IND vs NZ 2024: Rishabh Pant's contentious dismissal raises questions on why 'Hot Spot' is not being used in cricket

A historic whitewash of India was looking bleak considering the manner in which Rishabh Pant took charge of the spin threat of the Kiwis with his usual counter-attacking style of play. However, it only took one delivery to eventually make the difference. It was the fourth delivery of the run-chase which prompted the discussion regarding there being need for the Hot Spot, which has been out of the reckoning for quite some years now.

Before the dismissal is discussed which it will later on in the piece along with former South African cricketer AB de Villiers' take on it, let us delve into the nitty gritty of Hot Spot in terms of its history, pricing, and the reasons why it came under the scanner which led to its eventual fading away from the game. 

The Hot Spot technology was initiated as one of the state-of-the-art technologies to assess whether the ball has made any sort of contact with the bat or any other part of the cricketing gear while monitoring the cases of catches or LBWs involving an element of uncertainty. The infrared cameras positioned around the ground, typically as a multi-angle camera setup, use thermal imaging to detect the exact impact of the ball.

The major merit of the technology was that it could detect the faintest of nick. However, the 2013 Ashes stirred controversy regarding the technology with the inventor of the tool, Warren Brennan, being concerned about the possible usage of coatings on bats, the usage of which would be detrimental to the efficiency of the Hot Spot. With the technology costing a bomb back in the day (approximately INR 566,400) per day of a Test match, the factor of cost-cutting would have probably come into the picture as well. 

Also Check: Watch: Rishabh Pant trudges back to pavilion after controversial DRS dismissal

Here's what de Villiers had to say on Pant's dismissal

Coming to the Pant saga, it was the Black Caps' skipper, Tom Latham, who was unconvinced with the not-out decision provided by the on-field umpire, Richard Illingworth. It was indeed a close call with the ball passing the bat with the willow being in close contact with the pad. As inconclusive as it was at first, there were a couple of replays that were shown which indicated the bat hitting the pad on the Snickometer. However, the TV umpire, Paul Reiffel, reckoned there to be a deflection in the trajectory of the delivery just as it hit with the bat, which in turn was in contact with the pad.    

Check the post below: 

Also Read: 'Tough pill to swallow' - Sachin Tendulkar laments after New Zealand whitewash India with Mumbai win

Pant was seen trying his best to plead with the on-field umpires but to no avail. He trudged back at a snail's pace back to the pavilion, almost knowing that the game was as good as done and dusted. It was de Villiers' tweet that sparked a meaningful discussion regarding the validity of the Snickometer in such touch-and-go calls. He also suggested in a reply to his original tweet that the TV umpire should have given the benefit of the doubt to the batter in such a tight scenario where the evidence at hand was obscure.