Rishabh Pant „okradziony”? Fani i eksperci wściekli z powodu kontrowersyjnego zwolnienia podczas meczu IND vs NZ

Indian cricket fans were left furious after Rishabh Pant’s controversial dismissal during IND vs NZ third Test at the Wankhede Stadium. Pant was the only Indian batter showing some fight between the sudden collapse, his counter-attacking half-century giving hope to India’s innings. Labelled the “lone warrior,” Pant was driving India’s efforts forward, but his controversial dismissal came at a critical moment, leaving fans and supporters deeply disappointed.

Ex cricketer and broadcaster Sunil Gavaskar said, “they don’t use the Hotspot here, that would’ve been even more conclusive in this situation”.

Ajaz Patel gets the breakthrough

New Zealand’s Ajaz Patel managed to dismiss Pant with the help of a review. Just when Pant seemed ready to turn the game in India’s favour, Patel’s breakthrough shifted the momentum back to New Zealand. The wicket came in the final session, as both teams were battling hard for a win. For fans, Pant’s dismissal marked a key turning point in the match, sparking reactions on social media.

What happened with Rishabh Pant?

The controversy around Rishabh Pant’s dismissal centers on a disputed caught-behind decision that involved multiple reviews, contradictory signals, and a crucial third umpire intervention. Here’s how it unfolded:

• The appeal and initial decision: Pant came down the pitch to Ajaz Patel’s delivery, missed it, and the ball bounced up to wicketkeeper Tom Blundell. New Zealand appealed for a bat-pad catch, claiming Pant edged the ball onto his pad, leading it to pop up for the catch.
• The review process: Captain Tom Latham and the New Zealand side were convinced there was an edge, so they reviewed the not-out decision. UltraEdge, the technology used to detect edges, showed a faint “murmur” sound when the ball passed Pant’s bat. This sound was taken as potential evidence of an edge, but there was ambiguity.
• Key observations by the third umpire: The third umpire noticed that Pant’s bat and pad might have made contact separately, suggesting the sound could have come from the bat hitting the pad, not the ball. Additionally, there appeared to be a small gap between the bat and ball, which would typically lead to an overturned appeal.
• The final decision: Despite the inconclusive evidence and the gap observed by the third umpire, on-field umpire Paul Reiffel ultimately instructed his colleague Richard Illingworth to give Pant out, siding with New Zealand’s claim. This reversal was significant because it gave Ajaz Patel his 10th wicket in the innings and altered the course of the match.
• Pant’s reaction: Rishabh Pant was visibly frustrated, feeling that the sound detected was from the bat hitting his pad, not the ball. Convinced he hadn’t edged it, he reluctantly walked off, dragging himself from the field.

Following the decision, fans took to social media to express their anger, with many arguing that Pant was “robbed” of a fair call.