World Cup, Timed-out row: I have video evidence - Mathews questions umpires

The Bangladesh vs Sri Lanka game on Monday in New Delhi had no significance in the ICC Cricket World Cup 2023 semifinal race, given both teams are already out of the reckoning. But Angelo Mathews' given timed-out triggered a huge controversy.

The Timed-out row didn't die after the match as Mathews came to address the press. In a fiery press conference, the veteran Sri Lankan all-rounder stoked yet another controversy by questioning the umpire's decision, saying two minutes had not elapsed. 

"You all play to win. And if it's within the rule, it's fine. But the rule clearly says, in my incident today, within two minutes, I was there. We have video evidence. We will put out a statement later on. We have video evidence footage; everything was looked at. I'm not just coming and saying things here. I'm talking with proof," Mathews said in the post-match press conference.

"So, we have the video evidence where from the time the catch was taken, and then from the time I walked into the crease, I still had five seconds after breaking my helmet. So, we talk about the safety of the players - you guys tell me if It's right for me to take my guard without my helmet on? It's just pure common sense," Mathews added.

"That's why the umpires also had a bigger job at the time because they could have at least gone back and checked. So, we talk about player safety. And a wicketkeeper for the spinner is not - they only let him keep with his helmet. So how can I take my guard without my helmet? It's a complete equipment malfunction," 36-year-old Mathews further added. 

However, in the mid-inning break, fourth umpire Adrian Holdstock said that two minutes were elapsed before the equipment failure occurred.

"We have certain protocols within the PCT. With a TV umpire at a fall of wicket, he basically monitors the 2 minutes and he will then relay the message through to the on-field umpires. And in the instance this afternoon, the batter wasn't ready to receive the ball within those 2 minutes, even before the strap became an issue for him," Holdstock told broadcaster Ian Bishop.

Here's what Harsha Bhogle said on Angelo Mathews timed-out controversy

Full text of Bhogle:

My thoughts on the Mathews-Shakib issue. 

You have to believe the umpires. If they say two minutes had elapsed, they had because these are vastly experienced, and very good, umpires and they are unlikely to make those mistakes. 

Second, ignorance of the law is no defence. If the law is there and you have infringed it, you don't have a leg to stand upon.

Shakib was within his rights to appeal and it is not for us to decide whether or not he should have. That is his decision, that is how he wants to play. 

This case is different though from backing up too far at the non-striker's end. There the batter is seeking, or getting, an unfair advantage and the bowler must run him out if possible. But here Mathews was getting no advantage nor was he seeking any. Batters routinely pick up a ball in play to give it to the bowler or a fielder and no one appeals, though careful batters ask if they can. Ditto here, if Mathews had asked if it was okay to change his helmet, I am certain there would have been no appeal. To that extent, it was unfortunate. I would run a non-striker out every day of the week but I wouldn't appeal for this.

And let us leave spirit of cricket out of this. It is a weak argument often used by those that are ignorant or at the wrong end of a mistake. There are laws and you play within them. Beyond that, how to play the game is an individual choice. 

Mathews and Sri Lankan fans can be disappointed and angry but as per the laws of the game, he was out.