Did Sourav Ganguly and Ricky Ponting Fail to save Rishabh Pant from the ban? 

Delhi Capitals (DC) wicketkeeper-batsman Rishabh Pant faces a crucial one-match suspension for slow over-rate during their IPL 2024 clash against Rajasthan Royals (RR). This suspension, Pant’s third such offence this season, could significantly impact DC’s playoff chances. However, the team isn’t going down without a fight. Sourav Ganguly, DC’s Director of Cricket, and head coach Ricky Ponting recently appeared before BCCI Ombudsman Justice Vineet Saran to appeal the ban.

DC’s Arguments Against the Suspension

  • Ball Retrieval Allowance: Ganguly argued that despite RR batsmen hitting 13 sixes, the fielding side only received a time allowance for retrieving the balls on three occasions. He questioned why this crucial factor wasn’t considered when calculating the slow over-rate.
  • DRS Review and Captain’s Protest: Ganguly further argued that the time spent reviewing Sanju Samson’s dismissal through DRS, coupled with additional time wasted due to Samson’s protest, wasn’t factored into the over-rate calculation.
  • Wide Deliveries: Head coach Ricky Ponting presented a different defence. He claimed that several wide deliveries bowled by DC bowlers towards the end of the innings ate into available time, leaving Pant with “no time” to compensate for the lost time caused by other factors.
  • Weather Conditions: Pant himself joined the appeal, citing the scorching Delhi weather on match day as a contributing factor to the slow game pace.

BCI’s Counter-Arguments and Missing Evidence from DC

  • RR Maintained Over-Rate: BCCI CEO Hemang Amin countered Ganguly’s argument by pointing out that despite hitting 13 sixes, RR still managed to maintain the required over-rate. This suggests that ball retrieval might not have been the main culprit behind DC’s slow over-rate.
  • Lack of Written Evidence: The BCCI highlighted that DC failed to provide any written submissions or calculations to support their claims regarding insufficient time allowance or the impact of other factors.
  • Missing Defense for Wide Deliveries: While Ponting raised the issue of wide deliveries, there’s no mention of him providing any evidence or specific details to substantiate this claim.

The Verdict and Repercussions

The BCCI Ombudsman’s final decision on Rishabh Pant’s suspension is still pending. The outcome hinges on whether the BCCI finds DC’s appeals, lacking in concrete evidence, convincing enough to overturn the initial one-match ban.

With the crucial match against Royal Challengers Bangalore (RCB) looming, DC will have to contend with Pant’s absence. A win against RCB is critical for their playoff aspirations, and the team will be led by experienced all-rounder Axar Patel in Pant’s stead.

Stay updated with all the cricketing action, follow Cricadium on WhatsApp, Facebook, Twitter, Telegram and Instagram

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you

Delhi Capitals (DC) wicketkeeper-batsman Rishabh Pant faces a crucial one-match suspension for slow over-rate during their IPL 2024 clash against Rajasthan Royals (RR). This suspension, Pant's third such offence this season, could significantly impact DC's playoff chances. However, the team isn't going down without a fight. Sourav Ganguly, DC's Director of Cricket, and head coach Ricky Ponting recently appeared before BCCI Ombudsman Justice Vineet Saran to appeal the ban.

DC's Arguments Against the Suspension

  • Ball Retrieval Allowance: Ganguly argued that despite RR batsmen hitting 13 sixes, the fielding side only received a time allowance for retrieving the balls on three occasions. He questioned why this crucial factor wasn't considered when calculating the slow over-rate.
  • DRS Review and Captain's Protest: Ganguly further argued that the time spent reviewing Sanju Samson's dismissal through DRS, coupled with additional time wasted due to Samson's protest, wasn't factored into the over-rate calculation.
  • Wide Deliveries: Head coach Ricky Ponting presented a different defence. He claimed that several wide deliveries bowled by DC bowlers towards the end of the innings ate into available time, leaving Pant with "no time" to compensate for the lost time caused by other factors.
  • Weather Conditions: Pant himself joined the appeal, citing the scorching Delhi weather on match day as a contributing factor to the slow game pace.

BCI's Counter-Arguments and Missing Evidence from DC

  • RR Maintained Over-Rate: BCCI CEO Hemang Amin countered Ganguly's argument by pointing out that despite hitting 13 sixes, RR still managed to maintain the required over-rate. This suggests that ball retrieval might not have been the main culprit behind DC's slow over-rate.
  • Lack of Written Evidence: The BCCI highlighted that DC failed to provide any written submissions or calculations to support their claims regarding insufficient time allowance or the impact of other factors.
  • Missing Defense for Wide Deliveries: While Ponting raised the issue of wide deliveries, there's no mention of him providing any evidence or specific details to substantiate this claim.

The Verdict and Repercussions

The BCCI Ombudsman's final decision on Rishabh Pant's suspension is still pending. The outcome hinges on whether the BCCI finds DC's appeals, lacking in concrete evidence, convincing enough to overturn the initial one-match ban.

With the crucial match against Royal Challengers Bangalore (RCB) looming, DC will have to contend with Pant's absence. A win against RCB is critical for their playoff aspirations, and the team will be led by experienced all-rounder Axar Patel in Pant's stead.

Stay updated with all the cricketing action, follow Cricadium on WhatsApp, Facebook, Twitter, Telegram and Instagram