The ongoing Test series between India and England has been marred by several controversial decisions involving the Decision Review System (DRS), and the latest incident involving Joe Root’s dismissal on Day 3 of the fourth Test at Ranchi has added fuel to the fiery debate. When the England cricket team’s captain Ben Stokes had earlier expressed concerns over a few questionable decisions, it seemed part of the game’s usual contention with technology. However, the cacophony of grievances reached a crescendo when Joe Root, a pivotal figure in England’s batting lineup, was adjudged out, much to the dismay of English cricketers, media, and fans alike.
The crux of the debate centered around the on-field umpire’s initial decision, which was not out, given that the trajectory of the ball, as it spun after pitching, seemed to suggest it would miss the stumps. On this occasion, the Indian team’s skipper, Rohit Sharma, opted for a review based on the advice of bowler R Ashwin and wicketkeeper Dhruv Jurel. The Hawk-Eye technology subsequently showed that the ball was indeed pitching in line, although precariously so. It seemed that the call was as marginal as they come—nearly a 50-50 situation.
According to DRS law 3.4.4.3, for the ball-tracking technology to adjudicate, it must report whether the ball pitched within one of three areas relative to the Pitching Zone: In Line, Outside Off, or Outside Leg. In Root’s case, the centre of the ball was marginally inside the Pitching Zone, fulfilling the ‘In Line’ criteria. This slim margin was enough for the third umpire to overturn the call.
Former England captain Michael Vaughan swiftly registered his dissent, branding the decision a ‘shocker’ while on BBC commentary duty. His sentiment reverberated through the English cricket community as many surmised that with the angle of Ashwin’s delivery and the amount of turn already imparted on the ball, clattering into the stumps seemed highly unlikely. Despite the skepticism, Hawk-Eye’s image stuck, and with it, the umpire, Kumar Dharmasena’s, decision was reversed. Root, who had constructed a masterful, unbeaten 122 in the first innings, was sent back to the pavilion for a meager 11 runs.
This dismissal does not occur in isolation. It comes amidst a rather tumultuous innings for England, where they found themselves losing eight wickets for a paltry sum. Even with a slim 46-run lead, England’s hopes of setting a competitive target for India hinge on whether they can cross the threshold of a 200-run lead at least—a test that will undoubtedly be influenced by the psychological impact of these contentious DRS calls.
The discussion around DRS and its application has been long-standing within cricketing circles. While envisioned as a tool to eliminate clear errors and uphold the spirit of the game, decision-making aided by technology can sometimes introduce its controversy. This stems from the bureaucratic interpretation of laws, which in cases like these, focus on the minute position of a ball at the point of pitching, taking precedence over the perceived trajectory observed by players and spectators.
The dissent over Root’s dismissal holds echoes of the past grievances in the series, where other English batsmen were subject to similar scrupulous analyses by the technology. What should ideally serve as an equalizer in the game often inflames debate over what constitutes fairness in the sport. In the courtroom of public opinion, the jury is still out when it comes to the DRS, but one thing remains undeniable: its immense impact on the game’s narratives.
Tangential to the controversy, the match has also seen individual performances that may otherwise have occupied the headlines. Shoaib Bashir’s entry into record books with a maiden Test fifer, Dhruv Jurel’s gutsy knock on a tricky Ranchi pitch, and Irfan Pathan’s accolades for Akash Deep’s commendable Test debut hardly broke through the commotion surrounding Root’s contentious dismissal. Nevertheless, they remain important threads in the rich tapestry of this Test series, reflecting the multifaceted nature of cricket that can inspire, frustrate, and captivate all in equal measure.
