Joe Root’s dismissal by Akash Deep on Day 4 of the second Test at Edgbaston has ignited a significant debate around umpiring oversight and the use of technology in cricket, particularly concerning backfoot no-balls — an area that often escapes scrutiny compared to front-foot violations.
The controversy stems from observations made by BBC Test Match Special commentator Alison Mitchell, who noted that Akash Deep’s back foot appeared to cross the return crease—a clear breach of Law 21.5.1 of the MCC rulebook, which states that:
“The bowler's back foot must land within and not touching the return crease appertaining to his/her stated mode of delivery.”
According to Mitchell, Deep’s heel landed around two inches outside the crease, making the delivery to Root technically illegal. But the on-field umpires didn’t call it, and crucially, third umpire Paul Reiffel did not intervene, as he should have under standard ICC protocols for monitoring backfoot infractions.
This has led to several key talking points:
-
Root’s Controversial Dismissal:Root, one of England’s most reliable batters, was dismissed cheaply for 6 (16 balls), which significantly dented England’s chances late in the day. The legality of the delivery being in question makes the dismissal all the more contentious.
-
Technology Oversight?While front-foot no-balls are automatically monitored using technology, backfoot no-balls are not checked unless specifically referred. This inconsistency is being seen as a serious gap in umpiring protocols, especially in a high-profile Test series.
-
Split Reactions from the Cricket World:Former England captain Nasser Hussain, commenting on Day 5, acknowledged the infringement but called it a "marginal call". Still, many fans and analysts feel that “marginal” doesn’t mean legal, especially in a game governed by such fine margins.
-
Bigger Questions for the ICC:
-
Why isn't automated monitoring for backfoot no-balls in place, like for front-foot ones?
-
Should the third umpire be more proactive, even without on-field referrals, in high-stakes moments?
-
Does this reflect bias or inefficiency in applying rules evenly?
-
-
Impact on the Match and Series:England were under pressure already, and Root’s wicket before stumps was a psychological blow. Had the delivery been correctly judged a no-ball, England would’ve retained a key batter at the crease to start Day 5, potentially altering the flow of the game.
In essence, Root’s dismissal has become a flashpoint in the conversation about cricket’s evolving relationship with technology and fairness. With slow-motion replays, ultra-edge, and DRS scrutinizing every aspect of the game, the lack of consistency in enforcing basic laws like foot placement is being seen as an unacceptable lapse — one the ICC may now be forced to address more rigorously.
