Marais Erasmus – Bulletproof Truth

Marais Erasmus’ overs are up

“A more boring life is what I’m looking for.” – Marais Erasmus

Telford Vice / Cape Town

WHAT does Marais Erasmus want for his 61st birthday? To be bored, preferably at home. He spent his 60th, on Tuesday, 11,500 kilometres away from South Africa in New Zealand preparing to officiate in the men’s Test series against Australia. It will be his last international engagement.

“I’ll miss the privileges and the travelling,” Erasmus told Cricbuzz on Wednesday from Wellington, where the first Test starts on Thursday. “But I’ve had enough of being away and living outside of my comfort zone. I think having a more boring life is what I’m looking for.” He delivered the last line with the naughty chuckle that only those who know him outside the necessarily staid realm of umpiring would have heard.

From his debut in a men’s T20I between South Africa and Australia at the Wanderers in February 2006, he has stood in 80 Tests, 124 ODIs and 43 T20Is played by men, in 18 women’s T20Is, and as the television official in 131 men’s internationals across the formats.

“I decided in October last year and I informed the ICC that I would finish my contract in April and that would be that,” Erasmus said, denying reports implying he had been told to quit because of his age.

What would he do with his downtime? “For the first couple of months I’m just going to take the winter off. We have some travel planned domestically, and from September I’ll be in the hands of CSA. We still need to finalise how they want to use me. I’ll umpire in domestic cricket next season and play a mentoring role. I might go to the Khaya Majola Week [a schools event] or the club championships, and I’ll be watching and advising umpires.” Erasmus said he hoped to continue the work in the latter area done by his close friend Murray Brown, who died on February 8, and Shaun George, who died on Saturday.

What would he miss about being part of the ICC’s elite panel, which he joined in 2010? “The challenge of the job, being in that moment of trying to get it right. That’s always something special and tough, and it’s exhilarating when you have a good game.”

He might also yearn for the company of some of his colleagues: “There’s lots of camaraderie, because we’re all in it together even though there’s competition between the guys. We all understand the highs and the lows, and that when someone is going through a rough period you need to support him because your turn will come.”

Erasmus recommended umpiring as a profession “if you’re passionate about cricket”. His own passion burned brightly enough to keep him in the game after he had retired after playing 53 first-class and 54 list A games from December 1988 to December 1996 as a combative Boland seam bowling allrounder.

“To have seen the best players and been to the iconic venues and World Cups is a massive privilege,” Erasmus said. “It’s been quite a journey from being a schoolboy who kept score while watching Eddie Barlow play at Newlands.”

Along the way he’s been to the 2023, 2019, 2015 and 2011 men’s ODI World Cups, all eight editions of what is now called the men’s T20 World Cup and three of the women’s version. He has stood in 14 Ashes Tests, seven games between India and Pakistan, and in 10 editions of the IPL.

But several times he has had to celebrate his birthday — which he shares with Graeme Pollock, who turned 80 this year — without his family and far from his home in the Western Cape hamlet of Malmesbury. On February 27, 2008 he was at the men’s under-19 World Cup in Malaysia. Two years later he was in India for a tour by England. He had another birthday in India in 2013 for Australia’s visit. The year after that Erasmus blew out the candles in the Caribbean, during a series involving England. In 2015 he was in New Zealand for an Australia rubber. Five years later it was back to West Indies for Sri Lanka’s tour.

You don’t get to do all that if you don’t know what you’re doing. Erasmus, who joined the ICC’s elite panel in 2010, knows what he’s doing well enough to have won the David Shepherd Trophy — the prize the ICC awards annually to the world’s best umpire — in 2016, 2017 and 2021. Only Simon Taufel, who landed the first five from 2004, has claimed the trophy more often.

Even so, Erasmus has often been at the centre of drama on the field. It was he, for instance, who during a World Cup match between Sri Lanka and Bangladesh in Delhi in November correctly upheld the appeal that made Angelo Mathews the first batter to be timed out in international cricket.

“We need to find a different way of administrating that situation,” Erasmus said. “Yes, it’s the responsibility of the player, and maybe if we find a different way the players will abuse it. But I think that debate is wide open. It wasn’t something I wanted to be part of at a World Cup, but I had to apply the law.”

The relevant section says: “After the fall of a wicket or the retirement of a batter, the incoming batter must, unless time has been called, be ready to receive the ball, or for the other batter to be ready to receive the next ball within three minutes of the dismissal or retirement. If this requirement is not met the incoming batter will be out, timed out.”

Mathews, not least because he had to resolve an issue with the strap of his helmet, was not ready to face within three minutes. But the incident spawned a slew of criticism of the umpires, much of it rooted in ignorance and parochialism. You could understand how a touch of boredom, preferably at home, might be welcome after that.

Cricbuzz

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Any colour you want at the SCG, as long as it’s green

Aussies don’t think about cricket at this time of year, in the same way some people don’t think about roast turkey until Christmas.

Telford Vice / Sydney Cricket Ground

UNTIL Kane Williamson loomed on screens around the ground upon winning the toss, you might have been in the dark about the identity of Pakistan’s opponents. There was plenty of vivid, vibrant, visible green — shirts, flags, face paint – near the gates hours before the match, and in due course it flowed into the stands. Black or grey? Not so much.

Certainly, the Sydney Morning Herald didn’t do much to ensure people knew there was a big game in their ’hood. A passing reference in Wednesday’s edition was made in a piece on how Australia might address their problems, quoting Matthew Hayden — Pakistan’s mentor — speaking at a “a T20 World Cup press conference previewing tonight’s semi-final against New Zealand at the SCG”.

And that was that. Would a knockout match in a global tournament in any other country be all but ignored because the hosts’ team hadn’t been good enough to reach the play-offs? Perhaps. Or maybe the paper was catering to a readership who didn’t seem that interested in the competition even when Australia were in the mix.

There’s a theory that the Aussies don’t think about cricket at this time of year, in the same way that some people don’t think about roast turkey until Christmas. Australians also think of pavlova in December. Surely that’s Pavlovian?

Pakistanis wouldn’t understand these strange tendencies. Their passion for cricket burns bright year-round, and is focused on their beloved team — who reinvented themselves in the space of seven days after losing, cruelly, to India and, unthinkably, to Zimbabwe by beating South Africa at this very venue. The South Africans didn’t do much for the tournament, but by allowing Pakistan to recover from 43/4 and 95/5 to 185/9, and then floundering to a reply of 108/9, they helped them rekindle their fire. Good job: far rather a rising Pakistan in the semis than a discombobulating South Africa.

