Bangladeshis, stop whining

that Lankans would never win outside their country. He did not have to wait very long to find out he was wrong. But he was unwilling to accept that his mighty team could be undone by a little neighbour.

And so we come to the World Cup. Bangladesh was hammered by India in a totally one-sided quarterfinal. During this tournament, Indian bowling, which has unusually become as good as the batting, has ensured that the opposition is under the cosh for the full 100 overs, whether fielding or batting. And so it was also in this game. Other than a large patch of overs in the middle of the Indian innings where the run rate dropped but wickets were not lost, India dominated the day.

But to read the Bangladeshi papers, there was a conspiracy against their team. “Controversial umpiring mars Bangladesh’s hope for semis,” ran the headline in the nation’s biggest English newspaper, Daily Star.

The paper felt that Rohit Sharma’s reprieve when he was 91 and hit a Rubel Hossain full toss “down the throat” of midwicket was the match’s turning point. The batter went on to his another 46 runs, and in the ultimate scheme of things this error probably did not mean much.

“When the replay was shown, the error in Ian Gould’s judgement became apparent with repeated viewing as the ball was dipping sharply when the batsman made contact. Such decisions are usually given by the leg-umpire but on this occasion Aleem Dar chose to remain silent.”

Others also thought this was a mistake. Former Indian batsman V.V.S. Laxman tweeted “Bad decision from Gould, was definitely not above the waist. Lucky break for Rohit. This can b the difference in getting xtra 20 runs”.

The fact is that umpires make bad decisions. When Bangladesh came to bat, Imrul Kayes was out in the last ball of the first over, caught behind off Umesh Yadav, and the snickometer showed it, but the umpire did not respond. No reference about this in the Bangladeshi papers when they were whining about the umpiring, naturally.

Also the fact is, in this case it was not Gould’s fault, nor was it his call. Dar at square leg had immediately signalled the no ball (even before the ball had been caught). Now Dar may have been mistaken in believing that the ball was over waist high (it was lower by about a couple of inches), but it was hardly conspiracy. However, as I said in my opening paragraph this is cricket. The Bangladeshis held aloft a banner in the stands which read ICC: Indian Cricket Council.

This formulation came in fact from Ramiz Raja, who tweeted “Well done @ICC (indian cricket council). u guys were completely sold out!!”

How Raja had arrived at selling out based on this decision is a mystery and he was not the only one. Shoaib Akhtar tweeted “Poor Bangladesh played well... There was cheating in the match as well. But next time...”

Who had cheated? This was left unsaid. Raja later probably realised he had overdone it (or was more likely overwhelmed by abuse from India’s Twitter army) and tweeted “Excellent game, excellent performance! Congratulations Team India.” But in Bangladesh, the idea that they were cheated of a win still ran strong. The papers ran many headlines on this aspect including “Bangladesh to appeal against controversial umpiring: ICC” and also “ICC should prosecute for war crimes” which I thought was overdoing it. When I read that particular story it turned out to be the International Criminal Court.

I turned the page, and so should Bangladesh’s fans. Aakar Patel is a writer

and columnist