Border-Gavaskar Trophy: Was KL Rahul out or not out? Former umpire gives verdict on controversial dismissal | Cricket News


Was KL Rahul out or not out? Former umpire gives verdict on controversial dismissal
KL Rahul dismissal (Screengrabs)

NEW DELHI: Team India opener KL Rahul’s controversial dismissal in the opening Test against Australia in Perth has sparked widespread debate, with fans questioning the third umpire’s decision. Former elite umpire Simon Taufel, however, has weighed in to clarify the logic behind the ruling.
The incident occurred in the 23rd over of India’s innings when Mitchell Starc bowled a delivery that angled across Rahul.
Looking solid on 26 from 74 balls, Rahul got forward to defend.
SEE ALSO: When was the last time both R Ashwin, Ravindra Jadeja missed a Test for India?
The ball passed close to the bat and was caught by wicketkeeper Alex Carey. The on-field umpire initially ruled it not out, but Australia went for a review. It showed that there was a faint edge.
The review showed a spike on Snicko, indicating contact as the ball passed the bat. However, the front-on replay, crucial for determining if the sound came from the bat or bat-pad contact, was inconclusive.
Despite the ambiguity, the third umpire, Richard Illingworth, overturned the decision, citing the spike as sufficient evidence of an edge.

Veteran Simon Taufel later explained the decision while speaking to 7Cricket. “We saw with that side on shot there was a spike on RTS with the bat away from the pad, in other words the bottom of the bat hadn’t reached the pad,” he said. “Therefore rolling that through in its natural course, you may have seen that second spike (on Snicko, to indicate bat hitting pad) come through, had it been rolled all the way through.”
SEE ALSO: ‘This is a joke’, ‘Ridiculous umpiring’: KL Rahul dismissal against Australia sparks outrage
Rahul, visibly frustrated, expressed his disbelief as he walked back to the pavilion. His dismissal proved costly as India, already under pressure, stumbled to 47/4 against a relentless Australian pace attack.
The decision has sparked outrage on social media, with many fans calling it a “joke” and arguing that the lack of a definitive front-on angle should have ensured the benefit of the doubt was given to the batter.