The warm-ups — Pakistan’s replete with three large national flags planted into the outfield — were backgrounded by a constant and growing burble of expectation. By the time the superfluousness of the anthems had been wearily observed, and Shaheen Afridi was finally gliding like a hawk through the shadows that shrouded the ground to bowl the first ball to Finn Allen, the stands were a veritable forest of green. Soon, the trees were talking. Or rather roaring their support in a towering tornado of urgent noise.

So you had to feel sorry for Marius Erasmus when he was proved wrong to have given Allen out leg-before to Afridi’s second delivery. When Erasmus raised his finger again after the next ball, for the same appeal, and had his decision confirmed electronically, you couldn’t do anything but admire his unflappability. It seems not all South Africans melt under pressure.

Sunset around the SCG prompts hundreds of birds to set a course to roost for the night. They fly far beyond the ground’s western boundaries, but not far enough to escape forming part of the pageant: a golden sky speckled with the silhouettes of creatures moving elegantly above, a heaving, singing, shouting, jubilating mass of green-clad people below, and a cricket ground that has retained enough of what it should be, thanks to the towers, swooning roofs and twirly iron work on the Members’ and Ladies’ pavilions to the west, to give the scene a hug in a way that mere stadiums cannot.

Even if you weren’t a Pakistan supporter or a ridiculously outnumbered New Zealand fan; if you were a disinterested Australian, or even a South African who was, justifiably, spitting with rage at that damned team and will be for years to come, you had to gape in appreciation. Cricket is a beautiful game.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Dear Bangladesh: grow up

“We don’t want to think too much about what happened in the opening game.” – Mominul Haque talks sense.

Telford Vice | Gqeberha

PLEASE, Bangladesh, don’t blow this. You played far better cricket than South Africa in the one-day series to not only win it but also earn the respect of all who watched you, the locals included. But you’re losing that respect as we speak by reducing yourself to a mess of unseemly squabbling in what looks a lot like an immature, emotional attempt to deflect the blame for your dismal performance in the second innings at Kingsmead. It’s time to grow up and get on with the game.

Many cricketminded South Africans — and surely also Bangladesh’s more serious, less blindly nationalistic supporters — would want to tell Mominul Haque’s team something of that sort as they prepare for the second Test at St George’s Park. If the visitors don’t pull themselves out of their damaging downward spiral of negativity about matters they cannot change, what started as their most successful tour of South Africa could end in ignominy.

Yes, the umpiring in the first Test was below par for officials of the calibre of Marias Erasmus and Adrian Holdstock. No, that doesn’t mean they are biased because they are South African: their overturned decisions were evenly split between the teams.

Yes, the South Africans came hard at them, as every team do in every match they play. No, that isn’t automatically cause for complaint: match referee Andy Pycroft, who is not South African and has shown no hesitation in taking action against South Africans in the past, has said nothing about unfair sledging.

Yes, taking first strike on South African pitches is challenging. No, that doesn’t mean you should win the toss and refuse to bat — particularly when your South African head coach, who knows better than you do about these things, advises you to bat. That way, you are at the crease in the third innings of the match and not the fourth, when conditions will be more difficult still.

How the Bangladeshis cannot see that they are undermining their own cause by distracting themselves in these poisonous ways is difficult to fathom. They are purposefully taking their eye off the ball and could pay a high price for refusing to take responsibility for failing themselves in Durban.

Do they honestly want to go home in the disarray that would take hold if they deliver another abjectly poor display? Do they want the fine memory of their ODI triumph to be erased and replaced by increasingly damning evidence of alarming insecurity and an utter dearth of self-belief. And all the while the home side are smiling in smug disbelief at rivals who seem hell bent on beating themselves.

That said, South Africa didn’t get everything right at Kingsmead. They lost their last six wickets for 187 in the first innings and the last nine for 88 in the second dig, albeit that they were then batting with the security of a growing lead. Their bowlers allowed Bangladesh to score 115 more runs after they had been reduced to 183/6. They put down four catches in the field, not all of them difficult.

But those kinds of issues are paved over with happiness when you dismiss your opponents for 53 using only two bowlers. And especially, in South Africa, when those bowlers are spinners. The selection of Simon Harmer and Keshav Maharaj, who took 14 wickets between them, marked the first time South Africa picked two specialist slow bowlers in a home Test since 1970.

Might that spark a revolution in their thinking, or was it merely a nod to the prevailing conditions? We won’t have a proper answer even if, as expected, both are deployed again in Gqeberha — where the pitch is not unlike Kingsmead’s. But it should be interesting watching the argument for more spin in the country gain currency.

It would be even more interesting if Bangladesh remember they’re here to play cricket, not behave like over-indulged children.

When: Friday, 10am Local Time

Where: St George’s Park, Gqeberha

What to expect: A slow surface and rain on Sunday, but the easterly wind that has been forecast to blow for the entire match will bring moisture from the Indian Ocean to help seam and swing bowlers.

Team news

South Africa: Similar pitch as Kingsmead, same XI who won handsomely at Kingsmead.

Possible XI: Dean Elgar (capt), Sarel Erwee, Keegan Petersen, Temba Bavuma, Ryan Rickelton, Kyle Verreynne, Wiaan Mulder, Keshav Maharaj, Simon Harmer, Lizaad Williams, Duanne Olivier

Bangladesh: Tamim Iqbal is over the stomach problem that kept him out of the first Test, and should replace Shadman Islam. But Taskin Ahmed’s absence because of a shoulder injury will hurt the visitors. The sensible option, considering the likely conditions, would be to fill the vacancy with Taijul Islam.

Possible XI: Tamim Iqbal, Mahmudul Hasan Joy, Nazmul Hossain Shanto, Mominul Haque (capt), Mushfiqur Rahim, Yasir Ali, Litton Das, Taijul Islam, Mehidy Hasan, Khaled Ahmed, Ebadat Hossain

What they said:

“Even though we were bowling spinners, the ruthlessness and relentlessness that they showed was world class.” — Dean Elgar on the performance of Keshav Maharaj and Simon Harmer at Kingsmead. Both are likely to feature at St George’s Park.

“We will play for a win and we don’t want to think too much about what happened in the opening game.” — Mominul Haque talks the talk to put the Kingsmead catastrophe behind him and his team.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Elgar to Bangladesh: ‘harden up’

“I didn’t see any bad sledging out there, even from their side. This is Test cricket, and we need to dry our eyes sometimes.” – Dean Elgar

Telford Vice | Gqeberha

DEAN Elgar has denied and dismissed Bangladesh’s allegations of untoward sledging during the Kingsmead Test, and told the visitors to “harden up”. His comments are sure to inflame tensions ahead of the second match of the series, which starts at St George’s Park on Friday.

