‘Snicko needs to be sacked’ – Ashes controversy continues

England are collapsing towards Ashes defeat in the third Test in Adelaide but the Snicko controversy shows no sign of settling down.

After Alex Carey’s reprieve on day one, courtesy of a mistake by the operator of the technology, England wicketkeeper Jamie Smith was twice involved in contentious decisions.

With the first one, he was given not out and for the second one he was judged to have been caught behind for 22.

Before the second verdict on Smith was given, one Australian player was heard saying: “This could be anything.”

“Just review everything,” added another.

Smith ultimately walked off shaking his head while his captain Ben Stokes did little to hide his dismay.

What is clear is the players on the field are not trusting the technology.

The controversy on the second day follows Alex Carey being given not out on Wednesday, when England reviewed a caught-behind decision with the Australia wicketkeeper on 72.

He was given not out because the spike which appeared on the technology was out of sync with the pictures, but that was later revealed to have been an error by the operator.

The first incident on day two occurred in the 44th over, with England 149-5.

Australia appealed for a catch after a ball to Smith looped to Usman Khawaja at slip and the on-field umpire Nitin Menon sent the decision to the TV umpire to check if the ball had carried.

TV umpire Chris Gaffaney then deliberated over various replays, first checking whether the ball had hit Smith’s glove or helmet.

While the TV pictures seemed to suggest the ball must have hit glove, the Snicko technology seemed inconclusive – the spike was as the ball passed helmet not glove – and Gaffaney deemed the ball had hit Smith’s head.

The hosts’ fielders were visibly disgruntled and one Australian was heard saying “Snicko needs to be sacked” over the stump microphone.

Marnus Labuschagne added: “Nitin, this is outrageous.

“Has the ball gone through his glove?”

Menon was heard explaining: “We checked for fair catch because we felt it was off the glove but he says it is off the helmet.”

In any case it appeared the ball did not carry to Khawaja.

The second decision ultimately resulted in Smith’s dismissal.

He attempted a pull shot to Pat Cummins but Australia appealed confidently for a thin edge.

Smith appeared certain he had not hit the ball and was ready to review the decision had it been given out on the field.

Again umpire Menon suggested he was not sure if the ball had carried so sent the decision for Gaffaney to review.

As the players came together to await the decision, Nathan Lyon was heard asking non-striking batter Ben Stokes if he heard anything.

Gaffaney said “there is nothing obvious there” after viewing an initial replay but Snicko showed a rough spike within a frame of the ball passing the toe of Smith’s bat – the leeway allowed in such scenarios.

Smith was given out. Both he and Stokes seemed frustrated with the decision.

“This is where Snicko needs sacking, as we heard down the stump mic,” said former England spinner Alex Hartley on Test Match Special.

“Clearly Australia have gone up and made a loud noise because everybody knows we don’t trust Snicko right now so you just appeal for everything and review it if you have to.”

As well as player distrust, there was also debate about whether the right process was followed given the TV umpire checked for an edge when the decision had been sent to him for a fair catch.

The review system falls under the International Cricket Council’s playing conditions, which suggests the right procedure was followed.

It states “the third umpire shall determine whether the batter has been caught”, including checking for a no-ball and “whether the batter has hit the ball”.

“I think for both decisions the right decision was probably made,” said former Australia bowler Glenn McGrath.

More significantly, however, the debate over the accuracy of Snicko continues and it appears player distrust is growing.