The Indian team’s unhappiness with Dravid’s dismissal in the second innings at Galle is well known. For the record, originally given not out, Mahela after a lengthy dialogue with Doctrove went for the referral and got the decision overturned.
Initially, it was assumed that Indians were unhappy with Mahela’s protracted conversation with the umpire. It was reasoned that the prolonged chat gave Mahela an advantage and a chance to plant a seed of doubt in the umpires mind.
However, the exact reason behind India’s dissatisfaction is now out. The Indian’s believe that Mahela’s long-drawn-out discussion was a premeditated attempt to buy time for his teammates, either in the dressing room or on the ground to look at the replays and decide whether a referral will be in their favor.
This explains why, a normally restrained Dravid, smote his bat on the ground.
However, the exact reason behind India’s dissatisfaction is now out. The Indian’s believe that Mahela’s long-drawn-out discussion was a premeditated attempt to buy time for his teammates, either in the dressing room or on the ground to look at the replays and decide whether a referral will be in their favor.
This explains why, a normally restrained Dravid, smote his bat on the ground.
13 comments:
Mahela was justified. Abt time taken for the referal did our batsman not immediately walk into the pavilion when lights were called well before the close.And what abt the time lost due to rains. When it is convenient for them they become conscious abt time loss.
Whether Mahela waited for a sign or not from the dressing room, this will likely happen again, unless they set time limits - before the first replay is seen... What happens in stadiums with big screens - if a replay is shown, and then the captain asks for a referral?
R,
You have completely missed the point. The Indian's feel the Sri Lankan's deliberately engaged in a discussion in order to watch the TV replays.
RS,
That is a good point. They should come around to it or otherwise there will only be more controversies.
hmm...thats another aspect to look into bidding time...
though i doubt whether dravid threw his bat for that or in disgust of the uncharacteristic shot he played...
Pan,
Hope VMM does not read your comment.:)
me too ;))
@Ott, SP, I'm very much reading it. :) The rational side of me agrees (albeit with some difficulty) that it was not a great shot, but many times many ppl get away with it.
As for Mahela and dressing room confirmation, if that was what happened then it's disgusting - just as bad as Ponting claiming a grassed catch. Btw, Ott, where did you read this story? I didn't find it in the regulars that I read. They need to put a time restriction on this. Even if they do, I'm sure folks like these will find a way to misuse the loopholes in the system. The proceedings from the last two Tests have made me wonder if this is just a way to shut India/BCCI's mouth on the use of technology after Sydney. Now India will be on the backfoot about this, then we can go back to square-one with atrociously incompetent or partisan umpires officiating in matches.
VMM,
Read it in Hindu - regarding Indians wanting to have a second look on referrals.
Thanks, Ott. Will check it out.
in the com box, and manjrekar too -only he had to talk for all 3, sanath and cairns were playing marbles.
There were players fielding in front close to the bat. They were in a better position to advise Mahela than those in dressing rooms. During the discussion with the umpire I dont think Mahela was looking towards the pavilion. I wonder how this story came abt .As captain I would depend on those in the field to those in the dressing rooms.
We have come to the stage where we cannot accept decisions without murmering. If this is going to continue I am going to stop worrying abt cricket. Not worth it.
R,
Close in fielders may be better placed in the case of bat pad appeals. I doubt whether they are the right judges for lbw decisions.
Post a Comment