Credits: X
Former Indian batter Robin Uthappa slammed the third umpire after KL Rahul’s controversial dismissal in the BGT opener. India and Australia locked horns in the first of the five-match Test series at the Optus Stadium in Perth. The opening match of highly-anticipated Border Gavaskar Trophy saw India struggling with bat after stand-in skipper Jasprit Bumrah won the toss and invited the rivals to bat first.
The game saw Indian batter KL Rahul’s dismissal sparking controversy. Rahul was given out by the third umpire despite there being lack of evidence of him getting out. The incident took place when Rahul was batting on 26 runs off 74 balls with India already losing three wickets. Rahul seemed to have edged Mitchell Starc’s delivery which landed into the hands of Alex Carey. While the on-field umpire declared it not out, the Aussies took review, and despite the lack of evidence the decision was overruled.
What the f**k is this?- Robin Uthappa slams third umpire’s decision
The cricketer-turned-commentator took to X to slam the umpires and the decision leading to Rahul’s dismissal. Uthappa wrote, “What the F@&* is this decision???? This is a joke! #BGT2025”. In another tweet, he wrote, “How a third umpire makes a decision without accessing all angles!! Poor!! Just Pi*s poor!!”
Not only this, but former Indian cricketer Sanjay Manjrekar also called out umpires for the decision and expressed his disappointment with the decision. On Star Sports, Manjrekar said, 'First of all, disappointed with what was provided to the TV umpire.”
He added, 'He should have got more evidence. Based on just a couple of angles, I don't think such an important decision in the match should have been made. My point is, with the naked eye there's only one certainty and that's the pad being hit by the bat. It's the only visual certainty we've got that with the naked eye. For everything else, you needed the aid of technology, which is Snicko.”
Manjrekar continued, “If there was bat, as an edge to the ball, there should have been an earlier spike because clearly two events there, and the umpire obviously heard one noise. The visual certainty was bat hitting the pad. If that was the spike, then there wasn't an outside edge. If we were shown two spikes, then you could say the first one was the bat. So it was a poor supply of technology to TV umpire, and he should have said he can't nail it.'
