You could look at it a million ways, but there’s no separating the drama in the final over from the engrossing cricketing battle that Rajasthan Royals and Delhi Capitals displayed before us. The high-scoring thriller at Wankhede had a fair share of moments that would cut into highlights reels, but at least a few of them would be cut out after what unfolded in the final over.
What exactly happened in the final over of the DC vs RR game?
Delhi Capitals needed 36 runs off one over when Rovman Powell decided to shake off his rusty form and wield the bat the way he does in other franchise leagues. Obed McCoy was smashed for three successive sixes at the start with the last off a high full toss that Kuldeep Yadav at the non-striker’s end and his teammates in the dugout felt was above the waist. The on-field umpires refused to call it a no-ball, and the DC camp remonstrated, questioning why the decision couldn’t be checked with the third umpire.
Remember that at this point, DC had already brought the equation down to 18 runs off three balls. Had it been a no-ball, it would have been 18 off four balls with a free-hit included. It would drastically change the equation of the game and in the heat of the moment, Delhi Capitals, led by an animated, and clearly miffed, Rishabh Pant reacted adversely.
In a fit of anger, Pant was seen calling back the batters as he felt they were clearly wronged. Shane Watson, the assistant coach, was seen having a talk with Pant even as the captain refused to tone down. Ricky Ponting, whose family member had tested positive for COVID-19, is in isolation for a five-day period, and wasn’t available as such in the dugout.
Watson’s attempt to calm down Pant didn’t quite work out as he sent coaching staff Pravin Amre onto the field to discuss the chaos with the umpires, reminiscent of MS Dhoni’s famous walk onto the field of play to question a decision in the 2019 season of the IPL. The game resumed soon after with the umpires sticking to their original call and not checking the decision upstairs.
Why was the full toss not referred to the third umpire if there was indecision?
To put it simply, the on-field umpires cannot refer decisions other than for dismissals to the third umpire. The IPL Playing Conditions state that only dismissals and front foot no balls can be referred to the third umpire by the on-field umpires.
The playing conditions state:
Umpire Review
In the circumstances detailed in paragraphs 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 below, the on-field umpire shall have the discretion to refer the decision to the third umpire or, in the case of paragraphs 2.2, and 2.4, to consult with the third umpire before making the decision.
2.1 Run Out, Stumped, Bowled and Hit Wicket Decisions
2.2 Caught Decisions, Obstructing the Field
2.3 Boundary Decisions
2.4 Batter Running to the Same End
All of the above are dismissal types and these are the only ones the on-field umpires can check with the third umpire.
However, if a dismissal were to happen off the waist-high full toss, a check would be initiated to see if it was a no-ball for height.
No ball checks following a dismissal 2.5.5 If the bowler’s end umpire is uncertain as to the fairness of the delivery following a dismissal, either affecting the validity of the dismissal or which batter is dismissed, he/she shall be entitled to request the batter to delay leaving the field and to check the fairness of the delivery with the third umpire. Communication with the third umpire shall be by two-way radio.
Given the playing conditions, Nitin Menon and Nikhil Patwardhan had no option but to play by the rules and stick to what they felt was right. Was it right though? Several players and former players disagree, but quite a few of them are also against Pant’s actions when the decision arguably went against his team.
What did the others say?
Pant was vocal about the issue even at the post-match presentation ceremony after Delhi Capitals’ loss.
“Powell gave us a chance. I thought the no ball could have been precious for us,” Pant stated. “I thought we could have checked that no ball, but it’s not in my control.”
Pant felt that it was “not even close” and that “everyone in the ground saw that.”
“I think third umpire should have intervened in between and said it was a no ball, but I can’t change the rule myself I guess,” Pant added, sparking off a new discussion on the power the decision makers have in the game.
A few argued that Pant’s actions were against the spirit of the game and that asking the umpire to reconsider his decision by walking onto the field was simply not on.
A few others, however, felt that the onus was on the umpires to take it upstairs or for the third umpire to intervene and check the decision.
The complicated laws of the game do not encourage detours of that kind and while it is sad, it is worth mentioning that the umpires played by the laws, which by itself might need a change as a few mentioned.
“This is cricket, not football. You cannot be doing that,” commentator Kevin Pietersen said. “You cannot enter the field [referring to Pravin Amre]. I don’t think that would have happened if Ricky Ponting was there. I don’t think that would have happened at all. Jos Buttler has every right to walk up to Rishabh Pant and say, ‘hey, what on earth are you doing?’. For them to send one of their coaches to actually go on to the field and think that that was right, I don’t think that was the correct behaviour. We play the gentleman’s game and people make mistakes…”
What consequences will Rishabh Pant and Delhi Capitals players who protested face?
While Pant stated it was a “heat of a moment” thing in the post-match presentation ceremony, the players have no right to question the umpire, let alone force them to take an umpire’s review. The relevant section of the Playing Conditions state as below:
Save for requesting the umpire to review his/her decision under paragraph 3 (Player Review) below, players may not appeal to the on-field umpires to use the Umpire Review. Breach of this provision may constitute dissent and the player may be subject to disciplinary action under the IPL Code of Conduct for Players and team officials.
The behaviour from Pant and a few other DC players would fall under dissent and a likely sanction will be placed on them.
What can we change to avoid this in the future?
The archaic laws of the game need tweaks every now and then and this particular one falls under that category. To state a reference point, had the very same delivery been caught out, the third umpire would have been able to check for the no-ball automatically and arrive at a decision. As a viewer, to witness something as ambiguous as that, and not have clarity on what the right decision is, even when there’s the technology and someone available to interpret it, is frustrating.
In the end, the player who showed dissent would get a sanction, but what about the Playing Conditions that didn’t help in reaching the right decision because there was no provision by which the replays could be checked for the decision?
There are two possible straightforward solutions to this particular case.
— The front foot no-ball is checked every ball by the third umpire now. The same can be done for waist-high deliveries, giving the third umpire the right to intervene if it’s actually a no-ball.
— The Player Review [DRS] right now can only be taken for dismissals. Expanding that to wides, no-balls and other controversial decisions could help in ironing out such ambiguity.
Would cricket be open to these? Unlikely. But we have had soft signals removed from IPL Playing Conditions and front foot no balls checked by the third umpire. In the end, if these incidents spark healthy debates and discussions and pave the way to laws more relevant to the present game, it would work well for all the parties involved.
Read all the Latest News, Trending News, Cricket News, IPl Live Score UpdateLatest IPL Schedule 2022, and , IPl 2022 Points tableEntertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.