Lehmann was 'smart': Wright

PUNE, MARCH 28. India's coach John Wright said Darren Lehmann was very `smart' in rushing to the dressing room. Australian captain Steve Waugh did not think umpire S.C. Gupta was right in consulting the third umpire after the Indians pleaded with him. There was wit in Wright's remark; umpire Gupta ought not to have consulted the third umpire.

The sequence of events went like this. Lehmann played offspinner Harbhajan Singh near short cover and darted down the pitch for a single; Mark Waugh responded. In between Yuveraj Singh (substituting for Rahul Dravid) picked up the ball and threw it to wicketkeeper Vijay Dahiya who promptly whipped off the bails.

The question now arose as to which batsman was `out of his ground'? Lehmman was halfway through when he stopped in his tracks.

Television replays showed that Mark Waugh appeared to be slightly ahead of Lehmann. Obviously umpire Gupta was caught napping when the Indians appealed and probably urged him to declare Mark Waugh out.

In the meantime Lehmann disappeared into the dressing room in a jiffy.

The wicket at the batsman's end (Lehmann's who played the shot and left his ground first) was put down. And Law 29. 2, on which is batsman's ground, explains: (a) If only one batsman is within a ground (1) it is his ground (2) it remains his ground even if he is later joined there by the other batsman; (b) if both batsmen are in the same ground and one of them subsequently leaves it, `(a) (1) above applies''.

The clause applicable to the Waugh-Lehmann controversy is explained in (c). It says, ``if there is no batsman in either ground, then each ground belongs to whichever of the batsmen is nearer to it, or, if the batsman are level, to whichever was nearer to it immediately prior to their drawing level.''

Well, even if Mark Waugh was inches ahead of Lehmann (they appeared to have crossed) then he should have been declared out because he was nearer to the stumps which was put down by Dahiya. If Mark Waugh and Lehmann were level, then the latter was right in walking back to the pavilion. In this case it is the second part of clause `C' which is the operative part.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Sport
Previous : Mark Waugh in forefront of Aussie win
Next     : Indian spinners bowled poorly