On Sunday, KKR’s Harshit Rana found an unexpected ally in umpire Vinod Seshan. In-form Virat Kohli, who was in full flow with the bat, was caught unaware by a deceiving high-full toss that did not rise as predicted. Paceman Rana successfully enticed him into making the RCB opener offer a rather miscued shot back to him and boom, wicket!
Seshan, who was standing at square leg at the time, signalled to his counterpart Akshay Totre at the non-striker’s end that the ball was aimed below the waist. TV umpire Michael Gough declared Kohli out after replays suggested the trajectory of the ball dipped inches below his waist, much to the chagrin of both Kohli and opening partner Faf du Plessis. The drama did not help Bengaluru in their chase as bottom-placed Bengaluru in the 10-team table slumped to their seventh loss in eight matches.
Their endeavour would have been considerably simplified had the slower delivery of the third over been deemed a no-ball. This would have left them with an in-form opening pair at the crease. Subsequently, a protracted interruption ensued following the delivery, marked by both Kohli and Du Plessis on the field contesting the decision. The delivery was replayed several times on the big screen only to be adjudged as being a legal delivery, with Kohli storming towards the umpires with an air of furious determination as the RCB camp looked on in disbelief.
Subsequently, Kohli incurred a fine equivalent to 50 per cent of his match fee as his conduct underwent thorough scrutiny in light of the penalty. “It was crazy. Rules are rules, Virat and myself in that space thought the ball was higher than his waist,” skipper Du Plessis said at the post-match press conference. “You always find one team happy and the other not so with such decisions.”
Also Read: Cheerleading is not everyone’s cup of tea
To eliminate subjectivity in assessing no-balls above waist height, the IPL has implemented new technology to gauge the height of deliveries as they pass the batsman at the crease. This measurement is then compared against the predetermined height from the toe to the waist of the batter in an upright stance. If the ball`s height exceeds the recorded waist height of the batter, it`s deemed a no-ball, otherwise, it is considered a fair delivery. In this instance, the anticipated path of the delivery would have positioned it 0.12 metres below Kohli`s waist had he been standing upright within his crease.
Offering a valuable analysis of the dismissal, the Hawk-Eye technology revealed that Kohli`s dismissal stemmed from his positioning outside the crease. While the ball`s height at the moment of impact exceeded waist level, its trajectory suggested that had he stayed within his crease, it would not have surpassed his waist height. That is to say, if Kohli had stayed within the crease, the ball would have passed him at a height of 0.92 metres above the ground. Prior measurements had established Kohli`s waist height at 1.04 metres. Had he not stepped outside, the ball would have passed below his waist, rendering it a legitimate delivery.
“Virat was indeed out as per the official rule book. The rule states that for a delivery to be considered a no ball, the ball must be at waist height as it crosses the stepping crease,” Star Sports posted on X. “In Kohli`s situation, while the ball was at waist height when he encountered it, as it crossed the stepping crease, it was below waist height, making it a fair delivery basis the official rule.”
“Feels like we may have got away with one there. It’s new to the game; maybe in 12 months, there’ll be a review to find out whether it’s working or not. From a player’s point of view, any time you are using data and technology, it’s good for the game,” said KKR opener Phil Salt, who stood near the unfolding drama.
It is a tad ironic how technology aims to eliminate human frailties, yet frequently attracts notice through controversies despite the strides made in technological advancements.