Asked at a press conference on Thursday what he made of Bangladesh’s claims, Elgar said: “I don’t think they’re justified whatsoever. We play the game hard, and if anything we were just giving back what we were getting when we were batting.

“By no means did we swear or use foul language towards the Bangladeshi cricketers, because we respect them. I think they need to harden up and play the game at a level that maybe they’re not used to.

“One of my messages to the players is that we do everything with dignity, and we don’t throw our badge or our name away. I didn’t see any bad sledging out there, even from their side. This is Test cricket, and we need to dry our eyes sometimes.”

The Bangladeshis have said that the South Africans targetted 21-year-old Mahmudul Joy Hasan, who was playing just his third Test, for abuse. Elgar refuted the assertion: “We wouldn’t go out there and intentionally try and intimidate a young player. We’ll play the game at a hard level, but we’re not there to use language to try to intimidate guys. We’d rather try and intimidate by our skill.

“But, also, this is Test cricket. When I started playing it [against Australia at the WACA in December 2012], the environments were a lot harsher. You were told everything that you didn’t want to know about yourself.”

Asked at a later press conference on Thursday about Elgar’s view, Mominul Haque said: “In cricket, sledging happens and you have to absorb it. I never complain about it.” That differs from what Mominul said immediately after the Durban Test: “Sledging is quite normal, but the umpires didn’t seem to notice it.”

Indeed, Bangladesh seem to have a bigger issue than their claims of sledging with the performance of Marais Erasmus and Adrian Holdstock, who had eight of their decisions overturned on review — four of which went in South Africa’s favour and four in the visitors’.

“I don’t think the pitch helped, especially with the variable bounce, which can challenge the umpires,” Elgar said. “I feel for them because they’re good umpires. Marais is the umpire of the year [for 2021, 2017 and 2016]. Adrian [who stood in his fifth Test] is just starting off in the Test arena, and he’s definitely not a bad umpire. They are human beings — they do make errors, as do the players. But I’m pretty sure they’re going to learn a hell of a lot out of that. Hopefully in the second Test we can have a better show.”

The visitors failed to refer two other unsuccessful appeals, all of which DRS revealed would have earned wickets had they been sent upstairs. “Whatever the umpire decides, we need to respect that,” Elgar said. “Technology is there for a reason. If you don’t use the technology, then you’re holding yourself accountable for [the umpires’] decisions.”

One of the sources of Bangladesh’s ire will be moved sideways at St George’s Park, where Allahudien Palekar will replace Holdstock, who will move to the television official’s booth in accordance with appointments made before the series. But Bangladesh won’t be able to escape the home side’s intensity and competitiveness.

“We’re representing our country and we want to win, and if you’re playing a little bit of a mind game on the opposition, why not,” Elgar said, and hinted that the Bangladeshis’ overly dramatic response to events on the field made them party to their own downfall: “Maybe they got caught up in the moment, which played perfectly into our hands. That’s what comes with gamesmanship. You’ve got to outsmart and outplay and outwit your opposition. That’s the total emotional and mental side of Test cricket that people forget about sometimes. If you incorporate your skill and tick the boxes to the best of your ability, that’s what sums up Test cricket.”

Elgar’s skin would seem significantly more difficult to get under than that of South Africa’s opponents in this rubber. But even one of the toughest cricketers in the game was no match for a slip in the shower in Durban on Monday night.

“I’ve got a few stitches in my forehead,” Elgar said about a visible gash above his right eye. “It wasn’t my proudest moment, but these kind of accidents happen. I batted today [Thursday], which was a concern because of where my helmet rests. But I seem to be OK.”

That’s bad news for Bangladesh’s hopes of recovering from being bowled out for 53 — their lowest total in this country — in the second innings at Kingsmead to seal South Africa’s 220-run victory. Because if they thought Elgar and his team came hard at them in Durban, they ain’t seen anything yet.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Kingsmead comes in from the cold, and prompts Bangladesh’s bizarre blame game

“If you have someone who knows the ground like the back of their hand you need to understand that he knows what he’s talking about.” – Ryan Rickelton implores Bangladesh to trust Russell Domingo.

Telford Vice | Gqeberha

WHAT had gone so wrong, Graeme Smith was asked. “It’s just …” He paused to try to think of a less direct way of saying what he was about to say, decided to stay true to his damn straight self instead, and completed his sentence: “… Durban.”

It was December 29, 2011 and Smith was trying to explain to a press conference how and why his team had lost a Test to Sri Lanka at home. The result jolted South African cricket. Being beaten in their backyard by an Asian team was rare but grudgingly accepted if that team were Pakistan or India. Sri Lanka? Don’t joke. Even so, Rangana Herath, who took nine wickets to seal the Lankans’ first win in nine Tests in the country, saw the funny side: “That’s why we are laughing at you.”

That loss followed defeats at Kingsmead by Australia, England and India. South Africa beat India there in December 2013, but then went down to England, drew a rain-ruined match with New Zealand, and were beaten by Australia and Sri Lanka. In the same period, they lost only five of the 41 home Tests they played at other grounds. Even St George’s Park, where surfaces are also slow, had come to the party: played six, won five, drew one.

Maybe it really was just Durban. South Africa’s players had long since decamped from the beachfront hotel where they had usually stayed — less than 2km from Kingsmead — to another 29km away in Umhlanga, a sanitised seaside suburb to the north. Perhaps they were scared away by the rude realities of Durban’s gritty urban environment, which would only have been exacerbated by playing at the country’s only inner-city Test venue.

So South Africans will hope that their team’s emphatic victory over Bangladesh at Kingsmead on Monday will serve to reclaim the ground from foreigners who have felt too welcome there for too long. And open a new avenue of thinking about how to win there. South Africa’s only other success in their last 10 Durban Tests was built on the standard procedure for getting the job done in this country: Dale Steyn and Morné Morkel claimed 15 of India’s 20 wickets in December 2013.

This time, Simon Harmer and Keshav Maharaj took 14. Only once has spin grabbed more wickets for South Africa in their 245 home Tests, and that was more than 112 years ago — Bert Vogler and Aubrey Faulkner snapped up all 20 against England at the Old Wanderers in January 1910.

