The Indian left-hander cut Saqlain and the ball hit Azhar Mahmood (substitute for Inzamam-ul Haq) at silly mid-off as the fieldsman turned away in a reflex action. The ball ricochetted off his ankle, hit the ground and as it rebounded, wicketkeeper Moin Khan dived forward to complete the `catch'.

The Pakistan players vociferously appealed and went into their rejoicing act. Umpire Steve Dunne first remained unmoved and then consulted V K Ramaswamy, the square-leg umpire. After a few moments, Dunne declared Ganguly out. TV replays showed that the ball touched the ground after hitting Azhar and it was only after that Moin caught the ball.

In the first place, if there was any doubt in Dunne's mind -- and there was, for otherwise he would not have consulted Ramaswamy-- he could have ruled in favour of the batsman. Secondly, what was the point in consulting Ramaswamy, who was not in an ideal position to judge, with the possibility of his view being obscured by at least three close-in fieldsmen. And finally, why was the third umpire A V Jayaprakash not consulted?

Here, it is worth pointing out that only on Friday, during the controversy surrounding Ijaz Ahmed's dismissal -- caught and bowled Kumble -- Dunne consulted Ramaswamy and then the third umpire's help was called for before he ruled Ijaz out.

The fact that a correct decision against Ganguly at that juncture could have altered the final outcome of the closely contested match, is an important factor, but secondary all the same.

The point is that when the third umpire is around to help in controversial or doubtful decisions, then the officials on the field should seek his help in arriving at the right decision.