Cricket

Sachin Tendulkar's Social Media Post Reignites Controversy over Steve Bucknor's Controversial DecisionsLegendary Indian cricketer Sachin Tendulkar's recent social media post has sparked a storm among fans, reigniting the debate over former umpire Steve Bucknor's controversial decisions against the batting maestro.Bucknor, known for his deliberate decision-making style, earned the nickname "Slow Death" during his illustrious career. However, his reputation was tarnished by two high-profile blunders involving Tendulkar, one at the Gabba in 2003 and the other at Eden Gardens in 2005.In the 2003 Test between India and Australia, Bucknor controversially gave Tendulkar out LBW off Jason Gillespie, despite replays showing the ball would have gone over the stumps. This error denied Tendulkar a chance to continue his innings and sparked widespread outrage among fans.The second incident occurred in 2005 during a Test against Pakistan at Eden Gardens. Tendulkar was given out caught behind off Abdul Razzaq, despite no contact with the ball. The delivery, which swung away from Tendulkar, ended a promising innings and shifted the match's momentum.Tendulkar's recent social media post, featuring an image of three trees resembling big wickets, asked fans to guess which umpire made the stumps feel this big. The post quickly went viral, with fans flooding the comments section with replies naming Bucknor.The decisions made by Bucknor during those two crucial matches have remained significant moments of debate in cricket history, cementing his legacy for his contentious decisions. Despite being regarded as one of the best umpires of his time, Bucknor's errors against Tendulkar have left an indelible mark on the sport.

India's promising batter Ruturaj Gaikwad has expressed his outrage over a controversial dismissal in the ongoing Ranji Trophy. Gaikwad, who is currently in Australia with the India A team for a three-match unofficial Test series, took to social media to vent his frustration over the incident involving Maharashtra's stand-in captain Ankit Bawne.During the Maharashtra vs Services match in Pune, Bawne was adjudged caught behind off a delivery that replays clearly showed had bounced before reaching the fielder in the second slip. The decision left Gaikwad fuming, and he shared a slow-motion video of the incident on Instagram, questioning how such a dismissal could be given in a live game."How can this be given out in a live game???" Gaikwad wrote in his post. "Shame to even appeal for a catchhhh! Absolutely pathetic."Gaikwad's reaction highlights the growing frustration among players over questionable umpiring decisions in domestic cricket. The use of slow-motion replays has made it easier to scrutinize such incidents, and players are increasingly demanding a higher standard of officiating.The incident also raises questions about the role of technology in cricket. While the use of the Decision Review System (DRS) has been widely praised for reducing umpiring errors, it is not available in all domestic matches. This means that players are often left at the mercy of the on-field umpires, who may not always have the best view of the action.Gaikwad's outburst is a reminder that umpiring remains a crucial aspect of cricket. Fair and accurate decisions are essential for maintaining the integrity of the game and ensuring that the best team wins. As technology continues to evolve, it is important to find ways to incorporate it into the decision-making process to minimize the risk of controversial dismissals.

In a controversial turn of events, an lbw decision against Antigua And Barbuda Falcons batter Imad Wasim sparked chaos and a lengthy delay in the CPL match against Trinbago Knight Riders in Port of Spain.Umpire Christopher Taylor initially ruled Wasim not out, but a review by TKR captain Kieron Pollard showed the ball hitting leg stump. However, Wasim insisted he had edged the ball, and replays on the big screen seemed to support his claim.The third umpire reversed the decision to not out, prompting an animated discussion between Pollard and the on-field umpires. TKR coach Phil Simmons also expressed his displeasure from the dugout. The delay lasted nearly 12 minutes, with the TKR camp clearly unhappy with the outcome.Falcons coach Curtly Ambrose protested from the dugout, while Wasim himself appeared confident in his innocence. Despite the controversy, Wasim went on to hit the winning runs for the Falcons.TKR, despite the loss, remain second in the points table but have yet to secure a playoff berth. Pollard declined to comment on the incident, saying, "If I speak, I'll get into trouble."Falcons captain Chris Green was more vocal, describing the situation as "absolute chaos." He questioned the initial decision and the subsequent reversal, but ultimately expressed satisfaction with his team's victory.The incident highlights the complexities of umpiring decisions in cricket and the potential for controversy when technology is involved. It also underscores the importance of clear communication and consistency in decision-making.