Much has changed about South African cricket since their Test attack comprised Vogler, Faulkner, Reggie Schwarz and Gordon White; wrist spinners all. Kingsmead has changed, too, particularly in recent years. And for the better. The pitch for the Bangladesh match offered assistance for seamers and spinners alike, and batting on it was challenging but far from unfair. The surface was relaid two-and-half years ago. That play started on time on Sunday after Saturday night’s deluge of 50mm — two-thirds of what falls on average in Durban in the whole of April — was a minor miracle, and no small tribute to the efforts of the groundstaff and the world-class drainage system, which was overhauled four years ago.

Kingsmead has come in from the cold in several senses, including financially, under the direction of a young and innovative chief executive, Heinrich Strydom, who has been on board since August 2017. And thanks to the dedication of his hardworking staff, who buzz with an enthusiasm not often seen among CSA’s also industrious but demoralised managers and executives.

A symbol of that difference was the stuck sightscreen that held up the start of the series for 33 minutes, which was one of the few aspects of what might otherwise have been a flawless occasion. The buck for that problem stopped with CSA and one of their service providers, not with Kingsmead.

Some 900km down South Africa’s east coast in Gqeberha, staff at St George’s Park would have been watching with interest. The second Test starts there on Friday, and in some ways the ground is what Kingsmead was until not long ago: emblematic of a fragile economy worsened by the pandemic and the chronic and intensifying flaws in South African society. It’s also a ground where South Africa have lately struggled to perform — they lost here to Sri Lanka in February 2019 and to England in January 2020.

Dean Elgar played in both those matches, and in South Africa’s last five at Kingsmead. He has one win to show for all that. Small wonder that, even in the afterglow of Monday’s thumping victory, he said: “We still want to play the Highveld kind of cricket, where you’re playing three seamers and a world-class spinner, where fast bowling is our prime source of attack.” He will have to hold that thought until next season, what with St George’s Park and Kingsmead cut similar conditions cloth. But the two grounds are also different.

“Get ready for a fucking brass band in your ears for five days,” one of the television camera operators working on the series said to another at Durban’s airport on Tuesday as they waited to board a flight to Gqeberha, a reference to the providers of St George’s Park’s perennial soundtrack — which is beloved by some and detested by others.

“We know the wind howls here, which makes it difficult in all areas; those are the challenges you have to deal with,” Ryan Rickelton said in media material CSA released on Wednesday. The wind is an important element of the conditions. The easterly comes off the Indian Ocean just more than 3km away, and brings with it moisture that makes seam bowling more threatening. The westerly blows in from the hinterland, which has been stricken by drought since 2015, and dries the surface — making it better for batting. On Wednesday, a blustery westerly pumped at between 50km and 74km an hour. If you’re at the ground, the “bowling wind” comes over the main scoreboard. The “batting wind” flies from beyond the grandstand to the west.

But the Bangladeshis won’t have to do all this homework. Russell Domingo was born and raised in the city, and no-one knows St George’s Park better than the former Warriors coach. But that can only help the visitors’ players if they take Domingo’s advice. On the evidence of what happened at the toss in Durban, that seems unlikely.

“I was very surprised that they bowled first, because at Kingsmead you generally bat first,” Rickelton said. On Wednesday, Cricbuzz confirmed with BCB president Nazmul Hasan that Domingo had indeed wanted Bangladesh to bat first should Mominul Haque have won the toss at Kingsmead. But Mominul chose to field, and will thus have to bear a large portion of the responsibility for his team being dismissed for 53 — their record low in South Africa — in the second innings.

Rickelton all but implored South Africa’s opponents to do better next time by listening to the expertise they have at hand: “With Russell being from here and Allan [Donald, the bowling coach] having played a hell of a lot of cricket here, there’s valuable insight they need to exploit. It will be an unknown ground for a majority of their players, so if you have someone who lives here and knows the ground like the back of their hand you really need to invest in what they have to say and understand that he knows what he’s talking about.”

But the Bangladeshis seem determined to self-destruct and are blaming everyone except themselves for the mess they made of the first Test, including the umpires and, bizarrely, the malfunctioning sightscreen.

BCB cricket operations chair Jalal Yunus has been quoted as saying: “There hasn’t been impartial umpiring in this Test match. It started on the first day. We were held up for half-an-hour at the start of the game due to the sightscreen. We were deprived of the initial advantage. To make up this half-an-hour, they extended the lunch session, instead of starting early, which we usually see. It is definitely at the umpire’s discretion, but generally we see them making up for lost time by starting early.”

If Yunus has been quoted accurately, his comments are at best farcical and at worst dishonest. To try to besmirch the impartiality of Marais Erasmus and Adrian Holdstock — who are both South African — because of a sightscreen glitch is scandalously wrong. Nobody on a cricket ground is more intent on getting play going at the earliest opportunity than umpires. And Yunus would surely have been party to the memorandum of understanding agreed by CSA and the BCB — which clearly states that lost time will not be made up on subsequent mornings.

Other Bangladeshis have implied the umpires made biased decisions, including Shakib al Hasan — despite him being thousands of kilometres away in the US. None of the complainants has yet interrogated the unimpeachable fact that, of the eight calls that were overturned on review in the match, four favoured South Africa and four favoured Bangladesh.

The Bangladeshis have also alleged that their players were unfairly sledged by the South Africans at Kingsmead, despite Ebadot Hossain having been central to the only obviously unsavoury on-field episode. Seemingly annoyed by a fielder not being where he wanted him, Ebadot took out his frustration on Elgar, who was safely in his ground when the fast bowler hurled the ball in the South African’s direction. Still not satisfied, Ebadot launched an emotional verbal tirade at Elgar that required Holdstock’s intervention to restore calm.

Aggression is part of the game. Impotent rage for no apparent reason is not. The Bangladeshis would do well to remember that, and this, too: when they look for reasons why matters went so badly wrong for them, they can’t blame Durban.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

The unfairness of umpiring

“I think it’s time for ICC to go back to neutral umpires.” – Shakib al Hasan casts aspersions recklessly.

Telford Vice | Kingsmead

WHETHER he is meeting dictators or descendants, Marais Erasmus wears the same smile. It is wide and warm, spreads in a gentle curve below his twinkling eyes, and suits his generally genial demeanour like the ring of a bell does a bicycle. He has the comfortable bearing of a middle-aged cherub plainly content with life, love and everything else.

Erasmus is also the world’s best umpire, maybe the finest of his generation. He has won the David Shepherd Trophy, awarded by the ICC to the year’s best official, in 2016, 2017 and 2021 — as many times as Aleem Dar and Richard Kettleborough. Only Simon Taufel, who reeled off five consecutive wins from 2004 to 2008, has claimed the prize more often.

