England v Australia, 3rd Investec Test, Old Trafford, 1st day August 1, 2013

'One of the worst umpiring decisions'

ESPNcricinfo staff
Reactions to Usman Khawaja's dismissal at Old Trafford
149

Usman Khawaja's dismissal before lunch at Old Trafford, adjudged caught behind after the on-field umpire's call was reviewed and upheld, has triggered an outpouring of furious tweets from former players and even the Australian prime minister. Here's a selection:

"I've just sat down to watch the test. That was one of the worst cricket umpiring decisions I have ever seen. KRudd"
Kevin Rudd, Australian prime minister

"Usman Khawaja has every right to knock on the umpires door over lunch & just ask HOW?"
Tom Moody, former Australia batsman

"That is a ridiculous decision by both the on & off field umpires. DRS creating yet more controversy. Any wonder players don't walk!"
Alec Stewart, former England captain

"And people say you should Walk .... No chance when you get decisions like that...."
Michael Vaughan, former England captain

"DRS was introduced to eradicate the human howlers...humans are out to prove that no technology can eliminate human errors."
Aakash Chopra, former India batsman

"Umpires protecting each other is the main reason DRS is causing controversy!"
Scott Styris, former New Zealand allrounder

"Shocking decision to give #usmanKhwaja out. What is the technology there for? Umpires may need a trip to specsavers n get a hearing aid."
Azhar Mahmood, former Pakistan allrounder

"Thing to remember is that without DRS we would still be saying that was a shocking decision. Not the system's fault but those operating it."
Steve James, former England batsman

"Don't blame the DRS for that. Blame the numpty 3rd umpire. Poor!"
Iain O'Brien, former New Zealand bowler.

"Now that's bullshit !!! Sorry ... Now you all know why I hate DRS! Bullshit."
Dean Jones, former Australia batsman.

"It's really quite obvious why we end up enslaved to robots in the future."
Jarrod Kimber, ESPNcricinfo

"just saw the khawaja dismissal. oh dear. you dream of playing the ashes and this is what you get...."
Harsha Bhogle, commentator and ESPNcricinfo columnist

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • dummy4fb on August 8, 2013, 7:24 GMT

    Umpires were absolutely right. The 2nd noise justifies that. The noise comes at 2:25 where the bat hits the ball when the bat is covered by the WK. If an inquiry is held this will be upheld and umpires will come clean for certain.

  • dummy4fb on August 8, 2013, 7:00 GMT

    It is the on field umpire who decides either to overturn or stand by his decision based on the 3rd umpires feedback. Why is Tom Moody and others howling about this ?

  • TheOnlyEmperor on August 5, 2013, 9:42 GMT

    The DRS system consists of the following components all of which have flaws: 1. The imperfect technology. 2. The imperfect interpretation of the results thrown up by technology. 3. The imperfect rules that govern the interpretation of the technology. 4. The imperfect implementation of the such rules by the umpires. Without the DRS the umpires would be more focused on making the right decisions and there would be lesser heart-burn on the post-mortems done. It's easier to accept human error and move on, rather than to accept technology driven errors that require a six sigma approach to minimize them!

  • alarky on August 2, 2013, 14:19 GMT

    johnathonjosephs, what you've said from a superficial perspective is quite true. But in a more profound sense, it does not completely exonerate the 3rd umpire from total blame in these matters! My understanding is that while it is true that the TV umpire CANNOT use the exact words, "he's out" or he's not out" to advise his on-field colleague, he has a duty not only to "simply look at what technology gives and tells the facts"; but to do so both ACCURATELY and TACTFULLY, in order to save them both from some of these rather embarassing situations, being seen worldwide! Most times they are the victims of genuine errors, thus the reason that the authorities have introduced the DRS to help them. Using the Khawaja incident for example, don't you think if the TV umpire had reported to his colleague as follows: "Hot spot shows there's no touch, but I heard a noise; however, the cameras show daylight between bat and ball", the onfield umpire would change the decision? the brain is key here!

  • one-eyed-but-keepinitreal on August 2, 2013, 10:11 GMT

    @Devmanus, if a drunk driver behind the wheel of a car causes an accident is the car or the driver to blame? I think any rational seven year old could answer that question and most of the simple arguments you propose to support your nationalistic agenda. The DRS and umpiring skills are separate issues. In the Khawaja case I think most people would have been able to give the correct decision using the available technology. Yes a lot of bad original decision have been given around the world under pressure and without replay, especially in India, but people are arguing that this is one of the worst decisions for two reasons: 1. There was time to review the decision and; 2. There was clear evidence (gap between bat and ball) to overturn. There will always be contentious decisions but that is no argument for burying your head. Technology cannot make every decision correct. For example the Agar Stumping he had a section of black sole behind the line. Other may argue otherwise.

  • dummy4fb on August 2, 2013, 10:04 GMT

    DRS is the worst system in cricket .Kevin Rudd: "That was one of the worst cricket umpiring decisions I have ever seen" it is well said because DRS can't judge a man is out or not out, but only creating problem .DRS should be abolished from cricket.

  • Devmanus on August 2, 2013, 9:57 GMT

    its the same old story... Until it didnt harm you, you will never ever oppose it. now even CA and ECB are questing decision made by DRS...

    but everyboby laughed and critisized other boards when they try to avoid it.

    Let the on field umpire make only LBW decisions...and all Other decisions should be made by the third umpire...and lets accept them and move on...

  • Sultan2007 on August 2, 2013, 9:39 GMT

    DRS should be used soley to redress umpiring howlers. It was such a pity to hear Michael Clarke taking about how his team was disadvantaged becasue they didnt get the use of DRS right and England did a better job at it. Is this the core competency required of a cricketer now? Clever use of DRS? Ridiculous. Doesnt stop here. Batting techniques have had to be reinvented. The art of pad play has disappeared. The LBW decision has become a joke. The ball can now pitch anywhere as long as it hits in line and hits the stump, its out. Used to be, when umpires would give this only if a shot wasnt played. Batsmen trained to play forward on turning pitches to take LBW out of the equation. No longer true. The art of batting is fast changing and I am wondering whether its a good thing that batting technique is now being tailored to deal with a sytem and technology rather than solely the skills of a bowler and the idiosyncracies of the cricket ball. What a sorry state for my beloved game!

  • dummy4fb on August 2, 2013, 9:34 GMT

    The featured comment by johnathonjosephs is off the mark. There was a lot more to it than the lack of a hotspot mark and a noise. The 3rd umpire took an eternity watching repays that also showed a gap between bat and ball and the bat hitting the pad (hence a noise). If you are going to call other posters clueless JohnJo. you should get it right yourself. As for the third umpire - if didn't communicate all of the above then sack him. If if he did and the umpire on the ground ignored it then sack him or send him instead.

  • brusselslion on August 2, 2013, 9:32 GMT

    Stewart and Vaughan's justifiction for not walking would be laughable, if it were not so pathetic. A real 'two wrongs make a right' piece of logic.

    @IndiaNumeroUno on (August 1, 2013, 14:21 GMT): Are you suggesting that the umpires in this series are biased? Incompetent certainly, biased I doubt it.

    @fguy on (August 1, 2013, 18:26 GMT): Two identical comments on the same thread about a series 2 years ago! Sounds like a problem to me, mate. Seek help!