Ravichandran Ashwin bit his lip but struggled to hide India’s frustration at a controversial decision from third umpire Simon Fry during the fourth Test.
Ashwin compiled a 65-run partnership with Bhuvneshwar Kumar on day four, when the tourists’ tail finally wagged to reduce Australia’s first-innings lead to 97 runs.
It could have been even better had Kumar not been given out in contentious circumstances, with the on-field umpires asking for Fry’s assistance.
Replays were seemingly inconclusive as to whether the ball scraped the pitch en route to Shane Watson at first slip.
Kumar accepted the decision and trudged off the SCG field, as Ashwin sought an explanation from umpires.
“I could say something and end up in a lot of trouble, but I don’t want to do that,” Ashwin said, when asked for his take on Fry’s verdict.
“It could have hit the ground and gone (to Watson), but the umpire’s decision is final.
“I’ve been told that – even while playing gully cricket back home. So I respect that and stick to that.
“But having said, I find my teammate very unlucky.”
Ashwin’s feelings were mirrored by retired express paceman Brett Lee, who was calling the game for the Nine Network.
“You can’t give the batsman out on that, no way,” Lee said.
“You’ve got to give the batsman the benefit of the doubt.
“I feel very sorry for Kumar.”
Kumar did enjoy some luck in his knock of 30, with Joe Burns putting down a catch at short leg when he was on zero.
Dalgety Carrington
Roar Guru
There is no "benefit of the doubt" rule per se, it's more having a "comfortable certainty".
Charles Plowdog
Guest
Has the ICC changed the rules such as the benefit of the doubt, for the batsman, no longer applies on replays. It seems to me that the 3rd umpire now looks for reasons to give a batsman out given the endless replays of hot spot/snicko/slow motion etc replays: if it isn't clear quickly surely its N.O.
The Magic Man
Roar Rookie
They may need a bunker!
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Like in today's effort with the attempted stumping. From one angle it looked out from another it didn't. Yesterday it went against the batsman and today for the batsman. I didn't have a problem with either decision both could have gone either way and I would have supported the decision.
Nick
Guest
Still censoring debate at the roar. Quell surprise
Rob JM
Guest
This is definitely a major problem with the third umpire system. There should be no such thing as umpires call, only in doubt! Any doubt should go to the batsman except when they fail to play a shot. However the Fielding side should not loose a DRS review for an In Doubt decision.
Larney
Guest
Gone are the days when the benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman. I have thought that for a while but that is human. However, the umpires went to third umpire and had the benefit of technology. The benefit still was not given to the batsmen. I would like to hear the grounds of that decision. What did the umpire see?