Virat kohli was not out

KKR vs RCB: Virat Kohli was not out, says Navjot Singh Sidhu | RCB lost the thriller by 1 run

KKR vs RCB: Virat Kohli was not out, says Navjot Singh Sidhu | RCB lost the thriller by 1 run


Tata IPL 2024 has been a rollercoaster ride, but Royal Challengers Bangalore (RCB) has had an especially rough ride. Their last match was a heartbreaking one-run defeat to the Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR). Also, the match became controversial as the star batsman Virat Kohli was given not out on no ball according to some people. According to Navjot Singh Sidhu, Virat Kohli was not out. Kohli’s angry departure, owing to a new interpretation of the no-ball rule for height, has generated a debate about bowlers overstepping and the role of technology in deciding such cases.

Virat Kohli’s dismissal

The event occurred during the early phases of RCB’s chase. Harshit Rana, the KKR bowler, fired a delivery that climbed swiftly after pitching, catching Kohli by surprise. Virat Kohli tried to defend the ball but ended up gloving it back to Rana for an easy catch. Kohli was confident that the ball was beyond waist height and promptly challenged the on-field umpire’s ruling.

However, replays analyzed with the latest Hawk-Eye equipment revealed a different scenario. While the ball’s trajectory was dipping, Kohli’s proactive posture, which kept him out of his crease, meant the point of impact was below his waist. This, according to the new no-ball law, rendered the delivery legal.

The dismissal outraged Kohli. While the on-field decision may have been questionable, the application of the no-ball rule threw a curveball. Reece Topley, RCB’s left-arm pacer, succinctly captured the sentiment after the match: “It’s a grey area… We’re very much disappointed. There will be two contrasting moods, or feelings, about the dismissal. “It’s just a grey area.”

What Navjot Singh Sidhu has to say about it

The question boils down to how the rule is interpreted. Is the spirit of the no-ball regulation, which is supposed to safeguard batsmen from risky deliveries, being undermined by the technicalities of the batsman’s positioning? Former cricketer Navjot Singh Sidhu chipped in, challenging the rationale of the decision. “I am disappointed…” Did you notice how he stood on his toes, nearly 6 inches high? Did you count the extra inches while measuring his height?” he inquired. Sidhu further claimed that the dismissal effectively legalized a beamer, a delivery for which bowlers would typically apologize, raising worries about player safety. Also, people on social media share their feedback and believe that Virat Kohli was not out on that delivery.

This incident demonstrates cricket’s ongoing growth and the difficulties of deploying technology-driven solutions. While Hawk-Eye has transformed umpiring, incidents such as Kohli’s dismissal highlight potential flaws. The question remains, should the batsman’s position at the instant of delivery be considered when determining the legality of a high bouncer?

Virat kohli was not out

Technology based decision and the controversy

This is not the first time when players question over a technology based decision in cricket. Earlier this season, there were instances of questionable DRS calls where replays were insufficient to reverse on-field decisions. The dismissal of Kohli adds to the continuing controversy about whether technology is becoming a double-edged sword in cricket officiating.

There is no easy answer. The ideal approach would be a set of unambiguous guidelines that allow little opportunity for interpretation. Perhaps a revised “bouncing ball” clause that takes into account the batsman’s posture as well as the overall trajectory of the delivery would be a step forward.

Apart from the immediate impact on the match, the Kohli incident has revived a critical discussion about player safety and the balance of technology and human judgment in cricket officiating. Umpires can use technology in more better ways to maintain essence of the game. This way, they can come out with correct justifications and consistency decision-making.

Suyash Prabhudessai’s well-hit shot was refused a six

The close nature of the RCB versus KKR match emphasizes the importance of the umpiring blunders. Suyash Prabhudessai’s well-hit shot, which replays revealed had crossed the boundary rope, was refused a six. Two runs may seem insignificant in the broad scheme of things, but in a close game like this, it might mean the difference between victory and defeat. This event, together with the contentious Kohli dismissal, raises fundamental concerns about umpires’ accountability in high-pressure circumstances. The BCCI, the regulatory body of Indian cricket, must take a closer look at umpiring standards in the IPL and develop stronger rules to reduce these blunders, especially given the tournament’s huge stakes.

Meanwhile, RCB’s difficulties persist. Their postseason chances are dangling by a thread, and the contentious removal adds insult to injury. While the argument continues, Kohli and his squad will need to regroup and focus on regaining some pride in the remaining matches.

Visit Winexch for more such news on cricket. You can sign up on Winexch now to catch the live updates on Tata IPL 2024.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *