- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Ben Stokes’s obstructing the field in the second ODI has proven an old cricketing rule. Namely, that a rare type of dismissal seems to give the green light to ignorant hysteria.
Last year, Geoff Lemon expertly dissected the intrinsic ridiculousness in the protests over Sri Lanka’s Mankad of Jos Buttler.
At the time, Sri Lankan captain Angelo Matthews was blunt and unapologetic. After the Lord’s ODI, Steve Smith rightly followed Matthews’ example.
Now the two incidents are obviously not exactly the same. But the point I need to make about both incidents is this – the criticism of the captains afterwards was nonsensical over withdrawing the appeal.
Stokes’s dismissal was not as clear-cut as the Buttler Mankad. This is shown by the fact it went to the third umpire. Now, the obstructing the field dismissal law requires that the batsman be “wilfully” obstructing the field to be given out.
It came down to a judgement call. If you listen to the third umpire Joel Wilson, he said, “I have enough evidence”.
He judged from the vision that it looked like Stokes was trying to stop the ball from hitting the stumps. You see, umpires aren’t mind readers. Complain all you want about poor decision making, but being a clairvoyant has never been a requirement to be an international umpire.
Wilson made a judgement call. Sometimes, judgement calls can infuriate fans. Even with the DRS, a thin outside edge is a hard decision for the umpire to adjudicate. The decisions that result from such quandaries, such as Kevin Pietersen’s second innings dismissal at Old Trafford in 2013, spark debate.
But there’s no suggestion that a fielding captain should withdraw his appeal and sit in the naughty boy corner with a thin outside edge. There should have been no such demand of Smith either. Wilson would have been able to justify a not out decision. However, the gap between the ball’s trajectory and Stokes’s head was wide enough to allow for an out decision.
Paul Collingwood, a cricketer and man I admire, said on Twitter that Smith would live to regret his decision, citing his own self-confessed mistake in 2008. I can only humbly disagree. Ryan Sidebottom and Grant Elliot collided. Nobody’s fault, collisions between batsmen and bowlers occur. However, no one accidentally prevented Stokes from diving back in the crease; Mitchell Starc didn’t accidentally push him into the line of the ball.
“But Stokes’ reaction was just that – a reaction.”
Yep. After all, batting comes down to reactions, whether it is over what shot to play or whether to run. You don’t have time to consult even a text message before deciding how to counter-act anyone other than Majid Haq.
Sometimes, a batsman reacts wrongly and gets out. That’s cricket. If you think the umpire’s decision was wrong, then say so. It’s not an indefensible position, and I would have had no problem had Stokes got the benefit of the doubt. It was a line-ball decision.
Feel free to criticise Steve Smith’s actions, but also be prepared for me and others to claim you’re wrong. Feel free to criticise Steve Smith’s nationality, but also be prepared for people to completely ignore you. Feel free to criticise Steve Smith’s level of likability, but also be prepared for people to shrug their shoulders and point out that that is irrelevant.
MS Dhoni sportingly called back Ian Bell in 2011 at England’s behest. It was a magnanimous gesture, acknowledged as such by all, and everyone moved on. However, generosity of that type cannot be taken for granted. Matthews and Smith have rightly resented the fact that it has been expected of them.
Now, don’t get me wrong. We have freedom of speech. As such, Eoin Morgan was entitled to state that he thought what happened was wrong. Morgan was entitled to claim that it would never happen under his captaincy.
Yet one hypothetical situation occurs to me. The 2019 World Cup Final will be held at Lord’s. England could be in it, and Morgan could still be captain. Should Morgan face a predicament similar to the one Smith faced on Saturday night to decide the World Cup, he will find out that action is much harder than making statements that could be uncharitably described as populist.
Steve Smith called Morgan’s implication that he should have withdrawn the appeal “disappointing”.
Disappointing, and rude.
Build your own fantasy cricket team and put it to the test with Draftstars daily fantasy competitions. Pick your match, pick your team and watch the points roll in to take out cash prizes on each match. What are you really gambling with? Set a deposit limit.