India vs England, 4th Test: Founder of HawkEye technology, Paul Hawkins, said the right decision was made with regards to Joe Root’s LBW call in the 2nd innings in Ranchi while condeding that there is scope for improvement in the ball-tracking technology.
In Short
- Joe Root was given out LBW after on-field umpire’s call was overturned in Ranchi
- Quite a few were not convinced that the ball pitched on line from visuals of the ball-tracking system
- England lost the 4th Test by 5 wickets after a dramatic 2nd innings collapse
Paul Hawkins, the founder of the HawkEye technology that is used for ball-tracking in Decision Review System in Cricket, played down the chatter around Joe Root’s LBW in the second innings of the recently-concluded Test match between India and England in Ranchi. Hawkins said that he did not doubt that the correct decision was made by third umpire Joel Wilson in overturning on-field umpire Kumar Dharmasena’s call.
Paul Hawkins explained the difference between the usage of HawkEye technology in tennis and cricket and said the reaction to Joe Root’s LBW call offers them a scope to learn and improve the visual aspect of ball-tracking system.
It all began in the 17th over of England’s second innings in Ranchi when Indian spinner Ravichandran Ashwin trapped Joe Root lbw. The on-field umpire’s initial decision was not out, believing the ball had pitched outside leg stump. However, India’s successful review turned the tide, with the ball-tracking system showing the ball had fractionally pitched inside the line of the stumps, leading to Root’s dismissal for 11.
“So firstly, you measure the width of the stumps on each day of the Test. That then becomes the lines between what’s pitched in line and what’s not. It was a very close-on (Joe Root call),” Hawkinds told Simon Hughes in the ‘The Analyst’ podcast.
The controversy erupted, days after Ben Stokes expressed his displeasure with the umpire’s call after a Zak Crawley dismissal in the 3rd Test.
“In tennis, you will occasionally get zero mm in or zero mm out (in terms of ball pitching outside the line). But in tennis, it’s decided that itn’s not out until it’s not zero mm, but it’s 1mm out. So in tennis, we shift the bounce mark just for the presentation perspective, so a zero mm in becomes a 1mm in to enable the viewers to see the mark.
“But that’s just a presentation thing, nothing different with the tracking or the answer. It just makes it clearer to the viewer.
“It would have been clearer on TV if the track hadn’t come off the ball, so you can see more clearly over the line, which happens automatically if the ball has pitched outside the leg stump.
“It must be 1mm more in than out (Joe Root case) because otherwise, we wouldn’t have said it’s pitched in line. But it is a very close one.
As per the laws, we gave the right answer. But we failed in the ability to not be the story and perhaps there’s a learning opportunity to improve our presentation and stuff to make those really close ones slightly clearer,” he added.
Former England captain Michael Vaughan and fast-bowler Steve Harmison voiced their disbelief, suggesting that the ball might have pitched outside the line of the leg-stump. Vaughan, in a now-deleted post, criticised the technology’s reliability, reflecting a broader sentiment of incredulity that resonated through the English cricket community.
The fallout from this incident was not just a matter of one wicket but spoke to larger concerns about technology’s role in cricket. As England crumbled to 145 all out, the lbw call became a focal point of discussions, with the English media dissecting every angle and projection offered by the DRS.
Also Read | ‘Thank You PIA’: Pakistani air hostesses fly to Canada, and ‘vanish’
This article is part of Indiatoday publication.