Erasmus stood in the quarter-finals at the 2011 and 2015 men’s World Cups. He was the television official in the semi-finals and final of the latter tournament, and on the field in the semi-finals and final four years later — as he was at the men’s 2017 Champions Trophy, 2016 World T20 and 2021 T20 World Cup, and the 2010, 2012 and 2014 women’s World T20s. Since he made his international debut in a men’s T20I between South Africa and Australia at the Wanderers in February 2006, he has featured in 71 Tests, 105 ODIs and 53 T20Is.

Clearly, besides being a thoroughly good bloke, the man knows what he’s doing. So what’s happened at Kingsmead these past four days? Five of Erasmus’ decisions have been overturned on review, and three of the four that have remained intact have survived only by dint of umpire’s call. Another, a not out after an inswinger from Khaled Ahmed rapped Keegan Petersen on the back pad before lunch on Sunday, wasn’t sent upstairs. DRS said the ball, untouched by Petersen’s bat or gloves, would have nailed the stumps.

Before this match, 69 of Erasmus’ 264 reviewed decisions in Tests had been reversed — or 26.14%, around average for elite umpires. So far at Kingsmead, he’s got it wrong five times out of nine, or 55.56%. Only two of the nine — those that weren’t put in the umpire’s call category — can be considered conclusively correct.

Adrian Holdstock, Erasmus’ partner, who is standing in his fifth Test, has been more successful. Five of his eight reviewed decisions have stuck — one of them thanks to umpire’s call — and two have been undone. He also decided Najmal Hossain Shanto had not edged Simon Harmer near the end of Sunday’s play. South Africa did not review. Again, the gizmo proved everyone wrong. Holdstock fell victim to the same thing in the first innings, when DRS showed Petersen had edged Taskin Ahmed.

Even so, there is cause if not for concern then for questioning. In all in this match, that’s 11 incorrect calls — including the three that fooled the umpires as well as the fielding team — and three others that were only marginally right. Erasmus and Holdstock are fine umpires, but they are both South African. Were they guilty of making hometown decisions? Shakib al Hasan seems to have thought so. From his home in the US, he tweeted: “I think it’s time for ICC to [go] back to neutral umpires as the Covid situation is OK in most cricket-playing countries.” That was after Erasmus had given Dean Elgar not out on Taskin Ahmed’s leg-before shout after lunch on Sunday — and had to change his decision on review.

Shakib should have known better: the number of overturned decisions in the match is evenly split at 4-4 in respect of which team they have favoured. Thus Erasmus and Holdstock are owed an apology by Shakib. Given his troubled, sometimes downright awful history with umpires, they should not expect it to arrive anytime soon.

Asked during a press conference what suddenly fallible umpiring, by two of the best in the business, no less, did to players’ confidence, South Africa batting consultant Justin Sammons offered an impeccable forward defensive: “Everybody’s human and everybody in the changeroom respects them. It’s not an easy job. We’ve just got to get on with our business. We’ve got to control what’s in our hands and block out any uncontrollables. That’s an uncontrollable. It’s important that we focus on our job at hand.”

He’s right, of course. If players’ blunders are accepted as part of the game, why not umpires’? Instead, officials get the short end of the stick. After the world has seen they have got it wrong they are required to keep calm and continue as if nothing untoward has happened. Contrast that with the solace Wiaan Mulder was able to take on Thursday after he edged the first ball he faced, bowled by Khaled Ahmed, to gully. Mulder retreated to the shadows of the dugout, where he remained for 20 minutes and more with the look of a jilted lover on his face.

Like players, umpires are also subject to the swings and roundabouts of poor and good form. Erasmus and Holdstock also stood together in the pivotal Newlands Test in January. Of the 11 decisions Elgar and Virat Kohli reviewed, only four were changed. Maybe they aren’t having the best of games at Kingsmead, but that doesn’t make them bad umpires. Indeed, Holdstock has had just six of the 19 decisions that have been referred during his Test career declared invalid. That’s a success rate of 68.42% — well above average.

None of the errors committed at Kingsmead have been blatant. But, especially in the case of the more experienced Erasmus, who has been a model of umpiring excellence for almost his entire career, they have stuck out.

With Bangladesh having lost three of their top four for eight runs in pursuit of a now near impossible target that will be 263 runs away when they resume on Monday, the umpires’ mistakes are unlikely to have a serious influence on the outcome of the match.

And Erasmus’ smile, the same one he wore at a reception hosted by, in the words of the invitation, “His Excellency Mahindra Rajapaksa, President of Sri Lanka” in Colombo during the 2007 men’s World Cup, and the same one he flashed in Cape Town airport’s arrivals hall at a couple of disembarking acquaintances while he waited for one of his sons to appear through the doors, will shine on. So it should.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Mahmudul makes magic as South Africa slip

“It’s a weird wicket. Both new balls did less than the older ball.” – Lizaad Williams

Telford Vice | Kingsmead

AS tea ticked closer at Kingsmead on Saturday, a tennis ball spurted from a lively game of grass-bank cricket onto the outfield. There it lay unnoticed, near the long-on boundary at the northern end, for more than an over until Marais Erasmus spotted it and motioned towards the dugout for assistance.

Khaya Zondo obliged, trotting over and tossing the ball back to grateful recipients. His reward was to be asked to sign autographs for the gathered throng of children. Happily, he obliged. A few overs later, the same ball found its way onto the field again. This time, Ryan Rickelton saw it as he loped back to his fielding position. He swooped and lobbed it back, left-arm and fluidly, and was also promptly persuaded to make the kids’ day.

The game on the grass bank didn’t stop for tea, of course. And as the players emerged for the third session another, different ball was deftly driven into the concrete moat meant to help keep spectators off the field. A nearby security guard shook his head and glared at the offending batter, who had held the striking pose of his follow-through.

All the while the sun beamed down, confounding a forecast for rain — and making the blazing floodlights, which had been turned on before the day’s play started under heavy cloud cover, look like sparklers at a fireworks display.

If you didn’t know better you would have thought all was well. It wasn’t, for South Africa. When Bangladesh resumed 269 behind with Simon Harmer having dispensed with four of Bangladesh’s top five, the home side seemed on course for domination. By tea, their lead had been whittled to 110 and three wickets still stood.

The odd man out — or should that be in? — among the visitors’ top five, 21-year-old opener Mahmudul Joy Hasan, delivered a career-defining performance in only his fourth Test innings. Having faced 141 balls on Friday, he hung tough for another 185 on Saturday. In all, he batted for more than seven hours for his 137, his first century and the only hundred by a Bangladeshi in the 13 Tests they have played against South Africa, home and away.

