<p> Off-field drama marred the controversial Champions Trophy title showdown as the tournament jury spent one hour and a half to find a way out to India’s protest against a shootout infringement against Australia here.<br /><br /></p>.<p>The tournament jury seemed to be in a fix when India filed an appeal against the video umpire’s decision to re-take the second attempt in the shootout.<br /><br />It took the jury multiple replays to find a way out of the embarrassing situation that kept the result pending.<br /><br />India had complained that Daniel Beale’s shootout attempt was allowed to go on for more than 14 seconds and the obstruction that was cited took place outside the eight-second limit for such attempts. The score then was 1-0.<br /><br />After an hour and a half of the match’s conclusion, the jury eventually discovered that the ball had rolled under Indian goalkeeper’s pad for a couple of seconds. The jury now cited this as the cause why the shootout was re-taken. But it still took the jury a lot of explanation to the Indian captain and coach before announcing that the result would stay.<br /><br />Signal for the crowd<br /><br />Australia thus won the title, but both teams had to be ushered out of the ground, to send a signal for the crowd that they go home.<br /><br />“The umpires have failed,” said Narender Batra, President of Hockey India. “Is this the quality of umpires you post in the final of the Champions Trophy?” asked Batra.<br /><br />“The shootout attempt went on for over 14 seconds, and then it was re-taken. Just to cover up their shortcomings, they are now pointing out at a different incident,” he said.<br />“If the goalkeeper had made an infringement, that a penalty stroke should have been awarded,” Batra emphasised.<br /><br />Indian coach Roelant Oltmans said it was “an unusual end to the tournament”.<br />“To be honest, the set process should be followed. Our protest was not about the result, but important tournaments should follow the process,” said Oltmans.<br /><br />“If something like this happens at the Olympics Games in Rio de Janeiro, just imagine the embarrassment for the game,” he said. <br /><br />Oltmans said shootouts had witnessed several controversies in the past.<br />“It’s not the first time there’s so much protest over shootouts. The system should be revised,” said Oltmans.<br /><br />“We protested against wrong execution of the shootout,” he said. “Is it not important that the shootouts are done properly?”<br /><br />“We had to raise the issue because the process was not followed,” said Oltmans.<br /><br /></p>
<p> Off-field drama marred the controversial Champions Trophy title showdown as the tournament jury spent one hour and a half to find a way out to India’s protest against a shootout infringement against Australia here.<br /><br /></p>.<p>The tournament jury seemed to be in a fix when India filed an appeal against the video umpire’s decision to re-take the second attempt in the shootout.<br /><br />It took the jury multiple replays to find a way out of the embarrassing situation that kept the result pending.<br /><br />India had complained that Daniel Beale’s shootout attempt was allowed to go on for more than 14 seconds and the obstruction that was cited took place outside the eight-second limit for such attempts. The score then was 1-0.<br /><br />After an hour and a half of the match’s conclusion, the jury eventually discovered that the ball had rolled under Indian goalkeeper’s pad for a couple of seconds. The jury now cited this as the cause why the shootout was re-taken. But it still took the jury a lot of explanation to the Indian captain and coach before announcing that the result would stay.<br /><br />Signal for the crowd<br /><br />Australia thus won the title, but both teams had to be ushered out of the ground, to send a signal for the crowd that they go home.<br /><br />“The umpires have failed,” said Narender Batra, President of Hockey India. “Is this the quality of umpires you post in the final of the Champions Trophy?” asked Batra.<br /><br />“The shootout attempt went on for over 14 seconds, and then it was re-taken. Just to cover up their shortcomings, they are now pointing out at a different incident,” he said.<br />“If the goalkeeper had made an infringement, that a penalty stroke should have been awarded,” Batra emphasised.<br /><br />Indian coach Roelant Oltmans said it was “an unusual end to the tournament”.<br />“To be honest, the set process should be followed. Our protest was not about the result, but important tournaments should follow the process,” said Oltmans.<br /><br />“If something like this happens at the Olympics Games in Rio de Janeiro, just imagine the embarrassment for the game,” he said. <br /><br />Oltmans said shootouts had witnessed several controversies in the past.<br />“It’s not the first time there’s so much protest over shootouts. The system should be revised,” said Oltmans.<br /><br />“We protested against wrong execution of the shootout,” he said. “Is it not important that the shootouts are done properly?”<br /><br />“We had to raise the issue because the process was not followed,” said Oltmans.<br /><br /></p>