MS Dhoni, the legendary Indian cricketer renowned for his astute strategies and tactical brilliance, has been widely acclaimed for his exceptional accuracy in Decision Review System (DRS) calls. However, Indian umpire Anil Chaudhary has shed light on a nuanced perspective, acknowledging that while Dhoni's DRS calls are often accurate, they are not always infallible."It's not always the case that Dhoni is right," Chaudhary stated in an interview with Shubhankar Mishra. "Sometimes it's the other way around, but he's close to accuracy."Chaudhary attributed Dhoni's proficiency in DRS calls to his deep understanding of the game and his ability to analyze replays effectively. He also praised young Indian wicket-keeper Rishabh Pant for his significant improvement as a keeper, emphasizing the importance of experience and attention to detail in making accurate DRS calls."Wicketkeepers have the best spot to keep an eye on the ball," Chaudhary explained. "They're still and can follow the ball's trajectory. In fact, the best umpires sometimes base their decisions on the movement of wicketkeepers because they follow the ball."Regarding Dhoni's potential as an umpire, Chaudhary expressed that the former India captain could excel in the role if he were willing to commit to the time and effort required. "He's close to accuracy," Chaudhary said. "He can become a good umpire provided he's ready to be inside the ground for seven hours."However, it remains uncertain whether Dhoni will continue playing for the Chennai Super Kings in the Indian Premier League (IPL) beyond the 2025 season.

Pakistan's most experienced umpire, Aleem Dar, has shared the heartbreaking story of how his family concealed the death of his seven-month-old daughter from him during the early stages of his international career in 2003.The 56-year-old umpire recounted on a Pakistani television channel that his wife and family chose not to inform him about the tragic loss while he was officiating in the 2003 World Cup. "It was the beginning of my career as an ICC panel umpire, and it was a crucial assignment for my career," Dar said. "They knew that if I learned about my daughter's passing, I would immediately return home."Dar, who has officiated in 145 Tests, 231 ODIs, and 72 T20 Internationals, said that when he eventually discovered the truth, it was the most devastating moment of his life. "I was kept in the dark for almost a month after her passing, and I only found out by chance in Johannesburg when a Pakistani man from my hometown of Sialkot came to offer his condolences," he said."It was a huge shock to me at that time, and I immediately informed the ICC and returned home," Dar added. He recalled that when he called his wife, she broke down in tears over the phone.Dar's family had strictly instructed the media not to report the news, fearing it would affect his performance on the field. "I came to know later that my father had strictly told the media friends not to print the story," he said.Despite the immense personal tragedy, Dar continued to excel in his umpiring career, earning widespread respect for his integrity and professionalism. He is considered one of the most respected umpires in the world and has officiated in some of the most high-profile matches in cricket history.

TV Umpire's Controversial Decision Sparks Scrutiny in RCB-RR EliminatorDuring the Eliminator match between Rajasthan Royals (RR) and Royal Challengers Bangalore (RCB) in Ahmedabad, a contentious decision by TV umpire Anil Chaudhary raised eyebrows. In the 15th over of RCB's innings, Dinesh Karthik was initially given out lbw by on-field umpire KN Ananthapadmanabhan. However, after a brief consultation with his partner Mahipal Lomror, Karthik opted for a DRS review.Replays showed the ball passing close to Karthik's bat and striking his front pad as he came forward. The crucial question was whether the spike on Ultra Edge indicated the ball hitting the inside edge of the bat or the bat hitting the pad. Chaudhary, the TV umpire, deemed it as bat on ball and overturned the on-field decision to not out.This decision drew immediate criticism from TV commentators and the Rajasthan Royals camp. Replays seemed inconclusive, and many believed that the on-field umpire's initial call should have been upheld. If Karthik had been given out, RCB would have been in a precarious position at 122 for 6.Despite the controversy, Karthik went on to score 11 runs off 12 balls, forming a crucial partnership with Lomror. He was eventually dismissed in the 19th over, and RCB finished on 172 for 8.The incident highlights the challenges and complexities of using technology in cricket decision-making. While DRS has been instrumental in correcting umpiring errors, it can also lead to subjective interpretations and controversial outcomes. The decision to overturn the lbw call against Karthik will undoubtedly be debated and analyzed in the coming days.

