England protest to referee over umpiring decisions

India 281-8 England 259 India win by 22 runs

England attempted to deflect the blame for their defeat in the first one-day international here on Saturday by running to teacher. The precise wording of their complaint to the series match referee was not disclosed, but probably went something along the lines of: "Please sir, please sir, the Indians are appointing awful umpires and not giving us a chance. It's not our fault, can you do something about it, sir?" The official line was that the letter to Denis Lindsay, following the loss at Eden Gardens, expressed the team management's disappointment at the standard of umpiring which fell below that required in internationals. It was a mistake.

Not that the umpiring was anything other than dreadful. To make the observation that it did not reach international level was to forget that it would have caused a riot in a village game. But in adopting a righteous stance, England seemed to be suggesting that it was the solitary reason for their failure to reach a target they appeared to have cakewalked.

More importantly, it also diverted attention from Marcus Trescothick's scintillating innings of 121 from 109 balls. It was Trescothick who caused the fuss. Having been dropped on two, he was terminated in full, resplendent flow by an abject leg-before verdict.

Umpire SK Sharma, who had already raised a timorous digit and huge doubts about his ability when he sent Nasser Hussain packing, missed the unmistakable evidence that the ball had pitched several inches outside leg stump, thus rendering any appeal null and void. It was a cruel, undeserving end to Trescothick's innings.

The 80 balls he took to reach a hundred made it the fastest by an Englishman in a one-day match, beating David Gower's 82-ball effort against New Zealand. For its quality and discriminating ferocity it also evoked comparison with Robin Smith's 167 not out against Australia in 1993. The other similarity with Smith was that he too finished on a losing side.

For Trescothick, the joke that when he scores a century England lose has probably worn thin. He has scored four international hundreds in all, two in Tests and now two in one-dayers, and the side have lost every time. The poor lad was as bemused by it as he was disappointed, but nobody dared ask him if he would have traded four 99s for four wins.

He was despatched after striking two sixes and 13 fours and beating into submission a viral infection which had threatened to keep him out of the match. His shots on the leg side were explosive, but his driving and cutting were not far behind.

The left-handed opener's dismissal, however, was not the cause of England's defeat. When the man of the match walked back to a standing ovation from a permanently excited crowd they had 66 balls left to make 58 more to win with five wickets in hand. It was a straightforward one-day equation. A side which was missing two experienced hands in Graham Thorpe (ill) and Andrew Caddick (dropped) were on their way.

As revealed by Javagal Srinath, the bowler who was awarded Trescothick's wicket (as well as that of Nick Knight earlier in the innings to a ball which also pitched outside leg stump), India still thought they were bound to lose.

Unfortunately, England thought otherwise. Six runs later the fluent Andrew Flintoff was run out, slipping and slow to turn after he advanced briefly for a second run and that was it for England. Their sense of belief had finally gone, they were all out for 259 with five overs still to go. That was not the umpires' fault.

After the match captain Hussain insisted, in that Hussain way, that England would not dwell on the matter. By yesterday morning the coach Duncan Fletcher was reflecting on the positive aspects of the result such as a wonderful all-round fielding performance, the best by England under his tutelage, and his opener's great innings.

He said of the negatives: "You could get the feeling that once again we got in a very strong position which went away from us. but you know the circumstances. I don't think you can blame the team." Then came news of the note to teacher.

It tended to diminish sympathy not least because the letter was immediately handed by Lindsay to Jagmohan Dalmiya, the president of the Board of Control for Cricket in India and England's adversary all winter. The waste-paper bin looked a likely receptacle.

The letter also tended to overlook the fact that from April umpires in one-dayers will consist of one neutral from the new global élite panel and a home umpire on their international panel. At present anybody can be appointed and often is. India, for instance, have appointed 12 different umpires for this series. England had better watch out now.

The second match in Cuttack tomorrow needs urgently to see an improvement in over rates. England's tardiness in bowling their overs meant that they had only 49 overs batting themselves. India then bowled extremely slowly knowing they could not be penalised.

The International Cricket Council last year rejected a proposal for a six-run penalty to be imposed for each over not bowled in the second innings in the allotted time. That would not have saved England either.