December 30th 2024.
On the final day of the fourth Test against Australia in Melbourne, India's opener Yashasvi Jaiswal's dismissal caused quite a stir. Jaiswal, who was batting on 84, was initially given not out by the on-field umpire Joel Wilson after Australia appealed for a caught-behind dismissal. However, upon review, third umpire Saikat Sharfuddoula made the decision to overturn the call, ruling Jaiswal out even though there was no edge registered on the Snicko.
The controversy erupted as the Snicko showed no spike, leading to accusations of cheating from the crowd at the Melbourne Cricket Ground. Jaiswal, who had played a solid innings of 84 off 208 deliveries, argued with the on-field umpires before eventually walking back to the pavilion.
Former ICC Elite Panel umpire Simon Taufel, who was commentating on the match, weighed in on the decision, stating that the third umpire made the correct call by going back to the clear deflection off Jaiswal's bat. He also explained that in such cases, the hierarchy of technology redundancy is followed, and the clear deflection is considered conclusive evidence.
This controversy is not the first of its kind in the series, as a similar incident occurred in the first Test in Perth. In that match, opener KL Rahul's dismissal also sparked a debate when the third umpire overturned the on-field umpire's decision without the benefit of a split-screen view. This led to speculation about whether the Snicko had responded to a hit on the pads or a slight graze of the bat.
The use of technology in umpiring decisions has been a topic of discussion for a while now, with some arguing for more reliance on it and others advocating for a balance between technology and the umpire's judgment. In this case, it seems that the third umpire made the right call by using the available technology to make an informed decision.
[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]
[Generative AI is experimental.]
