Review systems in sport are implemented to clear up any ambiguity or disputes that might arise from an official's decision. However, these review decisions are mostly subjective and sometimes creates even more frustration. The latter statement came into full effect in the recently concluded 1st Test between West Indies and Australia. Decisions were made that denied the former wickets and further runs while nearly identical decisions went in favour of Australia.
There may have been silence in the commentary box but what was not being said may as well have been screamed at maximum volume. Another hugely contentious decision had gone against the West Indies.
You could almost hear veteran commentator, Ian Bishop, carefully selecting what he was going to say. "There are not many fans of [third umpire] Adrian Holdstock in the West Indies at the moment," former West Indies player, Carlos Brathwaite, said, in the end, as Shai Hope trudged off after being given out caught behind.
Flabbergasted, incredulous, furious: take your pick, most West Indian fans could have selected any one of those emotions to describe what they were feeling at that time. "It's unfortunate, it really is unfortunate," Samuel Badree said, somewhat more diplomatically on ESPN.
"It feels as though everything has gone against the West Indians." In less enlightened times, such a feeling would have likely resulted in something of a siege at the Kensington Oval — it was only 1999 that an ODI between Australia and the West Indies was delayed by hundreds of bottles being thrown onto the field after a controversial run-out, after all.
Cricket is a serious business in these parts. There was none of that on day two of the first Test in Barbados, thankfully but there were plenty of aggrieved supporters nonetheless. The West Indies were, undoubtedly, on the end of some very poor decisions.
"I felt like the third umpire had some really tough decisions to make," former Australian player, Greg Blewett, said on ESPN. "A lot of them weren't really clear decisions; it was down to a bit of interpretations. I think Australia got on the right end of the decisions."
Here is a rundown of the events that sparked the controversy:
Travis Head's day one reprieve
As Travis Head rescued Australia on day one, he under-edged the superb Shamar Joseph behind to Shai Hope. Hope dived forward and caught the ball but didn't seem totally clear as to whether he had managed to pouch the ball before it touched the ground.
The matter was sent upstairs to third umpire Holdstock, who said there was "no clear evidence" that the ball had been caught. That despite footage appearing to show a thin sliver of leather under the ball as it landed. It was a tough break for the West Indies and Shamar Joseph, who missed out on a five-wicket haul as a result.
"The thing for me was, the pictures look out, but there was a statement made from the third umpire that it was not conclusive," Carlos Brathwaite said.
Roston Chase gets lucky
In the first over of day two, Josh Hazlewood trapped Roston Chase in front. There was a big appeal and, belatedly, Pat Cummins reviewed the decision.
Upstairs, we went to see if the ball brushed the pad before hitting the inside edge of the West Indian captain's bat. Initially, a small spike suggested that the ball did brush the pad first and Australia's fielders started celebrating.
That celebration turned to confusion soon after as Holdstock said on-field umpire, Richard Kettleborough, could stay with his on-field decision of not out. Later, reserve umpire, Gregory Brathwaite, could be seen explaining something to the Australian reserve fielders, suggesting it was a narrow decision.
Roston Chase's luck runs out
If he was lucky earlier, Chase was very unlucky later on day two. Pat Cummins appealed for an LBW and, as soon as Kettleborough raised his finger, Chase instantly reviewed, looking at his inside edge.
The replay showed that yes, Chase got an inside edge onto his pad, a very clear deviation. The technology, namely ultraedge, didn't quite match up; but surely that would not matter — there was a visible deflection off the bat.
"There is a clear gap between bat and ball," said Holdstock. Uh oh… "You can see with the naked eye … that there was a clear deflection," Brathwaite said. "So, albeit that the technology might have left you wondering, the naked eye shows you that there was a deflection."
"I disagree with the decision, I disagree with the technology there" said Ian Bishop on commentary. "I thought he hit that, but somehow it’s gone against Roston Chase."
Bishop went on to say that the clear deviation made it obvious that Chase hit the ball. "If you’ve watched the game long enough, you know when there’s a clear deviation," he said.
Shai has his hopes of a half century dashed
Things then went from bad to worse. Shai Hope, West Indies' last real chance of success, was caught spectacularly by Alex Carey off an inside edge from Beau Webster.
It was a remarkable catch but umpire Kettleborough instantly wanted to have a closer look to see if the ball had been grounded. Hope had, by this time, started walking off, convinced that Carey had pulled off a worldy.
