While there were some terrific performances, the IPL 2024 match between Delhi Capitals and Rajasthan Royals grabbed the limelight for an entirely different issue. A massive controversy erupted over a contentious catch taken by Shai Hope to dismiss Sanju Samson. Samson, who was batting at 86, slammed Mukesh Kumar straight down the ground but was caught in the deep by Hope. However, while completing the catch, he came extremely close to the boundary line. The third umpire gave him out but Samson refused to leave the field. He continued talking to the official before resultantly leaving.
There has been much debate on the issue with internet divided on whether he was out or not. Now, in a new video by official broadcasters Star Sports, is is quite conclusive that Samson was out. The video showed that Shai Hope’s leg did not touch the cushion. In the video, IPL-winning coach Tom Moody explained how the ‘boundary cushion’ never moved when Shai Hope took the catch.
Out or Not Out!?
Here’s a closer look at why #SanjuSamson was given out last night v Delhi Capitals – a moment which changed the course of the match. @TomMoodyCricket and @jatinsapru dissected each and every replay available to demonstrate why the third umpire made the… pic.twitter.com/xZeySOSmd4
— Star Sports (@StarSportsIndia) May 8, 2024
However, Navjot Singh Sidhu said in a separate video, that Hope had touched the boundary rope.
“The decision that changed the game was Sanju Samson’s dismissal. There could be differences of opinion, but if you look at the side-on angle, it touches the boundary twice. It was pretty clear. Either you don’t use technology, or if you’re using it and the technology is making a mistake, it’s like there’s a fly in milk, and someone asks you to drink it,” Sidhu said on Star Sports.
“It touched the boundary line twice. And after this, if someone says that it’s out… see, I’m a neutral person, so I’ve seen it, it’s not out. That’s why I also kept saying it about Kohli (on his dismissal against KKR, which triggered controversy over potential no-ball). Whatever may be the rule, you can see it from the naked eye; some evidence is very strong not to believe. It’s like finding a trout in a glass of milk. Umpire didn’t do it on purpose, no one is at fault. It’s part of the game. That changed the game,” he added.
Topics mentioned in this article