Oman D10 Run-Out Sparks Debate on 'Fake Fielding'A controversial dismissal in the Oman D10 competition has ignited a heated debate among cricket fans over the interpretation of run-out laws. During a match between Ghubrah Giants and Ruwi Rangers, Barathwaj Vinayagam was run out by a direct hit from Aflal Kariapper. However, some fans on social media have questioned the legitimacy of the dismissal, alleging "fake fielding."According to Law 41.5.1 of the cricket rules, "it is unfair for any fielder willfully to attempt, by word or action, to distract, deceive or obstruct either batsman after the striker has received the ball." In this case, Kariapper collected the ball and executed a no-look throw to dismiss Vinayagam. While some argue that the throw was a legitimate attempt to run out the batter, others contend that it was an intentional deception designed to distract Vinayagam.The umpires deemed the dismissal valid, and Ruwi Rangers went on to defeat Ghubrah Giants by 57 runs. However, the incident has sparked a wider discussion about the boundaries of fair play in cricket. Some fans believe that the no-look throw was a clear violation of the rules, while others argue that it was a clever and legitimate tactic.The debate has also raised questions about the role of technology in officiating cricket matches. While the use of video replays has become commonplace in other sports, cricket has been slower to adopt such measures. Some argue that the introduction of video replays could help to eliminate controversial dismissals like the one in the Oman D10 match.

DRS Accuracy Concerns Raised by Harbhajan SinghFormer Indian spinner Harbhajan Singh has expressed skepticism about the accuracy of the Decision Review System (DRS) in judging the bounce of the ball. Speaking on the 180 Not Out podcast, Harbhajan questioned the system's ability to determine the exact trajectory of the ball, particularly in relation to the wicket.Harbhajan's concerns stem from the fundamental principle of cricket, which dictates that any ball that hits the wicket results in a dismissal. However, he believes that DRS often fails to adhere to this rule, leading to inconsistent and sometimes questionable decisions."I'm not fully inclined to believe that it is entirely accurate because it cannot judge the bounce of the ball and how much it is bouncing," Harbhajan said. "Another thing that bothers me is that when we start playing cricket in the neighborhood, we are shown the wicket and told that if the ball hits the wicket, you're out."Harbhajan also criticized the inconsistency in applying DRS decisions by umpires. He cited instances where umpires have upheld not-out decisions despite clear evidence from the technology that the ball hit the stumps."If the umpire has given a not out, and DRS clearly shows the ball hitting the stumps, it should be given out," Harbhajan argued. "But we sometimes use the umpire's decision and retain the not out verdict. Aap technology ko la bhi rahe ho aur uski baat bhi nahi maan rahe (You are bringing in technology but not accepting its decision)."In contrast, former India pacer S Sreesanth expressed a more positive view towards technology in cricket, but with some reservations. He acknowledged the potential benefits of technology in improving decision-making, but cautioned against relying on it completely."Technology, if used wisely, is brilliant because you've got to accept the change, but don't depend on it completely," Sreesanth said.The debate over the accuracy and consistency of DRS continues to stir controversy in cricket. The recent incident involving Virat Kohli's dismissal in the 2024 Indian Premier League has reignited the discussion about the efficacy of technology in the sport.

Hawk-Eye Technology Debuts in IPL to Determine No-Balls for HeightThe Indian Premier League (IPL) has introduced a new Hawk-Eye technology to objectively determine no-balls for height, eliminating the subjective element in umpiring decisions. This technology made its debut during Virat Kohli's dismissal in Royal Challengers Bangalore's (RCB) chase against Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) at Eden Gardens on Sunday.Kohli was dismissed for 18 off 7 balls, caught and bowled off a high full toss from Harshit Rana in the third over. The delivery appeared to be dipping on the batter, even though it was above the waist height when Kohli made contact with it.The TV umpire, Michael Gough, checked the legality of the delivery using the Hawk-Eye ball tracking technology. The technology revealed that the ball would have passed the batter at 0.92 meters from the ground if he was upright at the crease. Kohli's waist height has been measured at 1.04 meters, which means the ball would have passed below his waist had he been on his crease, making it a legal delivery.Kohli expressed his dissatisfaction with the decision, arguing that it should have been a no-ball for height. However, the technology confirmed that the delivery was within the legal limits.The IPL has implemented this technology to remove the subjectivity in adjudicating no-balls above the waist. The system measures the height of the ball as it passes the batter at the popping crease and compares it to the toe-to-waist height of the batter when in an upright position. If the ball is higher than the batter's waist, it is declared a no-ball.In Kohli's case, the projected trajectory of the ball would have taken it 0.12 meters below his waist had he been upright on his crease. Therefore, the delivery was deemed legal.The introduction of Hawk-Eye technology for no-ball height determination is a significant step towards improving the accuracy and consistency of umpiring decisions in the IPL. It eliminates the potential for human error and ensures that batters are not unfairly dismissed due to subjective interpretations of the rules.