The unfair dismissal of Yuvraj Singh

By Anil - 10 July, '02
July 10 2002

A hugely controversial decision by England's third umpire Mallender, after an equally controversial appeal by wicketkeeper Stewart.

When a batsman's back foot has never crossed the crease, but he marginally lifts it in the process of playing a shot, is it valid to stump him? Or is that against the spirit of the game?

When a 3rd umpire deliberates for minutes on a decision, is it fair for him to then give a batsman out? Clearly there is doubt, and clearly the law says that the benefit of the doubt should go to the batsman. Is it against the spirit of the game for an umpire to declare a batsman out in such a situation? Especially when the batsman is one who has time and again taken the game away from the side which the umpire has "allegiance" to?

When a particular team has a reputation of whinging at the slightest reasons when they are touring, is it fair for them to go against the spirit of the game not once but twice on a single decision, in the desperate attempt to win a game?

Is the reputation of English umpires, who claim to be the most professional of all in the world, tarnished permanently by the actions of Neil Mallender, who made the decision described above to send back the batsman who has most terrorized the English attack so far, Yuvraj Singh?

Will Alec Stewart apologize for claiming a dismissal that was against the spirit of the game? Specially after the mighty whinging of the England team in India when their batsman Vaughan was dismissed when he "handled the ball" in an attempt to prevent it rolling on to his stumps?

Is cricket being cheapened due to such tactics by an aging wicketkeeper desperate to keep his place in the squad? Will the ICC step in to punish a cricketer who has truly brought the game of cricket into disrepute? Or a home-bias umpire who clearly violated rules to send an "opposition batsman" back in spite of video evidence to the contrary?