‘Bad umpiring, bad rules cost Pakistan’: Harbhajan slams ICC, disagrees with Graeme Smith over DRS calls in PAK vs SA

The ‘umpire’s call’ law of cricket once again came into focus during the World Cup 2023 match between Pakistan and South Africa at the MA Chidambaram Stadium in Chennai on Friday.

First, it was South Africa, who were at the receiving end when Rassie van der Dussen was given out by the third umpire with DRS showing two ‘umpire’s call’ out of three. Then, Pakistan suffered a heartbreak as Tabraiz Shamsi survived a close LBW shout due to the not-out decision from the on-field umpire. This prompted former India off-spinner Harbhajan Singh to launch a stringent criticism of the ‘umpire’s call’ laws.

Harbhajan said Pakistan lost the match by 1 run because of bad umpiring and that ICC should change the ‘umpire’s call’ rule.

“Bad umpiring and bad rules cost Pakistan this game.. @ICC should change this rule .. if the ball is hitting the stump that’s out whether umpire gave out or not out doesn’t matter.. otherwise what is the use of technology???” Harbhajan tweeted after Keshav Maharaj hit a boundary to seal a thrilling win for South Africa. The result meant South Africa jumped to the top of the table on net run rate while Pakistan slumped to the sixth spot.

What is the ‘umpire’s call’ rule?

Since DRS became a mandatory feature in all ICC events, it was made clear that if the ball-tracking technology projects that the ball would have gone on to clip the stumps instead of hitting it, the verdict will be given as per the on-field umpire’s call. This was done to keep a margin for error in ball tracking. This means if DRS can’t tell with certainty that more than 50% of the ball was pitching in line, impacting the pads or hitting the stumps, then the on-field umpire’s call would take precedence. If the on-field umpire rules it not out then it will stay not out even if the ball–tracking shows it would have gone on to clip the stumps. It will be out if the on-field decision says so.

What happened in the Pakistan vs South Africa match?

Umpire Paul Reiffel gave van der Dussen out in the 19th over of South Africa’s chase. He opted for a review. Ball tracking showed ‘umpire’s call’ on two parameters – the impact and the hitting. But because he was given out on the field, the third umpire was not allowed to change it. The on-field umpire’s call would have been changed only if the ball-tracking had shown it had hit Dussen outside the line of the stumps or was completely missing the stumps. Neither was true so Dussen was given the marching orders.

The other side of the umpire’s call came into effect towards the end of the match. Shamsi was given not out on the field by umpire Alex Wharf. DRS showed the ball was clipping the stumps but because it was not certain that the ball would have definitely hit the stumps, the third umpire had to go with the umpire’s call, which was not out.

What is Harbhajan’s logic and why did he debate with Graeme Smith?

Harbhajan says the ICC can’t be on two boats at the same time. He wants the parent body to either completely trust the technology or go with the umpire’s verdict. According to him, everything should be out if DRS shows the ball hitting or clipping the stumps.

After his tweet on Shamsi’s DRS decision, former South Africa captain Graeme Smith pointed out that van der Dussen got the rough end of the ‘umpire’s call’ rule when he was given out. Harbhajan came up with two replies.

“This isn’t right .. either u use technology or stick to umpires decisions SIMPLE ! In the same game ball hitting the stump twice once given out and once not out ..what r you showing the whole world ? Who’s making the mistakes umpire or technology? Why hv them both ? Need to decide which one is right . UMPIRE OR TECHNOLOGY?” he said.

The former India cricketer, however, contradicted his own logic by saying that Dussen should have been given not out.

“He was not out according to me .. but tech was there to give him out as umpire gave him out.. otherwise umpire would hv looked bad for wrong decision.. they saved the umpire there not the player who could have won the game easily for SA.”