The Spectator

4 th innings of a popular test match. The last wicket of the batting team ‘stunningly’ closes in on the finishing line. An appeal. Umpire nods in disagreement. Bowling side calls for a 3 rd umpire review. The infra-red beams show a feather nick. Decision made. Fielding side ecstatic and batsmen rue an opportunity of a miracle. The last part of the sequence of events came as a forced reaction rather than one of spontaneity. The conclusion of the test match gave way to post-match reviews and analysis. Names like Agar, Bell, and Anderson featured in most pieces but keywords like DRS, umpiring too found their way into them. A couple of reports stressed upon Broad’s ‘unsporting’ move to hang around despite consciously edging a delivery to the slips, others criticized the quality of umpiring. A few had some things to say about the way both skippers used their set of reviews and a couple of others stressed upon the lack of foolproofness of the DRS.

A 92-run resurrection stand in a final between number 3 & 4, last 15 overs of the innings coming up; wickets in hand, bowling pressure subsided, momentum & foundation. On an ideal day and/or on a flat deck the batting team would be projecting at least 110-130 in that span, subject to the batting powerplay (if unused) not going the bowling team’s way! 8 years and over a 1000 ODI’s since the introduction of ‘batting’ powerplays, the effective usage of those 5 overs still remains far from perfection; and Sri Lanka was the latest victim of the counter-effects of the batting powerplay! It wasn’t all that bad to start with. In fact 30 runs came in the first 2.4 overs of the 30 delivery installment, 6 runs and 3 wickets followed in the succeeding 2.2 overs. Set batsmen removed, momentum busted and suddenly the last ten became too many for survival! Sudden momentum change in cricket is not a new thing, what is surprising is the frequency at which the ‘batting’ powerplays...