It was a desperately needed innings, and Mahmudul answered the call with the rock solid discipline of a stalwart. He made his choices with due care and never looked out of his depth. When he was dismissed in the ninth over after tea to end the innings, he had done the lion’s share of the toil it took to diminish South Africa’s advantage to a marginal 69 runs — exactly 200 fewer than it was when play began.

And he should have been out earlier. Twice. Mahmudul was 64 when he tried to work a delivery to leg and was dropped by Sarel Erwee at the forwardest of short legs. He was 108 when Keegan Petersen grassed a grab at slip. Both were fiendishly difficult chances, and both times the bowler denied was Harmer.

Earlier, in the ninth over of the morning, Dean Elgar had somehow spilled the straightforward slip catch that would have removed Litton Das and ended his partnership with Mahmudul at 20. Instead it grew to 82; one of three half-century stands presided over by Mahmudul.

Those weren’t the only questions South Africa raised. Given that Harmer, Keshav Maharaj and Elgar bowled all but nine of the 49 overs Bangladesh faced on Friday — and dismissed them and dried up the runs — why did Lizaad Williams and Duanne Olivier send down the first nine overs on Saturday? They kept the damage down to 23 runs, and Williams had Taskin Ahmed caught in the gully to claim his first Test wicket. But it was puzzling why what had worked so well on Friday wasn’t the option taken first thing on Saturday, especially considering the ball was no longer new.

“The wicket had been under the covers overnight and it was overcast this morning, so the ball might have moved around,” was Williams’ initial stab at an explanation at a press conference, which he followed with: “It’s a weird wicket. Both new balls did less than the older ball. It’s not normal. I don’t know why it’s doing that, but it’s good for us because you bowl with the older ball for longer than with the new ball.”

The upshot was that Harmer’s deserved claim for a five-wicket haul in his first Test since November 2015 fell one short. Having taken 4/42 in 20 overs on Friday, he went wicketless for 61 in the same number of overs a day later. There was more poetry where that came from in the way Bangladesh’s innings unravelled — with Harmer safely pouching two catches at slip to hasten the end, albeit both more straightforward than those dropped off his bowling.

South Africa faced four mostly uneventful overs in their second innings before the clouds closed their fist around the ground and bad light, followed by rain, ended play at 4.10pm. The home side will take a lead of 75 into the fourth day of an increasingly intriguing contest.

But their struggle to dismiss opponents they might expected to push around, especially in their own conditions and more so after striking significantly on Friday — stoked the embers of the debate over the defection of their first-choice pace attack to the IPL. How much better would Elgar’s team have fared had Kagiso Rabada, Anrich Nortjé, Marco Jansen and Lungi Ngidi been available instead of half a world away?

There is no quantifiable answer to that question, but it’s worth putting to bed the moan that the IPL is solely to blame for South Africa’s diminished pace arsenal. What the pandemic has done to scheduling for international as well as franchise cricket is an important consideration. As is the fact that, contrary to what has been widely assumed, this IPL is not exponentially bigger and longer than previous editions. At 65 days it covers just 11 more days than it has previously, in 2012 and 2013, when it comprised 76 games — two fewer than this year.

How good or bad is the IPL for the rest of cricket? That’s as knowable as how long a tennis ball will be allowed to lay undisturbed on the outfield before someone tosses it back from whence it came. But we do know there is no removing the IPL from global cricket’s equation anywhere near as easily.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

India’s tantrum gave South Africa the series

“For a time, they forgot about the game.” – Dean Elgar on India’s reaction to the decision that kept him at the crease.

Telford Vice | Cape Town

“LOVE it!” Dean Elgar’s knee-jerk reaction to the unravelling of India’s players in the mad moments after he reviewed what seemed to be an open-and-shut case for leg-before at Newlands on Thursday won’t make the visitors feel any better about the incident.

“It was a team under pressure and things weren’t going their way, which they are not used to,” Elgar told an online press conference on Friday. “It played nicely into our hands that, for a time, they forgot about the game and were channelling more of the emotional side of what Test cricket has to offer.”

The Hawk-Eye element of DRS determined that the ball would have bounced over the stumps, which surprised even Elgar — he was walking back to the dressing room by the time the decision was handed down. Marais Erasmus, who had given Elgar out, couldn’t believe it. “That is impossible,” Erasmus said, shaking his head.

The comment was picked up by the stump microphone, which also captured R Ashwin, the bowler who had been denied, saying: “You should find better ways to win, SuperSport.” Virat Kohli bent over the stumps and shouted: “Focus on your team as well when they are shining the ball and not just the opposition; trying to catch people all the time.” KL Rahul also had a go: “The whole country playing against 11 guys.”

This is the stuff of conspiracy theories. Broadcasters do not control umpiring technology, which is independently calibrated and provided — although, and wrongly, not by the ICC. SuperSport are South African broadcasters, but South Africa are not SuperSport’s team any more than India are Star Sports’ team. But a fraction of South Africans were interested in what was happening at Newlands, much less watching or “playing against” India.

Even so, the Indians’ displeasure was justified. How Hawk-Eye could determine that that delivery would miss the stumps beggared belief. When a batter who has been given out and the umpire who gave him out concur that he is indeed out, he is surely out. In legal terms, that’s tantamount to a judge accepting a confession as a plea of guilty. So why did Elgar review? For the same reason that the guilty appeal their verdicts: to stay out of trouble. And for the same reason that bowlers and fielders appeal when they know the batter is not out: because you never know what the umpires might say. Also, in this case, because Elgar was key to his team’s chances of winning.

Many Tests are remembered for what happens around a single delivery. But usually a batter, bowler or fielder earns that distinction. Rare is the match that sticks in the memory because of an umpire’s decision, rarer still when the instant involves an umpire who is not on the field, and rarest of all when it stars not a human but a box of electronics.

Happily for Kohli and his players, the ICC are not keen to punish them, although charges of bringing the game into disrepute would seem appropriate for many. Maybe it’s difficult for the ICC to come down on players when an ICC-appointed umpire agrees with those players, albeit more demurely. Maybe it’s tricky to go after players on a broadcaster’s behalf. Maybe the ICC could see that Elgar should have been given out.

Where India’s players let themselves down was in the brattish tantrum they threw in response. How is it going to help Kohli spark a surge to victory by screaming into a microphone, presumably for the edification of his compatriots watching on the other side of the globe? Instead of helping the visitors, the explosion changed the course of the match and thus the series, which was level at 1-1 going to Cape Town.

