The TV umpire’s decision over the legitimacy of a catch sparked much debate during the IPL 2020 game between Kings XI Punjab and Chennai Super Kings in Abu Dhabi.

The incident occurred in the eighth over of CSK’s chase of 154, when opener Ruturaj Gaikwad hit a delivery off Ravi Bishnoi straight to Mandeep Singh at short third man. With the ball dying on him, Mandeep dived forward, grabbing the ball with both hands and sparking celebrations in the KXIP camp. However, the on-field umpire decided to refer the decision to the third umpire, although his soft-signal was out.

Replays showed that, while the grab itself was clean, the momentum from his dive forward caused Mandeep to fall on the ground with the ball cupped between his hands. A part of the ball was visible in the space between the two hands, and the TV umpire, Chris Gaffaney, ruled that upon Mandeep’s landing, the ball had made contact with the ground.

Gaffaney checked the replays thoroughly before ruling it in the favour of the batsman, but there seemed to be conflicting opinions around the decision, including from those inside the commentary box. While some thought that the catch was clean, others felt that the right decision had been made.

“Conflicting opinions here”, said commentator Danny Morisson on-air, when the big screen displayed ‘Not out’. “Gaffney is the man that matters. KL Rahul (KXIP captain) cannot believe it.”

Tough call but that catch was controlled and out! #KXIPvCSK

— Brad Hogg (@Brad_Hogg) November 1, 2020

KL Rahul and Kumble look furious – I thought it was out.

— Johns. (@CricCrazyJohns) November 1, 2020

Rahul was seen approaching the two umpires, visibly annoyed by the decision. Mandeep, the fielder, shook his head in frustration at the decision while Anil Kumble, the head coach, was visibly annoyed too, checking replays on a laptop within the dugout.

“Fingers were underneath,” Harsha Bhogle noted, “but was some part touching the ground? Chris Gaffaney thought so.”

WTF? How is that not out?

The only thing that touched the ground there was logic.

— Nikhil 🏏 (@CricCrazyNIKS) November 1, 2020

“The only thing I will say about the catch,” fellow commentator Ian Bishop said, “is that there must be in the mind of the third umpire, (the) evidence must be conclusive, however he determines it in his own mind to overturn the soft signal of ‘Out’. And that’s why I am kind of in between – was there the little finger underneath the ball, or did the ball hit the ground? I am not sure, I am not a 100 per cent, I am being totally honest with you.”

“And if you’re not a 100 per cent sure,” Bhogle replied, “and you’re the third umpire, you’re saying, ‘Go back to the on-field umpire’s hunch.'”

“But then again,” Bishop replied, “what is conclusive [for the umpire] might not be conclusive for me, and vice-versa. There is no one size fits all with conclusivity. It’s subjective.”

JP Duminy, also on air, pointed out that Gaffaney was convinced with what he saw. “Just listening to his wording when he was going through the replays, he seemed pretty conclusive,” he said. “The evidence he saw on that second grab, when Mandeep Singh was landing, that the ball had touched the ground.”

Gaikwad went on to score a half-century as CSK won the match by nine wickets to eliminate KXIP from the race for the IPL 2020 playoffs.