Yashasvi Jaiswal's controversial dismissal in MCG Test: All we know
30 Dec 2024

Indian opener Yashasvi Jaiswal's dismissal on Day 5 of the Boxing Day Test against Australia at the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) has stirred controversy.

The Indian batter was given out by third umpire Sharfuddoula, overturning an on-field decision for caught-behind.

Notably, the technological evidence was inconclusive whether there was an edge or not.

Jaiswal was finally dismissed on 84(208) by Aussie skipper Pat Cummins.

Jaiswal's dismissal: A closer look at the incident
Incident details

The incident happened when Jaiswal, who was batting on 84, tried to hook a bouncer bowled by Cummins.

Wicketkeeper Alex Carey successfully collected the ball as the Australians appealed for caught-behind.

On-field umpire Joel Wilson initially ruled it not-out, prompting Australia to review his decision.

Real-time Snicko showed a flat line as the ball crossed the bat, wheareas regular replays showed a big deflection.

Third umpire's decision and its impact on the match
Decision impact

Third umpire Sharfuddoula overturned the on-field decision on the basis of the deflection seen in regular replays, ruling in Australia's favor.

After his dismissal, Jaiswal was seen speaking having a word with the umpires before eventually walking off the field.

The dismissal left India reeling at 140/7 in their chase of 340. They finally lost by 184 runs.

Taufel supports third umpire's decision
Expert opinion

Former international cricket umpire Simon Taufel backed Sharfuddoula's decision.

Speaking on Channel 7, he said the deflection was "conclusive evidence" and defended the third umpire's decision.

"In my view, the decision was out," Taufel said. "The third umpire did make the correct decision in the end."

Not everyone, however, agreed with this line of thought.

Gavaskar questions evidence used in Jaiswal's dismissal
Disagreement

Speaking on Star Sports, Sunil Gavaskar also disagreed with the decision.

He asked why Snicko's evidence was ignored and proposed that an optical illusion may have affected the third umpire's decision.

"The optical illusion suggests there is an edge," Gavaskar said. "It was this optical illusion here as well. If the technology evidence suggests it is not out, then you cannot give it out."