The fourth Test match of the Border-Gavaskar Trophy series was a real drama, be it in terms of the flow of the game, the manner in which the wickets fell, the celebrations or the storyline surrounding qualification for the final of the World Test Championship. Regardless of the outcome of the game in Melbourne, talk of Yashasvi Jaiswal’s sacking is likely to continue for a long time.

The youngster played a crucial role in the final innings of the game on Monday as India looked to chase down a mighty 340-run target. After scoring back-to-back fifties in the Test and forming a potentially match-winning partnership with Rishabh Pant until the final afternoon, Jaiswal looked set to score a well-deserved hundred, which would have been his second of the series after the thunderous 161 in Perth last month .

But Jaiswal’s innings ended in controversy in the final hour of day five at the Melbourne Cricket Ground, leaving the left-hander furious as he argued with the field umpires.

It happened on the penultimate delivery of the 71st over of the innings when Pat Cummins delivered a shorter delivery on the leg side. The field was prepared and Jaiswal fell for the bait as he took the pull shot, but instead dropped it with a glove behind wicketkeeper Alex Carey, who leapt forward and intercepted it just inches from the ground.

The Australians erupted in celebration after picking the last specialist India batsman who took them close to victory in Melbourne. But the on-field umpire, Joel Wilson, signaled it was a no-out. Cummins immediately decided to investigate.

Third umpire Sharfuddoula Ibne Shahid Saikat watched the replay from all angles and was convinced it was a distraction. However, there was no spike on the Snicko. At this moment, most referees tend to rely on technology and consider it unsuccessful, but Saikat trusted visual evidence rather than Snicko and overturned the decision.

Jaiswal was not at all happy with the call after Wilson changed his decision. He stormed towards the umpires and argued before being told to go to the pavilion.

Why wasn’t there a spike on the Snicko?

Following the controversial firing, Warren Brennan, whose company BBG Sports operates Snicko, explained why there was no increase despite clear signs of distraction.

“This was one of the angle shots where there is no noise, so Snicko shows nothing but ambient noise,” Brennan told Code Sports. “I asked the audio director and he said there was no noise either. Probably only Hot Spot could have solved this problem.”

Former Test umpire Simon Taufel also supported third umpire Saikat’s demand for Jaiswal’s dismissal.

“In my opinion the decision had been made. “The third referee actually made the right decision in the end,” he told Channel 7.

“With the technology protocols, we have a hierarchy of redundancy and if the arbitrator sees a clear distraction right off the bat, there is no need to go further and use any other form of technology to prove the case. The clear deviation is conclusive evidence.

“In this particular case, what we saw with the third referee was that he used a secondary form of technology that for some reason did not produce the same conclusive audio evidence to support the clear deflection. In the end, the third referee did the right thing, went back to the clear distraction and overturned the referee box. So in my opinion we made the right decision.”