Madness in the Method

PERHAPS THE WORST way of getting out or missing out on a dismissal in cricket these days is “umpire’s call”. Take a close LBW shout, for example, which is given not out. The bowler is convinced he has his man and the wicketkeeper concurs. The captain, too, is on the same page and takes the DRS. Replays show the ball has indeed hit the pad first. Just when the bowler is feeling he has taken the perfect DRS call, does it all go to ball tracking. And when you see that the ball was hitting middle or leg but the impact says umpire’s call at the time of impact, you literally feel gutted. It is painful. You are there, and yet not there. The bowler has indeed won the mental battle but the batter is still out there.

Some of these umpires’ calls can be gamechanging. I vividly remember Virat Kohli falling to a close umpire’s call in the 2019 World Cup semi-final against New Zealand.

Trent Boult had bowled from over the wicket and at first glance, the ball seemed to be hitting Kohli well above the knee roll. While the umpire gave him out, he reviewed straight up to see the ball clipping the top of the middle stump. In fact, it was the base of the ball which was touching the top of the middle stump. The decision could have easily gone in favour of India and the outcome of the match could have been different.

While there is a detailed explanation on umpire’s call that is indeed out there, this is not a piece on technicalities. Rather, it is one on how borderline calls can decide cricket matches. From the batter’s perspective, more so. While the bowler will have another chance, for the batter, a marginal call can bring a career to an end. No one will remember if the batter was out to a close umpire’s call. The record will simply state that he or she was out and that’s that. While technology is a never-ending debate, my own view is umpires’ calls should be done away with. If the ball is hitting the stumps, it is out. Let there be no scope for ambiguity.

It is either a yes or a no. While I know it was hard on Virat Kohli, the reason I say this is simple. Another umpire could have ruled Kohli not out and if Boult went up for a DRS check, it would have been umpire’s call against the bowler. Things become way too subjective as a result. There is a clear case of ambiguity depending on human decisionmaking. When you are using technology, you have the option of doing away with ambiguity. You have the option of choosing a yes or a no. Either the ball is hitting the stumps or not hitting the stumps. I am conscious many will come and explain technical things to me. My answer to them is let’s keep sport simple. In the second Test against the West Indies in Delhi, Washington Sundar reviewed a decision for LBW against the visitors. At first glance, the ball seemed to be pitching in line and the only doubt was whether it had hit the pad first. Replays confirmed that was indeed the case and the Indians seemed buoyant.

Then the ball tracking came on screen. While the ball was going on to hit middle and leg, the point of impact was umpire’s call, and the batter continued not out.

Sundar was crestfallen and even went on to have a word with umpire Richard Illingworth, who had a wry smile on his face. Was he thinking he made a mistake or was it a smile of relief? Either way, these calls need to be looked at again for they can have a telling impact on the outcome.