He had been diving to his left and pouching the ball in his left glove. However, sadly for him, the ball clearly touched the ground as Carey landed — the footage even showed it moving closer into the glove's palm as he landed.
So not out? Yeah, about that…the catch was confirmed by Holdstock and the West Indian supporters were fuming. "It looked brilliant," Brathwaite said. "Alex Carey, tip your hat. But when you look at it zoomed in, you can't tell me that that was out and the first one [Head on day one] was not."
Green's lucky reprieve
All things considered, it hadn't been a great day for the third umpire so far. His day wasn't done. Cameron Green was trapped in front by Justin Greaves and the West Indies appealled vociferously as they kept the Aussies under the cosh.
Umpire, Nitin Menon, gave Green not out but Chase opted to send it upstairs. There was a big edge from Green but the question was was there a brushing of ball on pad before it got to the bat? Not clear enough for third umpire Holdstock and the tightest call of the lot was given not out.
"You can't tell me that Roston Chase is out and this is not out," Brathwaite said. "You can see the bat brushing the back pad so for the ball to hit the bat, it has to brush the back pad. "Regardless of if they're all bad decisions or some right, there was a lack of consistency and I'm sure that a lot of West Indies fans, players and myself, felt aggrieved during the course of play."
"We can only ask the question," Aussie bowler, Mitchell Starc, said by way of response on ESPN. "There were a few there, one went against us but a couple against the West Indies. I guess that's what we've got the technology for and then the questions can be asked of that and not the players."
Pat Cummins said there would be no issues raised about the umpiring from the Australians. "We appeal [and] if we think it's close, use DRS and leave the rest up to the umpires," he said. "In some games, there's a lot of 50-50 calls. Today we missed a few 50-50 calls that went against us. I think it's cricket. I think it all balances itself out."
Bishop added that he didn't want to criticise the umpires but that he hoped some good could come from the decisions. "Officiating is low-hanging fruit," Bishop said.
"What needs to happen here, when I put my emotions aside, the umpires perhaps need, and they probably do have a meeting after the day's play, they will review these decisions and I think we may get better interpretations … you have to get that going forward. I think they would probably have learned a few things [by] looking at that."
"I think they would probably have learned a few things [by] looking at that."
West Indies' new captain, Roston Chase, has doubled down on criticism of umpiring decisions that went against his team during the opening Test against Australia; believing they had a significant impact on the outcome of the game.
"This game is a frustrating one for me and for the team because we bowled out Australia for a relatively low score. We were very happy with that," Chase said. "But then there were so many questionable calls in the game and none of them went our way. I mean, as a player, you're out there, you're giving your all, you're fighting. And then nothing is going your way."
"It could be heartbreaking. You see what set batters can do on the wicket. The wicket is one where once you get in, you can get runs, but the hardest part is to get in. Me and Shai Hope were going well and then, obviously, we had some questionable calls. That really set us back in terms of creating a big lead on the total that Australia set."
"It's clear to see anyone would feel bad or feel hurt about those decisions. You're out there playing to win, giving it your all and it seems like everyone is against you."
Chase called for more accountability on umpires for poor decisions, although the ICC has an annual assessment process in place which can see international umpires removed from the elite panel based on performance.
"It's frustrating because as players, when we mess up, when we get out of line, we're penalised harshly," Chase said. "But the officials, nothing ever happens to them. They just have a wrong decision or questionable decision and life just goes on.
"It's clear to see anyone would feel bad or feel hurt about those decisions. You're out there playing to win, giving it your all and it seems like everyone is against you."
"You're talking about guys' careers. One bad decision could make or break a guy's career. I just think that it should be an even playground in terms of when players step out of line, they're penalised. I think that there should be some penalty put in place when you have blatant decisions going against you."
"I think it was a big factor in the game because me and Hope were going well. We even had a catch that went against us in the first innings when we were bowling. So, you never know what the score could have been, but I don't want to harp on it."
The catch referred to by Chase was when Head, on 53, edged through to Hope where it was taken low down and Holdstock ruled it not out. Head only added a further six runs. Australia, meanwhile, thought they should have had an lbw against Chase in the first over of the second day but it was ruled to be an inside edge.
