Our weekly column on sports coverage
FROM THE STANDS
S R Khelkoodkar
Needless to say, the big story of the week was the test match between India and the West Indies played at Antigua. And in particular, it was the incident involving West Indies captain Brian Lara, Daren Ganga and the Indian wicketkeeper MS Dhoni that generated the maximum coverage.
As the Hindustan Times summarises, `Mahendra Singh Dhoni lifted Dave Mohammed for what would have been a fourth consecutive six, but Daren Ganga caught the ball at the mid-wicket fence. It wasn`t clear whether his boot had touched the rope and the third umpire was called into action.`
But the replays were inconclusive, and what would otherwise have been a routine Out or Not Out verdict degenerated into a 15 minute debate on the pitch about whether Dhoni was out or not. Our sportswriters have done a good job in presenting the issue, and have raised a couple of interesting questions as well.
Dhoni and Kaif prepared to leave the field anticipating a declaration anyway, but "not before an incensed Lara challenged the decision, and a second attempt was made to make a decision with the help of the TV replays, but they were again inconclusive.
"Lara then angrily snatched the ball from umpire Asad Rauf and walked away to resume play, but Indian skipper Rahul Dravid put both sides out of their misery by making the declaration."
The Hindustan Times then asks, `Is technology better or human judgement?` Furthermore, it asks, given that the situation was eventually resolved only when Indian captain Rahul Dravid declared the innings, ` How would the umpires tackle such an incident if it happens when a team is not on the verge of declaration?`
The Telegraph, as usual, has a different take on the matter. Whatever may have been the conclusion reached in the middle, it feels `Brian Lara must count himself lucky. He might have had his reasons to get agitated but you can`t show disrespect to the umpires in the middle.` They explain Lara`s reasoning in his own words. `"There were 24 big men at the ground and they could not come to a decision. I thought the spirit of the game was not being kept. We all make mistakes but at the end of the day we all want to uphold the spirit of the game," Lara said.`
The Indian Express, on the resolution of the conflict, has this to say. "The cloud was finally cleared in match referee Jeff Crowe`s room, where the umpires told a "very upset" Lara that they were helpless at the time without any supporting TV evidence. Dhoni was confirmed out and "everybody left happy", was the final word. Really? Crowe may still have something to say on this matter, especially Lara`s behaviour on the field." It seems they believe that Lara should be censured in some way for his actions.
They continue. "The West Indies coach Bennet King, however, played it safe. `I really think that moment is gone, and the decision has been made by the umpire. I`d just like to move on and am sure both sides will just want to move on. Let`s just make sure cricket is the winner here and not focus too much on negatives. Those decisions have been made and let`s concentrate on what`s been happening in the future. All the players are done and dusted with that other issue.`"
Most papers have presented a very good summary of the incident. Reading any of the articles gives you most of the facts. But, as mentioned above, a couple of articles stress that the match referee should taken some form of action against Lara for his outbursts. They fail to debate, however, what exactly it is that he could have, or should have, done. After all, matters were not getting anywhere on the field, even after 15 minutes.
Furthermore, no article brings up the role of the umpires in all of this. After all, as pointed out by some of the experts on Ten Sports` coverage of the match, the final decision must rest with the three concerned umpires. Perhaps they should have made a decision.
Sanjay Manjrekar, former India batsman and Ten Sports anchor, brings up a moral question that the newspapers have not. In what is considered a gentleman`s game, he says, should the umpires have enforced a decision of `out` on the basis of the fielding side`s word? In other words, might that have set a good precedent: fielders being honest about the events, and the umpires taking their word on trust.
We probably haven`t heard the last on this. In particular, the technology vs. human debate will continue for a while more.