BCCI vp Rajeev Shukla on Monday slammed third umpire Saikat Sharfuddoula for Yashasvi Jaiswal’s contentious dismissal on the ultimate day of the Boxing Day Test in opposition to Australia in Melbourne, saying the India opener was “clearly not out”. Jaiswal was batting on 84 when Australia skipper Pat Cummins’ down-the-leg snorter cramped him for room whereas trying a hook, and the house facet went up instantaneously in attraction for a caught behind as Alex Carey accomplished a tumbling take.
The on-field umpire Joel Wilson did not relent because the Australians resorted to DRS and third umpire Sharfuddoula dominated Jaiswal out, regardless of no edge being registered on the Snicko, basing his determination on the accessible proof of visible deflection.
“Yashasvi Jaiswal was clearly not out. Third umpire should have taken note of what technology was suggesting. While over ruling field umpire third umpire should have solid reasons,” senior BCCI official Shukla tweeted.
Yashaswi jayaswal was clearly not out. Third umpire ought to have taken observe of what know-how was suggesting. While over ruling area umpire third umpire ought to have stable causes. @BCCI @ICC @ybj_19
— Rajeev Shukla (@ShuklaRajiv) December 30, 2024
Sharfuddoula, the third umpire from Bangladesh, quickly discovered himself within the eye of a storm with even the legendary Sunil Gavaskar criticizing the official for his controversial determination that tilted the scales firmly in Australia’s favour.
Jaiswal’s dismissal opened a door for Australia within the remaining session of the fourth Test and the hosts grabbed the remaining Indian wickets to finish a 184-run victory and take a 2-1 lead within the five-match collection.
Earlier within the day, Gavaskar didn’t settle for the choice of the third umpire which positioned visible proof forward of a flatline on Snicko.
“The defect can be an optical illusion. Why have you kept technology? If there is technology, one should use it. You can not make a decision based on what you see and ignore the technology,” Gavaskar instructed host broadcaster Star Sports.
Simon Taufel, himself a distinguished umpire as soon as, nevertheless stated the third umpire made the best determination.
“In my view the decision was out. The third umpire did make the correct decision in the end,” former ICC Elite Panel umpire Taufel instructed Channel 7.
“With the technology protocols, we do have a hierarchy of redundancy and when the umpire sees a clear deflection off the bat there is no need to go any further and use any other form of technology to prove the case.
“The clear deflection is conclusive proof. In this explicit case what we now have seen from the third umpire, is that they’ve used a secondary type of know-how, which for no matter motive hasn’t proven the identical conclusive proof of audio to again up the clear deflection.
“In the end the third umpire did the right thing and went back to the clear deflection and overturned the umpire field. So, in my view correct decision made,” he added.
This incident follows an identical controversy within the opening Test in Perth the place opener KL Rahul’s dismissal sparked a debate.
After on-field umpire Richard Kettleborough had dominated in Rahul’s favor following Australia’s attraction, the house workforce used DRS to problem the choice.
Third umpire Richard Illingworth had overturned the decision regardless of not having the advantage of a split-screen view which might have given him a clearer image of whether or not the Mitchell Starc supply really grazed the bat or the Snicko responded to a success on the pads.
Topics talked about on this article