Both Chase and Daren Sammy would appear to run the risk of ICC sanction for the comments about the match officials.
Unlike umpiring decisions, something squarely in West Indies' control is their catching and in Barbados they shelled seven chances, the last of them early on the third day when Head was dropped by Justin Greaves at second slip on 21 with Australia's lead was only 97.
"There's nothing I can say to justify the guys dropping the catches," Chase, who spilled one himself on the first day, said. "We've been working hard on the slip catches. Every day, we try to take at least 30 to 40 catches. But practice and in the game is a big difference."
"I just think it's more a belief. From the time one goes down, I think guys tend to get a bit nervous and second guess their catching ability, and sometimes it can throw you off. But once you put one down, you have to look forward to taking the next one."
West Indies coach, Daren Sammy, didn't hold back in his assessment of Adrian Holdstock. Speaking to the media after day two, Sammy even referenced Holdstock’s performances in the recent limited-overs series against England.
“We are just trying to find some sort of understanding as to what the process is,” Sammy said, as quoted by ESPNcricinfo. “We only hope for consistency. That’s all we could ask for. When there is doubt in something, just be consistent across the board.
“I have noticed, especially with this particular umpire, it’s something that for me started in England. It’s frustrating. I just ask for consistency in the decision-making.”
When asked if he was referring to Adrian Holdstock, Sammy replied, "Yeah, look, you don’t want to get yourself in a situation where you’re wondering about certain umpires. Is there something against this team? But when you see decision after decision, then it raises the question. I know he’s here for the series. You don’t want to go in a Test match having that doubt."
"So I want to have that conversation as to the process…so we could be all clear. Because, at the end of the day, you don’t want to be going into a Test match not trusting the umpires. And that’s not what our team is about. So we’re just looking for some clarity as to the decisions."
"We need specialist third umpires," said well-known and respected analyst, Jarrod Kimber. "We have needed specialist third umpires for quite some time. And I’m sick and tired of saying it, and we keep seeing umpires make mistakes."
"What’s happening to the West Indies in this Test against Australia… not only did they just have bad luck in the first innings with their bowling, now they’ve just got umpires making horrendous mistake after horrendous mistake. I don’t want to blame an individual umpire because I’ve been saying for ages the issue here is we don’t have specialist third umpires."
Many other fans took to social media to share their views on what was a controversial day’s play. Here are some of the reactions on X.
One X user wrote, "West Indies might have already won this match with normal 3rd umpiring and taking their catches."
Another wrote, "I'm sorry but the third umpire needs to have a spell. Happy for webster. But this is some of the worst third umpiring I have ever seen. The ball is still wobbling in Carey's hand when the ball touches the ground IN SLOWMO. That's not acceptable. Curtly Ambrose losing it #WIvAuS"
A third wrote, "Should be walking off, the Windies. Shouldn't be playing with this level of umpiring. The Test has turned on its head with the kind of decisions that has been made. Howler after howler. I get on-field umpires making a few errors, but with tech and replays, nah, can't be making so many. #WIvsAUS."
A fourth stated, "Didn't think we'd have Sydney 2008 level of incompetence ever again, but that's 4 howlers from the same third umpire Adrian Holdstock. Time to make this a specialised position instead of rotating between in-person umps who are clearly unfit at adapting to lower quality production."
A final one wrote, "Incompetent 3rd umpire . That's one of the clearest inside edge deflections you will ever see . How can you not see that ! #WIvAUS."
As predicted, Daren Sammy has been fined 15% of his match fee for a Level 1 breach of the ICC Code of Conduct during the second day of the first Test that the visitors clinched by 159 runs, courtesy Josh Hazlewood's stunning 5-43 in Bridgetown.
The 41-year-old was found to have violated Article 2.7 of the Code, which pertains to, "public criticism of, or inappropriate comment in relation to an incident occurring in an International Match or any Player, Player Support Personnel, Match Official or team participating in any International Match."
This was definitely an act of poor decision-making. Something needs to be done. Odds are that Adrian Holdstock won't be the third umpire for the 2nd Test. That won't be due to the decisions made above. It's customary for a rotation of umpires to take place between each match.
I do agree that there needs to be clarity and a review. There's a strong possibility that others might take the same course of action in the future if nothing is done. Behaviour like this can't be accepted. It needs to be dealt with immediately before any further chaoas ensues.