Elgar said the moment opened “a window to score more freely and chip away at the target”, and the facts back him. South Africa were 60/1 chasing 212 when the controversy erupted before the end of a hot, hard, intense, grinding day. Before that fateful over, Shardul Thakur had delivered a scoreless over to Keegan Petersen, whose single off Ashwin was the only run in the previous over. In the over before that, Elgar’s edge off Thakur fell just short of Cheteshwar Pujara at first slip.

The over immediately after the dodgy DRS decision yielded 10 runs, with both batters hitting Thakur for fours. Ashwin bowled another scoreless six balls — but Elgar was able to leave three of them. Then Jasprit Bumrah went for eight in the first over of a new spell. In the nine overs before the close after Elgar should have been out, South Africa scored 41 runs. In the nine overs before, they had scored 19.

The Indians’ histrionics cost them their composure, the match and the series. South Africa’s seven-wicket win made them only the second team in cricket history to beat the world’s top-ranked side in a three-match series after going down in the first game. More painfully still, for Kohli and his men, the first side to have done that, against Australia in 2001, were India.

“After losing the first Test [at Centurion by 113 runs] we knew we were going to be up against it,” Elgar said. “We needed guys to stand up from a character point of view and make more of a conscious effort and be a lot more aware of the position they have within the side, purely to bring the best out of the player. Ultimately, that will influence the environment. I am thankful for the way the guys responded. This was a proper squad effort.”

That’s not to suggest Elgar is an angel, as evinced by his decision to review against the odds. But he is evolving: “My skin is pretty thick when it comes to on-field matters and matters that value the team in a big way. I’d like to think I am complimentary when it comes to dealing with every member in the squad, which is something I maybe lacked in my younger years. Now, maybe being more experienced, I’ve gained the kind of people skills that I lacked. I’d like to think it’s something I am still going to work on and grow as a human.

“You’ve got to have mutual respect with every player; it’s a two-way street. That enables you to have the conversations we’ve had in the last few weeks. The players need to take that on board. They need to understand that I am not there to manipulate them. I’m not there to try and do their career injustice because I need them to operate at a level that is respectable at this level of cricket. If you want to be the best, you need to operate at that level, like what we have done over the last few weeks. But you need to be consistent around that.

“I’d like to think I’ve got a pretty good relationship with everyone, from the oldest player to the youngest. I’d like to think I connect with them in a pretty good way; a special way. The guys know Dean is doing this for the right reasons. It boils down to respect.

“We all want to influence things in our ways, but the team’s way is the only way. It sounds a little bit harsh, but if you want to be the best you need to have that skill. I’d like to think I’m not offending anyone with the language I use. I am there to motivate and influence this group.

“The pressure situations are tough, especially when you don’t have bat in hand. You can’t control anything that’s happening out there. That’s something I manage pretty well. You don’t want to show your emotions on camera. It’s something I have learnt and I’ve had to learn it quite quickly. From a captaincy point of view, it’s helped me being calmer and not panicking too soon.”

Other captains, are you listening?

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Rishabh wears the pants, DRS exposes itself

“Reactions like that show frustration. Sometimes teams capitalise on that. You never want to show too much emotion, but we could see clearly that emotions were high.” – Lungi Ngidi on the Indians’ reaction to Dean Elgar’s DRS decision.

Telford Vice | Newlands

HOW to write about Rishabh Pant without writing about Rishabh Pant? The modern method of analysing a match for publication, especially online, is for one reporter to consider matters from a single team’s perspective while another looks at things conversely. Usually, that works just fine and readers are presented with a choice of angles, thoughts and theories. But what happens when events are dominated by a single player?

Welcome to the third day of the Newlands Test on Thursday, when Pant wore the pants, scared the pants off South Africa’s supporters and seemed to channel his inner Navjot Singh Sidhu, who said: “You’ve got to choose between tightening your belt or losing your pants.”

Pant chose the latter, in the most respectable way, and belted South Africa’s bowlers to all parts to score a breathtaking 100 not out that had everything to do with India taking their lead to 211. He batted through six partnerships after arriving at 58/4, and 48 of his runs boomed in boundaries. India made almost three-quarters of their total with him at the crease, and he would surely have scored more runs had he not refused ones and twos when batting with Mohammed Shami and Jasprit Bumrah, the Nos. 10 and 11. Or he might have made fewer: he was dropped three times.

A scene in the eighth over after lunch captured the mood. Pant launched Keshav Maharaj for consecutive sixes, sending Kagiso Rabada and Duanne Olivier beyond the long-off boundary to find the ball after the second blow had sailed out of the ground. They looked like schoolboys searching the bushes after a big hit at some nondescript ground on a random weekday afternoon.

But some of us are not supposed to be writing about Pant and his storied innings, remember. What else was there? Before the 21st over of South Africa’s bid for a target of 212, that question had no viable answer.

By then, Aiden Markram had become the first wicket to fall for the sixth time in his last eight innings, and all six times inside 10 overs. So far, so expected. Then, with Dean Elgar and Keegan Petersen having taken the score to 60, R Ashwin had Elgar plumb in front with a delivery that pitched on off and did not turn. It was bound for the top third of the stumps before it smacked the pads. Marais Erasmus agreed, and raised his finger.

Umpires of Erasmus’ calibre don’t get too many decisions wrong, and certainly not those as straightforward as this. Elgar reviewed, no doubt more in hope and the knowledge that he is South Africa’s batting fulcrum than serious belief he would be reprieved. He had started the sad walk back to the dressing room before the decision had been handed down. He knew he was out.

And then, shockingly, he wasn’t: Hawk-Eye alleged the ball would pass over leg stump. The most telling reaction, relayed via the stump microphone, came from Erasmus: “That is impossible.” He wasn’t alone in that opinion. Ashwin loomed over the stump mic, and said: “You should find better ways to win, SuperSport.” Virat Kohli had another go at the broadcasters: “Focus on your team as well and not just the opposition; trying to catch people all the time.” Then it was KL Rahul’s turn: “The whole country playing against 11 guys.”

Maybe Rahul hasn’t noticed the empty stands all around, as demanded by the BCCI. So he might be surprised to learn that South Africans are turning away from cricket in significant numbers because of catastrophes off the field and problems on it. A won series would lure some of them back to the game, but it was folly to think the “whole country” was watching or even interested in what was going on at Newlands, much less “playing against” India’s team. Certainly in South Africa, cricket doesn’t work like that.

