Tony Becca

WHEN THE Test match between Australia and India in Sydney comes to an end, the result, it appears, could be anything, including, as improbably as it seemed at the time, victory for India.

At the end of the second day on Thursday (Wednesday night Ja time), the scoreboard read, Australia 463, India 216 for three. With three days to go, any one of the four results - a win for Australia, a win for India, a draw or even a tie - is possible, even though, based on the scores at that time, it should end in a draw.

And, the reason why it should end in a draw is because of the two umpires.

Although, one never knows and can never tell, but for Mark Benson and Steve Bucknor, India may well have been in the driver's seat and heading towards victory.

After losing Phil Jacques at zero for one and Matthew Hayden at 27 for two on the opening day, mighty Australia should have been 45 for three, and after losing four wickets for 15 runs, after falling to 134 for six, they should have been 193 for seven.

Instead of being 45 for three and in trouble, instead of being 193 for seven and in serious trouble, however, Australia recovered on both occasions, and on each occasion it was due to a mistake by the umpire.

Escaped stumping

Ricky Ponting, on 17 at 45 for two, was caught by wicketkeeper Mahendra Dhoni off medium-pacer Sourav Ganguly down the leg-side and Bucknor, the experienced Bucknor, to the surprise of everyone, said not out. And, apart from escaping a stumping at 48 when the third umpire ruled not out with his foot in the air, Andrew Symonds, who finished on 162 not out, went back to young pacer Ishant Sharma, edged a clear catch to the wicketkeeper, and Benson, to the amazement of everyone, said not out.

According to Symonds, speaking at the end of the second day's play, everyone makes mistakes, players and umpires, it is all part of the game, it tends to balance itself out at the end of the day, and apart from the fact that that has been the opinion of many players down the years, he may well be right.

Players down the years, many of them, have always stood their ground even when they knew they were out. According to them, when they were not out and were given out they could stay at the crease, they had to obey the umpire, and because of that, they do not walk.

According to them it's today for me, tomorrow for you, so let the umpire do his job and make a decision.

There must be, however, a difference between an umpire making a mistake and a batsman who knows he has touched the ball, who knows that he is out, and who stands at the wicket waiting for the umpire to make a decision - a wrong decision at that.

Like a fieldsman who appeals for a catch when he knows that the ball has not touched the bat or when he knows that he has not caught the ball before it hit the ground, the batsman who knows that he has touched the ball and that he is out, but stands at the wicket looking like a choir boy, is a cheat and regardless of the spin out on it, it is as simple as that.

Imagine, Ponting, the captain of Australia, after standing and getting the decision after the umpire's mistake, standing again, staring at the umpire before and while walking away, and smashing his bat against his pad as he stepped across the boundary when he was later given out leg before wicket by the same umpire who made another mistake - this time against him.

Unbelievable

As Richie Benaud said at the time, Ponting's response was unbelievable and for the simple reason that if you live by the sword, you should expect to die by the sword.

At the end of Australia's innings, Sharma, the 19-year-old pacer who was denied Symonds' wicket at a crucial stage of the game, the young man who thought he had put India in a strong position, went up and shook Symonds' hand, and for a long time I sat before the television wondering why.

Was it because the batsman had batted well, had played some glorious strokes and had enjoyed himself, not only after the umpire had made a mistake and had given him another chance, but also after he had cheated and had won a second innings when he should only have had one?

I am still wondering why, and the more I wonder, the more I remember champions of the game like Rohan Kanhai and Brian Lara - batsmen of integrity who scored many runs who used to walk, and who, in doing so, protected the image of the game they loved.