Updated: Aug 20, 2019
Daryl Mitchell's controversial lbw decision sparks new debate on DRS
Playing only 2nd T20I of his career, Daryl Mitchell, New Zealand all-rounder, featured in one of the all-time DRS controversies. Baffled with the third umpire's shocking decision, Daryl Mitchell had no other option than walk back to the hut. Not the technology or rules, Shaun Haig was at the receiving end for the decision.
As it Happened
India seeking revenge for the heavy drubbing at Wellington the other day were asked to bowl first in the 2nd T20Is as New Zeland won the toss at Auckland. Shorter boundaries and flatness of the deck at Auckland have always enticed batsmen. It has always been a happy hunting ground for batsmen or in other words, a batting paradise.
Batting first, New Zealand couldn't get off a flying start as it did in the first T20Is and ended up losing two quick wickets for just 41 runs under six overs. The drama took place on the final ball of the 6th over when Daryl Mitchell, facing his second ball of the innings, was trapped in front of the wickets by Krunal Pandya. What was supposed to be a plumb lbw from the naked eye, turned out even more controversial than it appears.
Soon after the on-field umpire showed his index finger, Daryl Mitchell knew he had edged it, upfront he referred the decision to the third umpire. During replay, Hotspot suggested a clear inside edge, however, after several set of replays TV umpire for more clarification moved on to the Snickometer which didn't show any spike when the ball passed. Based on the ball-tracking or Hawk-Eye where it ticked all three 'reds', Daryl Mitchell was declared out.
Shaun Haig, the TV umpire according to rule couldn't find enough evidence to overturn the on-field umpire's original decision. He potentially preferred Snicko over Hotspot. The mark showed on the bat in Hotspot may be a result of bat hitting the pad first. So, inconclusive evidence forced him to press the 'OUT' button.
The rule says,"If despite the available technology, the third umpire is unable to decide with a high degree of confidence whether the original on-field decision should be changed, then he/she shall report that the replays are ‘inconclusive’, and that the on-field decision shall stand. The third umpire shall not give answers conveying likelihoods or probabilities."