min...Jai ho Sachin!.

Posted by mscric on (November 16, 2013, 2:44 GMT)

The decision is correct.Why you guys always forget about 'Benefit of the doubt' concept? and dont criticize the specific indian umpiring.How can we forget about our master being victimized by the overseas umpires again and again in their own turf.Grow up guys.

Posted by Sir_Ivor on (November 16, 2013, 1:49 GMT)

I am surprised to read so much about this so called error. The cardinal principle in umpiring is to give the benefit of doubt to the batsman. I believe that was why it was given as not out. I felt from one angle that the ball had touched the ground for just that fleeting micro second. Perhaps that is why the benefit of doubt was awarded to the batsman.But I see no reason for such a fierce debate on the subject. There are many many decisions which can be questioned but are not. I think we Indians feel the need to take a view against ourselves just to show how objective we are.

Posted by   on (November 16, 2013, 0:58 GMT)

The question, is did any part of the ball touch the ground when the catch was taken by the fielder? If yes , then the batsmen should not be given out. If the catch was taken and then the ball touched the ground while the fielder has total total control then the batsman should be given out.

Posted by   on (November 16, 2013, 0:27 GMT)

The question, is did any part of the ball touch the ground when the catch was taken by the fielder? If yes , then the batsmen should not be given out. If the catch was taken and then the ball touched the ground while the fielder has total total control then the batsman should be given out.

Posted by   on (November 15, 2013, 22:36 GMT)

what r they talking about...the catch was dubious...!!! it was the right call....not out....

Posted by GrindAR on (November 15, 2013, 22:33 GMT)

Folks... I can clearly see a bounce just before the fingers. But whether it bounces off the finger or not is not clear. It does touch the ground. If your finger lands on the ground and the ball lands on the tip of the finger, it is as good as ball landing on the ground. So... no mistake of umpire as it was publicized everywhere

Posted by vpadmana on (November 15, 2013, 17:52 GMT)

OK. It wasn't a glaring error. In fact, it wasn't an error at all IMO. There's enough doubt from the front angle wherein one particular frame shows the ball hitting the ground even as two fingers are trying to come underneath. So the ball hits the fingers and the ground at the same time. The middle and index fingers are on the side and the ball touches the ground between the middle and ring fingers. That, IMO, is clearly not out.

Posted by binu.emiliya on (November 15, 2013, 17:16 GMT)

Yes it was a 50-50 dicision Powel grabbed it sideways, so i feel there is chance of ball kisses the ground before reaching his fingers

Posted by Cricketfan11111 on (November 15, 2013, 17:02 GMT)

It is a 50-50 decision. Some other umpire might have given it out.

Comments have now been closed for this article