England vs India 2018: Former Players Back Marius Erasmus' Decision to Give Joe Root Out

The skipper of England cricket team, Joe Root was ruled out when he guided a ball towards the second slip cordon where KL Rahul claimed a clean catch off Hardik Pandya. The official Marius Erasmus gave the soft signal as out, and despite the call getting referred to the third umpire, it stayed as out.

The on-field umpire decided to take help of Aleem Dar who was the third-umpire. Though certain angles suggested the ball bounced before Rahul grabbed it, there were not conclusive shreds of evidence. Due to the lack of confirmation, Aleem Dar decided to stay with Marius Erasmus’ decision.

Quite clearly, Joe Root looked dejected with the decision. However, some of the former players have backed Marius Erasmus call of ruling Root out.

However, India is enjoying the driver’s seat after Hardik Pandya bowled a fierce spell on day two. He ran over the middle-order of England and took his maiden five-for in Tests.

The former wicketkeeper-batsman of England, Mark Butcher, came with a reasonable interpretation on third controversies decision.

“(The) The ball travels horizontally, not vertically towards an object that is curved, not flat. Therefore the ball can and did in this case, bounce off the fingers into the palms. Out!” Butcher tweeted.

Thoughts on the Root dismissal. Ball travels horizontally, not vertically towards an object that is curved, not flat. Therefore the ball can, and did in this case, bounce off the fingers into the palms. Out! #EngvInd

— mark butcher (@markbutcher72) August 19, 2018

Michael Vaughan on the catch of KL Rahul

The former skipper of England, Michael Vaughan agrees with the umpire’s call. He is of the belief that it was a clean catch from the India opener, and Marius Erasmus call should stay.

“A lot of controversy over the catch – I thought he was caught. I think it bounces off the finger,” he told the BBC.

Also, the former cricketing legend of Sri Lanka, Kumar Sangakkara supports the decision as well. While sitting in the commentatory panel, he came with his statement.

“It does look out … it looked as if the fingers were underneath the ball. You do need conclusive evidence to overturn any signal from the on-field umpires.”