Labuschagne reprieved in slips catch controversy, greats call for rule change amid bad light drama: Talking Points

By Tim Miller / Editor

Fans who came to the SCG expecting an action-packed day of cricket between Australia and South Africa were left repeatedly frustrated, as bad light and rain combined to severely limit proceedings.

Play first came to a halt at the second session drinks break, when the umpires took a light reading and determined conditions were no longer safe for the Proteas’ pace bowlers to continue.

Captain Dean Elgar declined the offer to only use his spin bowlers, with both sides duly heading off for an early tea.

Light drizzle in Sydney then extended the break to over an hour; then, just as play looked set to resume at 3:45pm, it was again pushed back as Day 1 threatened to descend into farce.

Umpire Chris Gaffaney again took a light reading, finding the light was no better than it had been when play had stopped. Under cricket rules, play can’t resume after a bad light delay until said light improves.

Australian Test legend and former captain Steve Waugh posted on Instagram that cricket was being left behind the times.

“Test cricket needs to realise there is a lot of competition out there and not using the lights when the players are off for bad light simply doesn’t add up. Lots of unhappy spectators who can’t understand the rationale and reason for no play. #commonsense #movewiththetimes @icc @cricketaustralia”

His first skipper, Allan Border, also wasn’t impressed, calling on the ICC to change its current rules around bad light.

“You could play in this light in my opinion,” he said on Fox Cricket.

“I’ve been arguing this case for 20-odd years – that the current light rule is too soft. We come off too easily when it does darken up in the afternoon.

“It’s something that the game needs to look at a lot more closely as to when it does become dangerous, when it becomes difficult to see. Right now, with the light’s on – if we were using a pink ball, we’d be playing.”

Fellow former player Mark Waugh agreed, citing the SCG floodlights as providing enough visibility for the match to continue.

“I’m saying once the lights are on, we stay on – simple as that,” Waugh said.

“It’s an outdoor sport – sometimes the light favours one side over the other.

“The ICC need to look at the crowd here; there’s 30,000 people here. Did Australia look like they couldn’t see the ball when they were batting? I think they saw it ok.

“Lights are on, we stay on. Simple.”

Umpires test the light on day one. (Photo by Brett Hemmings – CA/Cricket Australia via Getty Images)

Former South African captain Shaun Pollock had an even more radical solution – to permit the use of a pink ball, exclusively used for day-night Tests, to replace a red in cases of poor light.

“You kind of think, well, keep developing the pink ball to make it perform exactly like the red ball at all times, and then you’ve solved that problem forever and a day,” he said.

The latest delay would last a little over an hour, with play finally able to resume, much to the delight of bored fans.

The Proteas were quick to make the most of the resumption, with Marnus Labuschagne falling for 79 to a brilliant piece of bowling by Anrich Nortje.

But no sooner had Steve Smith made his way to the middle than bad light struck again, with the players forced off for the third time.

Proteas fume over third umpire call as Marnus escapes in slips catch controversy

Controversy erupted just after lunch on Day 1 at the SCG – and not for the first time this summer, South Africa were left feeling like they’d copped the rough end of the stick.

On 70 and playing beautifully, Marnus Labuschagne was drawn into an edge from quick Marco Jansen, the chance superbly snaffled low down at first slip by Simon Harmer… or so it seemed.

After a lengthy review, though, third umpire Richard Kettleborough thought differently, finding the ball had flicked the grass before Harmer had clutched it and overruling the on-field call of out.

The Proteas were left in disbelief at the call, with captain Dean Elgar immediately seeking out umpire Chris Gaffaney for an explanation.

“Are there fingers underneath? You can never get quite close enough to understand where the fingers are there,” former South African great Shaun Pollock said on Fox Cricket in the aftermath.

“He [Kettleborough] must be 100 per cent convinced that it carried.”

Former Australian batter Mark Waugh was of the view the Proteas could consider themselves hard done by.

CLICK HERE for a seven-day free trial to watch cricket on KAYO

“The soft signal was out – that could go either way, let’s be honest.

“It was tough to tell. I thought from front on it looked probably out; from side on, there was enough doubt there. But once it was given out… they’ll count themselves a little unlucky, the South Africans.”

Speaking during a subsequent drinks break, Labuschagne’s non-striker Usman Khawaja, as expected, opined that his partner was right to be reprieved, jokingly claiming home-ground advantage helped his cause.

“Australia – not out!” he laughed.

“Umpire’s decision reigns supreme. Umpire had a good look at it. I thought there was doubt, I’m sure South Africa feel the other way.

“I know everyone’s a little bit biased, so it is what it is.”

Marnus Labuschagne of Australia speaks with Kyle Verreynne and Sarel Erwee of South Africa. (Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)

‘Really surprised’: Proteas’ bizarre move questioned as play suspended

Shortly after Labuschagne’s reprieve, both sides headed off, with the umpires having determined the light at the SCG was insufficient to continue playing.

However, it was soon revealed that while the light was too dim for the Proteas to continue bowling the quicks, the umpires had offered Elgar the chance to continue play with spin pair Keshav Maharaj and Simon Harmer.

Elgar, though, declined, with play duly suspended and an early tea called.

Speaking on Fox Cricket, former Test spinner Kerry O’Keeffe was shocked by the call, citing Harmer’s impressive start with the ball and a bevy of middle-order left-handers for the off-spinner to target as reason enough for the Proteas to push on.

“The curious thing is that Dean Elgar declined to bring on the spinners. I thought Harmer looked the best, the most likely to take a wicket,” O’Keeffe said.

Sports opinion delivered daily 

   

“There’s a number of left handers to come – [Travis] Head, [Matt] Renshaw, [Alex] Carey. It was an opportunity to get Australia in batting and getting them out, and he’s said ‘no, I was going to bowl the quicker men, we’ll go off.”

“I’m really surprised by that as well,” former great Michael Hussey added.

Recalled in place of fast bowler Lungi Ngidi with the SCG wicket expected to favour spin, Harmer had started brightly with the ball, with Usman Khawaja given out LBW off his bowling the first over after lunch.

However, Khawaja’s review would quickly spare him, the DRS finding the ball had hit his glove first.

The Crowd Says:

2023-01-06T04:08:04+00:00

DaveJ

Roar Rookie


Fair enough too. Until a few months ago that would have applied but apparently the rule or guideline changed to the soft signal only being relevant if there are insufficient video replays for the TMO.

2023-01-05T10:40:15+00:00

Derek Murray

Roar Rookie


The TMO essentially said it definitely hit the ground. And that seems remarkable based on what we all saw

2023-01-05T10:27:02+00:00

matth

Roar Guru


It should actually be benefit if the doubt to the umpire. He gave a soft signal of out and the third umpire didn’t have enough in my mind to overturn as an obvious error

2023-01-05T09:54:40+00:00

theirishman

Roar Rookie


Zoomed in front angle shot suggested otherwise. Look it up.

2023-01-05T02:45:19+00:00

DaveJ

Roar Rookie


My own feeling is that if it’s difficult to tell whether it hit the ground, give the benefit of the doubt to the fielder and bowler, not the batsman. The batsman has been beaten or made an error, the fielder probably couldn’t have done any better, and we’re 80-100% confident that it didn’t hit the ground. But not hard to see why TMO gave this one out, based on side-on view, given current approach of benefit of the doubt to the batter in all circumstances.

2023-01-04T21:52:05+00:00

scrum

Roar Rookie


It was designed initially to eliminate the howler but that is not how it is used either by the teams or the Umpires. And who is at fault, the media and the fans for creating drama and angst over difficult decisions that have to be made .

2023-01-04T11:42:57+00:00

Android-angler Cartman-brah

Roar Rookie


The same as you boss. I also feel hopeless.

2023-01-04T10:03:35+00:00

Rowdy

Roar Rookie


I feel bad man.

2023-01-04T09:56:02+00:00

Android-angler Cartman-brah

Roar Rookie


I fully agree read my post upstairs

2023-01-04T09:52:01+00:00

Android-angler Cartman-brah

Roar Rookie


I get the feeling that this Elgar guy is not the right captain to take us forward. Never ever a SA captain refused to use spinners under bad light. So he doesn't want us to win...with his decisions and field placing.

2023-01-04T09:20:34+00:00

Sgt Pepperoni

Roar Rookie


Absolutely correct dtm but still it's a storm in a wet, light affected tea cup

2023-01-04T09:16:20+00:00

Derek Murray

Roar Rookie


I'm amazed, having woken up in London to see the situation, that Elgar might have refused to remain on. Down 2-0 in the series, an offie potentially bowling at a string of lefties. What possible reason could he have for going off? I think he needs to be replaced as captain. This sort of negative thinking simply makes no sense

2023-01-04T08:34:20+00:00

DTM

Roar Rookie


That's Sydney for you Sarge. Although, I disagree with the first part of your statement. We don't know what difference it made as Smith could have been out first ball and the Saffas might have run through us.

2023-01-04T07:22:06+00:00

Ace

Roar Rookie


Perfect frame to show the ball touching the ground before completely going into the hands

2023-01-04T07:21:17+00:00

Sgt Pepperoni

Roar Rookie


In the end it made a huge difference of 6 runs. At least we have a talking point in this dead, waterlogged match

2023-01-04T07:13:56+00:00

Al

Guest


I commented on the blog with something similar but, in summary, the Laws require a fielder to have "complete control" over their movement and that of the ball's before the ball touches the ground. If read literally, you'd have to disallow at least one catch every other match - if the fingers are split under the ball, the ball is going to have touched the ground. This one was more obvious that most, but because the direction to umpires seems to be to uphold catches where the fingers are mostly under the ball, there's a grey area. The other one that I saw a few years ago in the BBL, but not again before or since, is disallowing a catch where the ball is thrown in celebration before the fielder has control over their own movement. Cam Green in the second test, as an example, tossed the ball as he was hitting the ground. Like most sport, there are areas of the game that are umpired by convention rather than by the rules as written. Sometimes it doesn't cause any problems for one reason or another (see: non-enforcement of voluntary tackles in rugby league), but in others it creates this grey area. In lower grade and social league sports (at least in my experience), you have no idea how an umpire is going to rule on one of these until it happens (imagine if you had a catch disallowed for landing with the ball in your hand, but facing down such that you land on the ball!).

2023-01-04T06:28:12+00:00

The Sports Lover

Roar Rookie


The third umpire was designed to eliminate the howler Exactly.

2023-01-04T05:57:59+00:00

DTM

Roar Rookie


Interesting decision on Harmer's catch/no catch. For all the technology we have to view, I'm sure you'll find many arguments for and against. After a pre determined time, I think the result should be umpire's call. Most of us can live with the on field umpire's making occasional mistakes where it is very hard to adjudicate. What we don't like is the 3rd umpire getting it wrong. If he has to look at multiple replays for more than say, one minute then go back to the on field umpire's decision. The third umpire was designed to eliminate the howler. Whichever call the on field umpire made (in this case) would not have been a howler.

2023-01-04T05:39:54+00:00

scrum

Roar Rookie


The ball clearly touched the ground from what I saw. And why are these decisions called controversial. If he had said out that would have been labelled as controversial as well.

2023-01-04T04:54:43+00:00

theirishman

Roar Rookie


Yeah. Looked out to me.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar