Did India beat Bangladesh fair and square?

Source: IANS
Saket Parekar
Saket Parekar folomojo staff

First things first. The claims of match-fixing are ridiculous. The statement made by Mustafa Kamal, the ICC President from Bangladesh, is irresponsible. And some of the news coverage of the whole incident has been ridiculous and infuriating.

Before we deal with the baseless conspiracy theories and allegations of fixing, I would like to take moment to criticise the unfair coverage of this episode by some of India’s top news channels.

When protests and effigy-burnings in Dhaka prompted the news telecast earlier this afternoon, hashtags like #BadLosers, #SourGrapes and #FalseClaims had already occupied half of the screens on certain news channels.

It is one thing to be happy about an Indian victory, but the least we can expect from a national news organization in the world’s largest democracy is fair and balanced coverage. Forget objectivity, shouldn’t they at least make sure that they do not favour one side?

A news organization is supposed to investigate, gather evidence, verify the story and then report on it. Inviting experts to shout express their views is also understandable, but when a news anchor pronounces the verdict before the coverage even begins, you can’t help but feel nauseated.

But perhaps my definition of news is outdated.

Anyway, let’s now look at the issue at hand and look back at how this whole debate started.

India defeated Bangladesh by 109 runs in the quarter-finals and advanced to the semi-finals. Bangladesh fans felt that their team was undone by a series of unfair umpiring calls during the game. They objected to three particular decisions in that fixture.

1. Rohit Sharma caught off a no-ball

In the 40th over, when Rohit Sharma was on 90 off 101 balls, a full toss delivery, off which he was caught at mid-wicket was deemed a no-ball. Aleem Dar was the leg-umpire at this time and it was him who made the decision, calling it a no-ball for height. Ian Gould accepted his decision and signalled right away. Rohit Sharma went on to make 137 off 126 balls.
Was it the right decision? No. Replays showed that the ball was below waster height and it was a tough call on the bowler. Even so, it’s hardly enough to jump to a match-fixing claim. Umpires make marginal calls all the time and this was just one of them. Besides, it would have made very little difference since Sharma had already gathered 90 runs.

2. An LBW appeal agains Raina turned down

In the 34th over from Mashrafe Mortaza, a huge LBW shout against Suresh Raina was turned down by Aleem Dar. Bangladesh took a review, and the ball was pitched marginally outside the leg stump.

It was a close call, but since much of the review process is mechanised, the third umpire had to stick to the automated call, which didn’t find enough of the ball to be inside the line. Suresh Raina was on 10 at this point and went on to make 65 off 57 balls.

Was it the right decision? Absolutely. Both the field umpire and the third umpire did their job. The field umpire didn’t see enough in it to give it out. It was reviewed and the ball was marginally pitched outside. Whether the margin was significant or not makes no difference, because if the technology you resort to points to one way, you have to stick to it.

3. Mahmudullah caught at fine leg by Shikhar Dhawan

In the 17th over of Bangladesh innings, in-form Mahmudullah was caught at fine leg by Shikhar Dhawan. The ball popped out of the fielder’s hand at first, but he recovered to grab it back.

However, the momentum forced him to step beyond the rope. Dhawan only just managed to throw in the air before stepping foot outside and then came back inside to claim the catch. The replays showed that his foot was very, very close to the boundary rope in this process, but since there was no visible sign of the rope being disturbed, the third umpire yet again gave the call in India’s favour.

Was it the right decision? Yes and no. The third umpire had enough reason to believe that it was a clean catch, and you have to respect that decision. Simply because, he is the umpire and you are not. Was it a blatantly wrong decision? Absolutely not. Once again, it was a close call. While the benefit of doubt usually goes to the batsman, there’s no written rule that directs the umpires to do so, and hence, the third umpire is well within his/her rights to make that call.

Conclusion

The umpires got one decision wrong. Not horribly wrong, but wrong. You simply cannot make a claim of match-fixing based on one bad call.

Even if you put aside the eventual margin of victory, or the quality of India’s batting, or the lack of Bangladesh’s quality, depth and experience exposed on the day, it is wrong to make such unfounded claims.

We’re all aware of BCCI’s dominant position in the ICC, the economic struggles of Bangladesh and their board’s weak and marginal position in cricket’s global body. Yet, it is unfair on the Indian players, who have just been better in every respect, who have given it their all their matches, and have outclassed their opposition.