Judging by his excuses for losing the latest CB Series match to Australia, MS Dhoni sounded more like a whingeing football manager than a respected cricket captain. Maybe he had a point that Sachin Tendulkar was unlucky to be given out after being forced to evade Brett Lee when running to the crease. The David Hussey 'hand of God'(?) incident was less clear cut.
The Indian skipper complained that the Aussie batsman should have been given out 'handled the ball' because his hand was outstretched and so was not legitimately self-defence, the reason the umpires give for not giving Hussey out. Now, I have not seen the incident in question but, while Dhoni appealed for clearer rules, there can never be a definitive answer. When is a hand outstretched or not outstretched? Does the TV umpire get out his electronic protractor ('Angle Eye?) to measure the angle at the shoulder? If more than 45 degrees and you're out, mate? Alternatively, what counts as self-defence? MS seemed to be contending that is only a genuine action if a batsman is trying to protect his 'crown jewels'. What about his head? Usually self-defence is an instinctive action anyway, so it's tough to rule on all these things in a flash. LBW is hard enough, without having to rule on a player's intent.
Dhoni harked back to Inzamam's dismissal at Peshawar six years ago, although on that occasion - when MS was keeping wicket - the Pakistan captain was given out 'obstructing the field'. He was judged to have deliberately used his bat to prevent Raina's throw reaching the stumps. After all, Inzy was never the quickest between the wickets!
Others have been given out in Tests for handling, usually for instinctively swatting a spinning ball which may or may not have been heading for the stumps. Graham Gooch and Steve Waugh have fallen foul of the law in this way. The last man to be given out 'handled ball' was another England opener, Michael Vaughan, against India in 2003. On that occasion, the batsman got tangled with the ball which he first smothered then flicked away with his glove, even though it didn't seem to be going towards his wicket. However, that is irrelevant and he had to go. Rather sheepishly, I suspect! His skipper at the time, Nasser Hussain later admitted he, too, would have appealed had he been in Ganguly's shoes.
In one-dayers, Darryl Cullinan caught the ball after first chopping it into the ground and was dismissed in 2000. However, only one man has been dismissed for both handled the ball and obstructing the field: back in the 1980s, the Indian batsman Mohinder Amarnath!
Forward to 2012, I may have a little bit of sympathy for MS Dhoni but these things happen and perhaps the decision, together with Tendulkar's controversial run out, may have contributed to his side losing the match. Nevertheless, I would hate cricket to go the way of football where every losing side blames the referee. Lambasting the officials is a tiresome feature of modern football, and ironically is usually prefaced by the phrases "I don't like to criticise officials but,..." or "I'm not looking for excuses, but..."! Decisions even themselves out, just like LBWs, run-outs, etc. I have a lot of respect for MS Dhoni, who has demonstrated tact and diplomacy many times in his career. I would hate to think these comments to the press are the start of something more insidious in cricket. leave the moaning minnies to other sports!
