KL Rahul's expression was one of fury, and his astonished smile soon faded. His entire body was resonating with the language of disapproval. He tells Richard Kettleboroguh, the on-field umpire, "There was a gap," and then he storms off the field while tossing a mouthful. Rahul does not typically exhibit such combative on-field behaviour. In the midst of chaos, he is the sensation of tranquillity.
However, Rahul showed a different side on the first day of the India vs Australia first test in Perth. Rahul has every reason to act that way, as most cricket fans would concur. He was the Indian batter who was set. All the hard work had been done by him. Above all, the third umpire did not have enough evidence to reverse the on-field umpire's judgment to declare the player out.
Simon Taufel defends Richard Illingworth
Richard Illingworth, the third umpire, came under fire for giving KL Rahul the marching orders. Both cricket fans and former players criticized the seasoned umpire's judgment. Illingworth's judgment upset former India batsmen Sanjay Manjrekar and Aakash Chopra, as well as former Australia cricketer Matthew Hayden. However, renowned umpire Simon Taufel offered support to the former English cricket player.
Third umpire Illingworth made the correct call, according to the former Australian, who is widely regarded as one of the best umpires in the history of the game. As there was a pause between the two events, Taufel explained that the ultraedge displayed the spike of the bat striking the ball and the bat striking the pads.
"Umpires are looking for conclusive evidence. There were a few gremlins at the start of that review, being the first Test where he didn't get some camera angles he was asking for. Richard Illingworth had a tough job there, but this camera angle is probably the best one for me, it shows that the ball does graze the outside edge." Taufel said on the Channel Seven, the host broadcasters.
"In my view, the ball does graze the outside edge, which has caused the scuff marks, but then the bat goes on to hit the pad. So I think from a batter's perspective, they are looking to see that evidence on the big screens as the decision is made. I think that's exactly why KL Rahul has a question mark on his mind and Richard Kettleborough as well. I imagine there will be an interesting discussion in the umpires room in the lunch break. We saw with that side on shot there was a spike on RTS with the bat away from the pad; in other words, the bottom of the bat hadn't reached the pad," he said.
Taufel concurred, though, that it may have been more obvious if Illingworth had given the frame more time rather than requesting that Kettleborough immediately reverse his decision to go out.
"Therefore rolling that through in its natural course, you may have seen that second spike (on Snicko, to indicate bat hitting pad) come through, had it been rolled all the way through," he added.
KL Rahul's controversial dismissal
The Indian innings' twenty-third over was where it all happened. From over the wicket, Mitchell Starc had a chance to try the angle. As the ball went past Rahul's bat and landed in the keeper's gloves, he kept his bat and glove close together. Pat Cummins sent it upstairs after the umpire ruled it not out despite the Australians' massive appeal.
Despite not having a split-screen view to help him determine if the Mitchell Starc delivery truly grazed the bat or if the snicko reacted to a hit on the pads, third umpire Illingworth overruled the ruling. Ten minutes prior to lunch, all of this occurred, and India ended the session at 51 for 4. Rahul, who scored 26 from 74 balls, said that when the ball passed the edge, his bat struck the pad simultaneously.
