The 29th over of the Indian reply chasing a West Indian total of 230in the Coca Cola Cup triangular series game at Harare on Wednesdaysparked off a rather strange controversy

Anand Vasu06-Jul-2001The 29th over of the Indian reply chasing a West Indian total of 230in the Coca Cola Cup triangular series game at Harare on Wednesdaysparked off a rather strange controversy. Carl Hooper tossed up ajuicy delivery for Virender Sehwag to drive. The Delhi lad obliged,was beaten in the air and off the wicket, overbalanced and wasstumped. Or was he? Television replays showed that Ridley Jacobs, inhis anxiety to whip off the bails in a hurry, had the ball in his lefthand while dislodging the bails with his right. By the rules of thegame, the batsman should not have been given out. The umpire standingat square leg, did not feel the necessity to refer the matter to thethird umpire and gave Sehwag out straight away.When the match was over, the match referee, Dennis Lindsay had achance to review the video evidence and convened a hearing attended byJacobs, captain Carl Hooper, coach Roger Harper and team manager RickySkerritt, and Zimbabwe Cricket Union CEO, Dave Ellman-Brown. The matchreferee found Jacobs guilty of a breach of the Players and TeamOfficials Code C2, namely: “Players and/or Team Officials shall at notime engage in conduct unbecoming to their status which could bringthem or the game of cricket into disrepute.” The match referee alsofound Jacobs guilty of transgressing the Spirit of Cricket point 5 ofthe Official ICC Laws of Cricket 2000 Code, namely: “It is against thespirit of the game to indulge in cheating or any sharp practice.”All this despite the match referee accepting the fact that Jacobs didnot appeal for the dismissal or claim the stumping. The match refereecontends that Jacobs had enough time to recall the batsman and failedto do so. In the modern game, where the stakes are so high andcompetition for every place in the side so intense, it is perhapsnaïve and even a bit unreasonable to expect a cricketer to do what thematch referee expected. What the player should or should not do isendlessly debatable. Rahul Dravid and Brian Lara, two of the `walkers’of the modern era have themselves had to retract their positionssimply because of the number of times things have gone against them asa result of umpiring errors.And yes, while a player’s approach to a situation like this isdebatable, the umpire’s approach is not. It is the duty of an umpireto rule a batsman out or not out. Attempting to effect a dismissal andappealing for the same wicket ends the player’s responsibility. In thesame breath, one must say that the players are bound to uphold thespirit of the game in every moment they are on the field. When theyfail to do so there are ways and means of punishing them. Jacobs, theWest Indian stumper was at the receiving end of some rather severepunishment. And yet, this begs the question, what was the umpiredoing?The umpires officiating the game in question, Kevin Barbour and GREvans should have at least consulted if there was any doubt about thelegality of the stumping. If that did not clear up the confusion theyshould have referred the matter to the third umpire who has theadvantage of television replays. In not doing so and thereby declaringSehwag out, the twosome have done cricket in general and Jacobs inspecific a disservice. For no fault of his, a man who has performed sowell behind the stumps and with the bat has been made to sit out threematches, not to mention the ignominy of having disciplinary actiontaken against him.In recent times, umpires have been found wanting on many occasions bythe eagle eye of television cameras. The second Test between Englandand Pakistan at Old Trafford saw David Shepherd, no less, repeatedlymiss no-ball calls, several of which were on wicket taking deliveries.In the Natwest One-Day series that followed, a Saqlain Mushtaqdelivery in the final over of a game that went right down to the wirewas called a wide despite going off the batsman’s glove. Even closerto where this incident occurred, the Coca Cola Cup saw an umpiredeclare a wide and change his mind immediately after in the last clashbetween Zimbabwe and West Indies.In short, umpires have made errors of judgment and yet have got awaywith them. When a player makes a similar error he is pulled upimmediately. If anything, Jacobs has been suspended for failing todispute the umpire’s decision! If you think that’s ironic, the icingon the cake will tickle your palate. Jacobs’ suspension comes intoeffect after the final of the tournament. In other words, he has beensuspended for three matches to be played during the forthcoming Kenyaleg of the West Indies tour. As it happens, the West Indies CricketBoard had already announced on June 13 that Jacobs would not remainwith the West Indian team for the Kenyan leg of their African tour,his place being taken by Courtney Browne.So there you have it a player suspended for an umpire’s mistake, andthe suspension is effective for matches he is not scheduled to play inthe first place. A real comic-tragedy of a situation.