ICC World Cup 2019 | England should have been awarded five runs and not six, says Simon Taufel on the overthrow controversy
Getty
Under the pump, England got a boon when a throw from Martin Guptill hit Ben Stokes’ bat and rushed towards the boundary to earn a total of six runs. Stokes was completing his second run when the ball struck his bat and Simon Taufel has now stated that it should have been five runs instead of six.
England certainly had a lot of luck riding their way while it was otherwise for New Zealand. When New Zealand needed nine from three deliveries, Stokes shipped one towards mid-wicket and charged for a double. Guptill got to the ball in no time and threw at the keeper’s end as Stokes was sneaking in a second run. Unfortunately for New Zealand, the ball hit the southpaw’s bat and raced away towards the boundary, which was signalled by the umpire as six runs in all. The instance has received heavy criticism from many and former umpire Simon Taufel also voiced his opinion on this.
“They (England) should have been awarded five runs, not six. It’s a clear mistake … it’s an error of judgment,” Taufel told foxsports.com.au.
The law states: “If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be any runs for penalties awarded to either side, and the allowance for the boundary, and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had already crossed at the instant of the throw or act.”
As per the law, the second run should not have been counted, which would have left England needing four runs of two deliveries. Umpire Kumar Dharmasena had a brief consultation with his fellow colleague Marais Erasmus and signalled six runs to the batting team. Eventually, the game was drawn and one can only imagine what the result could have been had the umpire gave it as a five.
However, Taufel defended both the umpires as the pressure was humongous at that moment and it would be not fair to say that this was the deciding moment of the match. Also, as per the law, Adil Rashid should have been on strike as the batsmen did not cross at the time of the throw, which would have certainly dented England’s hopes.
“In the heat of what was going on, they thought there was a good chance the batsmen had crossed at the instant of the throw. Obviously TV replays showed otherwise. The difficulty you (umpires) have here is you’ve got to watch batsmen completing runs, then change focus and watch for the ball being picked up, and watch for the release (of the throw). You also have to watch where the batsmen are at that exact moment," he said.
“The difficulty you (umpires) have here is you’ve got to watch batsmen completing runs, then change focus and watch for the ball being picked up, and watch for the release (of the throw),” he said. You also have to watch where the batsmen are at that exact moment,” he added, pointing out the difficulty and pressure faced by the umpires.
Taufel also acknowledged that the incident was an unfortunate one, and that it is unfair to say that it decided the outcome of the match. “It’s unfair on England, New Zealand and the umpires involved to say it decided the outcome,” the former umpire concluded.
