Former Australia umpire Simon Taufel has called the third umpire’s decision to give out Yashasvi Jaiswal in the Melbourne Test correct.
The former umpire of the elite panel of ICC told Channel-7- The umpire has taken the right decision. The 53-year-old umpire said- ‘In my opinion the decision was out. The third umpire took the right decision. Even with the technology protocol, we look at the evidence and if the umpire feels that the direction of the ball has changed after hitting the bat, there is no need to use any other type of technology to prove such a matter.’
“Even a slight change in the direction of the ball is conclusive evidence,” Taufel said. What we have seen from the third umpire in this particular case is that he used technology as an aid. Whatever the reason, this is not reflected in the audio (Sneeco) in this case.’
Who is Simon Taufel?
Simon Taufel is a former ICC Elite Panel umpire. This former Australia umpire has umpired in 87 Tests, 221 ODIs and 42 T20 Internationals. He was born on 21 January 1971 in Leonards, Australia.
There was a dispute a day ago
A day before, on Tuesday, December 30, there was a controversy regarding the decision of the third umpire on the wicket of Yashasvi Jaiswal in the Melbourne Test. In fact, on the last day of the Melbourne Test, Australian captain Cummins appealed for a catch on the ball against Yashasvi. The on-field umpire gave not out, but Australia took DRS and the third umpire declared Yashasvi out.
In DRS, the snicko meter showed that the ball did not hit the bat and there was no sound. However, the third umpire declared Yashasvi out on the basis of visual deflection. Yashasvi even questioned the on-field umpire on this decision, but the decision was not changed.
The third umpire took this decision at a time when Team India was in danger of losing and Yashasvi was leading the team with 84 runs. After this decision, the Indian fans present in the field raised slogans of cheater-cheeter.
Why there was a controversy over the decision, know in 5 questions and answers.
On what basis did the third umpire give the decision?
Umpire Sharfudullah of Bangladesh is handling the responsibility of third umpiring. Two pieces of evidence were placed before him to decide. Evidence of the first snickometer and visual evidence. Sharfudullah did not see any contact between ball and bat in the snickometer, as there was no sound, but based on the ball’s proximity and deflection from the gloves, the umpire declared Yashasvi out.
Why did Gavaskar call the decision wrong?
Sunil Gavaskar, who was commentating during the match, said, “You are using technology while taking the decision. It was clear on the snickometer that it was not out. This is a completely wrong decision. You are taking a decision under pressure. No concrete evidence of a successful out to the umpire. were not found, so giving him out is completely wrong.”
What do the ICC Rules say?
- According to ICC Cricket Rule 31.6, the “benefit of doubt” should always be given to the batsmen, meaning that if an umpire is unsure about the decision to dismiss, he should rule the batsmen “not out”. This is because batters get only one chance to play an innings and should not be dismissed on a small call.
- According to ICC rules, the decision of the field umpire also plays a major role during DRS. If the field umpire has declared not out, it is also taken into account while taking the decision. If the umpire has declared out, it also plays a role in the third umpire’s decision. LBW decisions are made only by umpire’s call during DRS.
In Rahul’s decision Snico was the basis, why not in Yashasvi?
- In the first match of the series too, there was a controversy over the wicket. In the first match, there was a controversy over the dismissal of KL Rahul during India’s first innings. Starc bowled the second ball of the 23rd over, which Rahul tried to defend. The ball went into the hands of wicketkeeper Alex Carey.
- The entire Australian team appealed, but the on-field umpire did not give out.
- Australian captain Pat Cummins took the review. When the replay was shown in the review, the gap between the bat and the ball was clearly visible from the rear camera angle, but the snickometer still showed a spike. Thus, the third umpire declared KL Rahul out. The third umpire took this decision based on the snickometer.
- After the third umpire’s decision on Yashasvi in the fourth Test, commentators Jatin Sapru, Irfan Pathan and Sunil Gavaskar questioned why the technology of the snickometer was ignored in Yashasvi’s decision if a snickometer was used for Rahul’s decision. Why this dual attitude?
How did India lose the Test after Yashasvi’s wicket?
Yashasvi was dismissed in the 71st over. Team India’s score was 140 runs for 7 wickets. India were all out for 155 runs in the next 8 overs. Team India lost the Melbourne Test. 5 Test matches are to be played in the Border-Gavaskar Trophy. Australia leads the series 2-1 after 4 Tests.
The reason for India’s defeat was the poor performance of the top-order batsmen. Apart from Yashasvi, the first three batsmen Rohit Sharma (9), KL Rahul (0) and Virat Kohli (5) could not reach double figures. Rishabh Pant’s bad shot also became the turning point. Yashasvi put on an 88-run partnership with Rishabh Pant to save the team from an early shock, but Pant played a poor shot and lost his wicket.
Rajeev Shukla also expressed his displeasure at Jaiswal’s dismissal
BCCI vice-president Rajeev Shukla was upset with the decision. Rajeev Shukla posted on ‘X’, ‘Yashasvi Jaiswal was clearly not out. The third umpire must pay attention to what the technology is indicating. The third umpire must have solid reasons while overturning the decision of the field umpire.’
Image Credit: Images/graphics belong to (Divya-Bhaskar).