Tough to hit Bumrah, need to learn how to adapt from India: Seifert

New Delhi, Jul 12: Former India batsman Sachin Tendulkar has urged the International Cricket Council (ICC) to do away with 'umpire's call' whenever a team opts for a review regarding a leg-before wicket (LBW) decision.

The Master Blaster has also said that a batsman should be given out if the ball is hitting the stumps.

Whether more than 50 per cent of the ball is hitting the stumps or not should not be matter, he further stated.

"What per cent of the ball hits the stumps doesn't matter, if DRS shows us that the ball is hitting the stumps, it should be given out, regardless of the on-field call," Tendulkar tweeted.

With this tweet, the former India batsman also shared a video, in which he has a discussion with Brian Lara regarding the working of DRS.
"One thing I don't agree with, with the ICC, is the DRS they have been using for quite some time. It is the LBW decision where more than 50 per cent of the ball must be hitting the stumps for the on-field decision to be overturned," Tendulkar said in the video.

"The only reason they (the batsman or the bowler) have gone upstairs is that they are unhappy with the on-field decision, so when the decision goes to the third umpire, let the technology take over, just like in tennis, it's either in or out, there's nothing in between," he added.

This call for doing away with umpire's call has been recommended by many former players.
Whenever a verdict pops up as 'umpire's call, the decision of the on-field umpire is not changed, but the teams do not lose their review as well.

ICC recently introduced some changes to the game of cricket, and they gave all teams liberty of extra review as non-neutral umpires will be employed in Test matches due to the coronavirus pandemic.

As a result, all teams will now have three reviews in every innings of a Test match. 

Some of the ICC guidelines on resumption of cricket border on the impractical and will need a review when the cricketing world is closer to action, feel former players Aakash Chopra, Irfan Pathan and Monty Panesar.

Last week, the International Cricket Council recommended a host of "back to cricket" guidelines including 14-day pre-match isolation training camps to ensure the teams are free from COVID-19.

The world body issued training as well as playing guidelines which will drastically change the way the game is played.

Among them are regular hand sanitising when in contact with the ball, no loo or shower breaks while training, minimising time spent in the changing room before and after a game, no use of saliva on ball and no handing over of personal items (cap, sunglasses, towels) to fellow teammates or the on-field umpires.

"Social distancing is very doable in individual sport but very tough in a team sport like cricket and football. If you need a slip during the game, would you not employ it?

"If the team is going through a 14-day quarantine and is being tested for COVID-19, I am fine with that process. Now, after that, if we have more guidelines for the players during the game, then you are making things complicated. Then there is no point of a quarantine period," former India pacer Pathan told PTI.

Safety cannot be compromised but regularly sanitising hands during the game will be too much to ask from the players.

"Safety is paramount but we should not make the game complicated. If a bowler or fielder has to sanitise hands every time he touches the ball, then it would be very difficult.

"You can shorten the process of giving the ball to the bowler. Instead of the usual chain (wicket-keeper to cover fielder to bowler), the keeper can straight away give the ball to the bowler but even then the bowler will have to sanitise hands six times in an over," said Pathan seeking more clarity on the guidelines.

Former India opener Chopra said it is still pre-mature to prepare a fixed set of guidelines for resumption of cricket as the situation is evolving "every day".

"That (regular hand sanitisation after contact with ball) is obviously impractical but my big question is when the game happens in a bio secure environment and everyone is quarantined and tested, do these additional measures make a difference?

"On the field, I can still understand but what happens when you go back into the dressing room? How do you practice social distancing there? So it becomes quite complicated.

"To be honest it is all very premature. Once they get closer to resumption, which will take some time, there will be more clarity," said Chopra.

International cricket is likely to resume in July with England hosting West Indies and then Pakistan.

Bundesliga football league has already begun in Germany behind closed doors and by the time cricket resumes, more sporting competitions would have restarted and Chopra feels that will help cricket decide the way forward in post COVID-19 times.

"By the time cricket resumes, more football would have started after Bundesliga. Cricket can take lessons from there, collect data and ideas and see what is practical and what is not."

Former England spinner Panesar foresees the start of the England-West Indies series making things a lot clearer for the entire fraternity than they are at the moment.

"The 14 day quarantine is very much needed and well done to the ICC for including that. I think we will see resumption of international cricket with England hosting West Indies in July. We might have some practical ideas then, the other countries would also be watching keenly and will learn how to go about it.

"But measures like regular hand sanitising is not going to be practical. May be you could sanitise every one hour but it can't be regular during the game," said Panesar.

While Pathan feels the on-field safety measures will make managing over-rate a bigger challenge for teams, Chopra said no loo or shower breaks during training won't be that much of an issue.

"Training is still controllable. You don't have to be there for a long time but you would still have to use the restroom at some stage. You may avoid taking a shower but you will have to use the restroom.

"I think the idea of these guidelines is to make cricketers more aware that you have to take care of yourself and inculcate habits which are in everyone's interest in the current scenario," added Chopra.

Jun 19: The BCCI is open to reviewing its sponsorship policy for the next cycle but has no plans to end its association with current IPL title sponsor Vivo as the money coming in from the Chinese company is helping India's cause and not the other way round, board treasurer Arun Dhumal said on Friday. Anti-China sentiments are running high in India following the border clash between the two countries at Galwan valley earlier this week. The first skirmish at the India-China border in more than four decades left at least 20 Indian soldiers dead. Since then, calls have been made to boycott Chinese products.

But Dhumal said Chinese companies sponsoring an Indian event like the IPL only serve his country's interests.

The BCCI gets Rs 440 crore annually from Vivo and the five-year deal ends in 2022.

"When you talk emotionally, you tend to leave the rationale behind. We have to understand the difference between supporting a Chinese company for a Chinese cause or taking help from Chinese company to support India's cause," Dhumal said.

"When we are allowing Chinese companies to sell their products in India, whatever money they are taking from Indian consumer, they are paying part of it to the BCCI (as brand promotion) and the board is paying 42 per cent tax on that money to the Indian government. So, that is supporting India's cause and not China's," he argued.

Oppo, a mobile phone brand like Vivo, was sponsoring the Indian cricket team until September last year when Bengaluru-based educational technology Byju's start-up replaced the Chinese company.

Dhumal said he is all for reducing dependence on Chinese products but as long as its companies are allowed to do business in India, there is no harm in them sponsoring an Indian brand like the IPL.

"If they are not supporting the IPL, they are likely to take that money back to China. If that money is retained here, we should be happy about it. We are supporting our government with that money (by paying taxes on it)."

"If I am giving a contract to a Chinese company to build a cricket stadium, then I am helping the Chinese economy. GCA built the world's largest cricket stadium at Motera and that contract was given to an Indian company (L&T)," he said.

"Cricketing infrastructure worth thousands of crores was created across country and none of the contract was awarded to a Chinese company."

Dhumal went on to say the BCCI is spoilt for choice when it comes to attracting sponsors, whether Indian or Chinese or from any other nation.

"If that Chinese money is coming to support Indian cricket, we should be okay with it. I am all for banning Chinese products as an individual, we are there to support our government but by getting sponsorship from Chinese company, we are helping India's cause."

"We can get sponsorship money from non-Chinese companies also including Indian firms. We can support our players any way but the idea is when they are allowed to sell their products here, it is better that part of money comes back to the Indian economy."

"The BCCI is not giving money to the Chinese, it is attracting on the contrary. We should make decision based on rationale rather than emotion," he added.