The Gujarat Titans (GT) beat the Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB) by 4 wickets at the Narendra Modi Stadium in Ahmedabad on April 30.
A significant moment in the match came in the first innings when Jason Holder took a catch to dismiss RCB skipper Rajat Patidar off the bowling of Arshad Khan. Holder completed a diving catch running from deep square leg, but replays suggested that the ball had touched the grass when the West Indies all-rounder hit the turf. The catch was a subject of significant protest from the RCB dugout.
“We saw that the ball touched the ground, but I don’t know what the umpire told [the players], so it’s something within the law or whatever. I have no idea about that but, yeah, we wanted to have the umpire to have a closer look at that,” RCB pacer Bhuvneshwar Kumar said at the press conference after the game.
Former West Indies fast bowler-turned broadcaster Ian Bishop suggested that the positioning of Holder’s hand while completing the catch deserved a second look, debating whether his fingers were under the ball when the catch was completed. Due to the circumstances of how the catch was completed, Bishop was inclined to believ that the catch was not out.
“My debate on it would be: Jason Holder, first he caught the ball, no problems with that. And then with the sliding of the hand initially, that deserved a second look. And then you talk about control of the ball but also control of the body. So, when you’re looking to get yourself up having slid along the ground, are they determining that his fingers was under the ball?,” Bishop said on ESPNcricinfo’s TimeOut show.
“Because the back of the hand was to the sky, which means the ball was facing the grass. And so there was to me doubt there about ball and ground, because you’re not in control of your body until you stop sliding and you stand up if you’re going to do that. So out or not out? I think there was sufficient evidence in my mind for that to be,” he added.
Ambiguity in the laws: Abhinav Mukund
Former Indian opening batter-turned broadcaster Abhinav Mukund believes that while there is a lot of vagueness around the law and its interpretation, the simple fact that the ball had touched the ground is enough to deem the catch as not out.
“To me that’s not out because the ball should not touch the ground,” he said. “If the ball touches the ground, then it clearly is not out. And there are multiple ways to get up. You’re an extremely fit international athlete. You don’t need your hands or a ball to get up. So that’s where I stand in the whole matter,” he said.
“I know the law is there’s a lot of ambiguity in the law itself. But if the ball touches the ground, to me it’s not out. And what I saw, which I’m sure the TV umpire did see and a lot of our viewers also saw, [was that] the ball touched the ground,” he added.
The MCC’s Laws of Cricket state that a catch is taken when the fielder has “complete control over the ball and their own movement before it touches the ground.”
