Kumar Dharmasena, who along with Marais Erasmus was the onfield umpire in the 2019 World Cup final, admitted on Sunday that he made a mistake by awarding an extra run to England after the ball ricocheted off Ben Stokes’ bat and ran to the boundary.
“It’s easy for people to comment after seeing TVreplays,” Dharmasena told Sri Lankan weekly the Sunday Times.
“I agree that there was a judgmental error when I seeit on TV replays now. But we did not have the luxury of TV replays at theground and I will never regret the decision I made. Besides, the ICC praised mefor the decision I made at that time,” he was quoted as saying.
With England chasing a target of 242 set by New Zealand inwhat has since been called the greatest World Cup final of all time and eventhe greatest ODI ever, Stokes went for a double off the third ball of the finalover with his team needing nine runs to win. But Martin Guptill’s throw fromdeep mid-wicket ricocheted off a diving Stokes’ bat and ran away to theboundary.
Dharmasena had signalled six runs with Stokes havingseemingly completed the second run. However, law 19.8 of the cricket rulebookpertaining to overthrows says, “If the boundary results from an overthrowor from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be any runs forpenalties awarded to either side, and the allowance for the boundary, and theruns completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they hadalready crossed at the instant of the throw or act.”
Television replays showed that Stokes and non-striker AdilRashid had not crossed when the throw came in from Guptill and hence Dharmasenashould awarded England five runs, instead of six.
Former umpire Simon Taufel was one of the first to point outthe error.
“The act of the overthrow starts when the fielderreleases the ball. It becomes an overthrow from the instant of the throw,”Tauffel was quoted as saying by the Australian media.
Dharmasena clarified that he could not have referred thematter to the third umpire as there was no dismissal involved. “So, I didconsult the leg umpire through the communication system which is heard by allthe other umpires and the match referee. And, while they couldn’t check TVreplays, they all confirmed that the batsmen have completed the run. This iswhen I made my decision,” he said.
Dharmasena also said that there were far too many thingsgoing on at the time.
“One must understand that there were too many things onour plate. We had to watch the batsmen complete the first run, the ball beingfielded, how it was handled by the fielder and whether the batsmen completedthe second run. And where the throw would come from, the striker’s end ornon-striker’s end,” said the former off-spinner who was part of the SriLanka team that won the World Cup in 1996.
“In this case, we were all happy that the batsmen hadcompleted the second run because the ball ricocheted off Stokes’s bat at thetime of him completing the second run. So, we assumed that they had crossedeach other at the time of the fielder releasing the ball,” he said.
The decision significantly worked in England’s advantagebecause apart from the extra run, Stokes was on strike for the last three ballsinstead of Rashid.
It was later reported that the Marylebone Cricket Club(MCC), custodians of the Laws of Cricket, was considering to review theoverthrow rules in light of the incidents that occurred during the World Cupfinal. The MCC feels overthrows are worth taking a lookwhenever it next reviews the laws of the game which is the responsibility ofthe MCC laws sub-committee.