But cricket shouldn’t depend on broadcasters to do its electronic umpiring. That the ICC hands the integrity of an increasingly important element of their match officials’ duties to outside parties is a damaging anomaly in the modern game. Would Ashwin, Kohli and Rahul have said what they said if they were talking about ICC-appointed umpires or referees, knowing what would they have been in for in terms of the code of conduct? Consequently the broadcasters were sitting ducks for the Indians’ anger. To take action against them now would add injury to the original insult. And if the players are to be punished, what of Erasmus?

A SuperSport spokesperson told Cricbuzz that the broadcaster had noted “comments made by certain members of the Indian cricket team”. And that, “Hawk-Eye is an independent service provider, approved by the ICC, and their technology has been accepted for many years as an integral part of DRS. SuperSport does not have any control over the Hawk-Eye technology.”

Lungi Ngidi had something like empathy for the Indians, telling an online press conference “Reactions like that show frustration. Sometimes teams capitalise on that. You never want to show too much emotion, but we could see clearly that emotions were high. That tells us maybe they were feeling a little bit of pressure. That was a good partnership, and they really wanted to break it. I think those feelings ended up showing. Everyone reacts differently to different situations, and what we saw there is probably how those guys were feeling at the time.”

Did he trust the DRS system to do its job properly? “Yes. We’ve seen it on numerous occasions being used all around the world. It’s the system in place, and that’s what we use as cricketers.”

Nine overs after all that, with what became the day’s last delivery, the Indians thought Bumrah had had Elgar caught behind down leg. Adrian Holdstock said they hadn’t. Kohli reviewed, and this time DRS landed on his side of the argument.

Elgar and Petersen shared 41 runs between the two DRS decisions. That’s worth twice as much in a match featuring two fractious batting line-ups. A stand that might have been snuffed out at 35 grew to 78, and took South Africa to within 111 runs of victory at a ground that has seen only two successful chases of more than 200.

That it is Elgar who was, belatedly, dismissed was some kind of justice for India. Petersen has proved himself a tough nut to crack, and will doubtless do so again when he resumes on 48. But South Africa’s opponents would far rather see the back of the talismanic captain than anyone else in the side. He wears the pants in that dressing room.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Roughie van der Dismissal

“We don’t comment on match officials’ decisions, and the match referee is not allowed to comment.” – the ICC.

Telford Vice | The Wanderers

CLEARLY, this is no longer MS Dhoni’s India team. In this match, it also isn’t Virat Kohli’s team. But it is still India, the world’s best team. Did they rise to the wider responsibility that comes with that deserved title when Rassie van der Dussen was given out at the Wanderers on Tuesday?

Van der Dussen was adjudged caught behind off Shardul Thakur with what became the last delivery before lunch. Certainly, Van der Dussen had hit the ball, Certainly, it had looped off his thigh pad towards Rishabh Pant. Certainly, Pant had claimed the catch. Certainly, Allahudien Paleker — who is enjoying a mostly solid Test debut — had raised his finger.

Less certain was whether Pant had taken the catch cleanly. After Van der Dussen had trudged off disappointed, looking exactly like someone who had spent 17 balls on a lonely single, replays suggested, strongly, that the ball had bounced in front of him.

Eighteen deliveries earlier, Van der Dussen had reviewed — also after allegedly edging to the wicketkeeper, this time off Mohammed Shami, and this time by Marais Erasmus. DRS showed that the ball had hit the flap of the pad and nothing else on its way to Pant. End of argument. Except that, as the footage rolled on, it was obvious the ball had hit the ground well before reaching Pant’s gloves.

Thus what happened in the seventh over of India’s second innings, when Aiden Markram’s low grab at second slip to remove KL Rahul was declared fair, will be seen as payback. Rahul’s alarmed reaction as he departed the scene hinted that some of the South Africans had taken the opportunity to tell him exactly that. The more mature view would be that two wrongs don’t make a right.

During lunch Dean Elgar and South Africa’s team manager, Volvo Masubelele, paid the officials a visit. What was discussed there is not known, but a theory that it had been decided the evidence was not conclusive enough to overturn the on-field decision — which was not reviewed, ostensibly because Van der Dussen knew he had hit the ball — took flight. It is to be hoped that is not true, because the evidence is damning.

Also certain is that the umpires could have recalled Van der Dussen without having to consult Rahul or anyone else, as per section 2.12 of what cricket calls its laws: “An umpire may alter any decision provided that such alteration is made promptly. This apart, an umpire’s decision, once made, is final.” Weasel words like “promptly” could be taken to mean 10 seconds, 10 days, or 10 years. They should be rooted out of all language that carries consequence.

Asked for his view, Barry Lambson, who stood in nine Tests and 58 ODIs in the 1990s and has since served as a match referee, told Cricbuzz: “In a case like that, the square leg umpire normally is in the best position to judge if the ball carried or not. The bowler’s end umpire often can’t see if the ball goes into the wicketkeeper’s gloves, and if he does he has no depth perception. If he has a doubt or his attention is brought by the other umpire, they will consult. The batsman often will bring it to the umpires’ attention that he thinks the ball has not carried.”

Erasmus and Paleker did not seem to consult as Van der Dussen was leaving. Neither Van der Dussen nor his partner, Temba Bavuma, appeared to think anything was amiss. Why the umpires did not show more care about the correctness, or lack thereof, of the decision remains a valid question in light of what Pant had done 18 balls earlier — which they would have seen for themselves on the big screen. For the same reason, the batters should have shown the presence of mind to question the call.

Indeed, when Thakur had Bavuma caught behind down leg in the sixth over before tea, the departing batter was halted while the umpires made sure the tumbling Pant had completed the catch properly. He had, but if that dismissal demanded closer inspection why had Van der Dussen’s not?

Asked for clarification, an ICC spokesperson said: “We don’t comment on match officials’ decisions.” Asked if the match referee, Andy Pycroft, could be prevailed upon to explain, the spokesperson said: “He is not allowed to comment.”

So here we are, wondering how we got here. What has happened to the philosophy that, famously, saw Dhoni call back Ian Bell at Trent Bridge in 2011 after the Englishman had been run out in the wake of dallying outside of his ground because he had thought, mistakingly, that the ball had touched the boundary and was therefore dead? Dhoni took that decision during the tea interval: 20 minutes is, for some people, prompt.

Would Kohli, who was ruled out of this match by a back spasm, have done the same? And would it matter whether he, or Rahul, or anyone else, had? It’s not as if Van der Dussen, who has scored 15 runs in three innings in this series, was on course to take the game away from India.

In terms of the match, then, what happened to Van der Dussen doesn’t matter much. But, if you’re the best cricket team in the world, which India undoubtedly are, you should be better than that.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.