A disgraceful umpiring decision on day three at Trent Bridge compounded Australia’s fading hopes of a win in the first Test.
Australia’s suspect batting will need to produce at least the second-highest successful fourth-innings chase at the Nottingham venue after England batted their way to a commanding 261-run lead at 6-326 at stumps.
The tourists were left fuming at an absolute howler from umpire Aleem Dar with England leading by 230.
Dar somehow missed Stuart Broad getting a big nick on an Ashton Agar delivery in the 118th over; it flicked Brad Haddin’s gloves and was easily caught by Michael Clarke at first slip.
Broad (47no) refused to walk and Australia couldn’t review the decision because they’d already wasted their final challenge in foolish circumstances.
To add to frustrations, Haddin dropped Ian Bell (95no) off Peter Siddle (1-63) in the next over.
Australia battled hard, but couldn’t strike the killer blows.
England chased 284 in the fourth innings to beat New Zealand at Trent Bridge in 2004 and, in all likelihood, Australia will have to better that record effort.
Australia will require their second highest successful fourth innings run-chase ever in England, trailing only a 404 chase at Leeds by the 1948 Invincibles, if they’re to take a 1-0 lead in the Ashes series.
When Bell and Broad came together, Australia were in control with England six down and leading by just 153.
But their superb unbeaten 108-run, seventh-wicket partnership took the match away from Australia.
Bell was given out lbw to Shane Watson when on 34 but DRS overturned the umpire’s decision.
The dream debut of 19-year-old Agar (2-82) continued when he knocked over Alastair Cook (50) and Jonny Bairstow for his first Test wickets.
But he should have had three.
Had Broad gone, Australia would have had a shot at England’s tail and been a chance of wrapping the innings up by stumps.
Captain Clarke gave Dar a verbal spray when Broad was given not out.
Players converged on the pitch and stood before Dar but he remained unmoved.
Given it was the end of the over, Broad walked quickly up to join Bell, instead of choosing to walk swiftly off the ground.
It followed a harsh DRS call against England on day two, when Jonathan Trott was given out by the third umpire.
Australia did have themselves to blame in some respect due to a challenge earlier in the day which proved way off the mark.
They went upstairs for a James Pattinson (1-89) lbw shout, but hawk-eye showed the ball missing leg by at least another stump.
Earlier Kevin Pietersen (64) and a quick-fire 31 from Matt Prior helped England ultimately put Australia to the sword.
Watson bowled 11 maidens in his 15 overs for figures of 0-11.
James
Guest
reminds me of a liverpool fc joke which il change for australian cricket fans. how many australian cricket fans does it take to put in a new light bulb? no one knows they prefer to sit around in the dark talking about how good the old one was
Cuzza
Guest
Didn't he cheat Lara out in the West Indies? I think so.
Bobbo7
Guest
Nothing wrong with DRS as is. The players need to stop reviewing decisions where they are only hoping for an outcome. Watson's review in the second innings is a prime example. If there were too many reviews the players would double check everything and there would be too many delays. Used properly DRS will get rid of the howlers as is. It is also interesting to see the teams use the reviews with a limited number. There are less wrong decisions now but there is still a nice balance between umpire decisions and technology.
pope paul v11
Guest
Justin Langer's square cut to the keeper back in old Hobart was a goody.
Sylvester
Guest
Do the words "Andrew Symonds" and he number "162" ring any bells? This article should have started and finished wth this statement: "Australia couldn’t review the decision because they’d already wasted their final challenge in foolish circumstances"
Sandy
Guest
Hear , Hear, totally agree. It makes absolute sense, I've been saying the same thing for ages.
englishmen
Guest
Yeah exactly sheek okay dar made a mistake but his good decision outweigh bad ones.. But obviously continous badgering of umpires appeal twice and continuosly when it is clearly not out all countries do it india are the worst appealing all the time leads the umpire to start question every decision he is making even obvious ones... This then leads to an eventual howler being a possibility.... Erasmus was okay giving trott why didnt he just say aleem thats out in his ear.... Problem solved.... Umpires should have the right to review one decision at least.
Renegade
Guest
Yeah we only won 3 consecutive world cups...how many did England win again??
263793
Guest
It always amazes me when opposing sides bicker about not out this not out that (and not to get side tracked but no try this no try that), in my mind the real indicator of if it it is all fair in the game is if the boot was on the other foot so to speak the arguments would be reversed.How about we say "bloody hell " and let it go. It is a game after all and I'm pretty certain that there will be plenty more to argue about in the coming days. As far as Stuart Broad being remembered for this incident alone, I highly doubt it, I recall Andrew Symonds against the Saffas pretty much saying in a press conference that he belted the cover off the ball and it was the umpires job to give him out. He is not remembered for that, he's remembered for being a booze hound who liked fishing and drinking more than playing cricket for Australia.
Renegade
Guest
What tag follows Steve Waugh?
sheek
Roar Guru
The one more thing I wish to add is that umpires are having unnecessay & intolerable pressures being placed upon them, which is clearing affecting their ability to adjudicate soundly. In this respect, the antics of players - from ALL countries - transcends that of gamesmanship into deliberate attempts at deceit.
sheek
Roar Guru
Earlier in the day I was flippant in my response to the Stu Broad "dismissal." Having seen footage on TV & having thought about it some more, here are my conclusions. Yes, it's probably true that Aussies invented the "don't walk" culture, let the umpire raise his finger if he dares. Casting my mind as far back as I could, the "don't walk" mantra applied to faint snicks & 50/50 calls when even the batsman was unsure if he got a snick or not. In those situations, it was eminently reasonable to leave the decision to the umpire. However, I honestly don't recall any Aussie batsman who has given a snick as obvious as that by Broad standing their ground. Not even hard-nosed hombres like Bill Lawry, Ian Chappell, Rod Marsh, Allan Border, Ian Healy or Steve Waugh. If it was bleeding obvious they were out, like their middle stump cart-wheeling 10 times, they walked. The only hesitancy might be to see if the umpire would signal a no-ball. Other than that, if it was obvious they were out, they walked. Somewhere along the line the philosophy of "don't walk" until the umpire raises his finger has become blurred, & you can't blame Aussies alone for that. Of course, everything is further complicated these days with the third umpire & captain's reviews, etc. It seems now even when the situation is obvious, players want to heap as much "gray" onto it as possible. Perhaps in attempting to demonstrate that they are as mentally tough as Aussies, players from other countries have lost sight of what passes as pushing the boundary rope, & what is actually over-stepping the boundary rope. Broad was so obviously out, he should have walked. Fans are calling for a return to "play hard but fair." However, with a cesspool of greed, deceit, self-interest & double-standards that passes for the ICC, are we surprised by anything anymore? They supposedly set the standard of moral behaviour, but their own bar of excellence is under their feet.
Jayvan Collins
Roar Pro
By the laws of cricket if the bail resettles in the groove the bastmen is not out as the stumps have not been broken. This was seen this year in the Big Bash (I can't remember the game). "Law 28 The Wicket is Down (a) The wicket is put down if a bail is COMPLETELY removed from the top of the stumps, or a stump is struck out of the ground," For the stumps to broken the bail needs to be completely removed and that means that it must remain removed. If it subsequently resettles on the stumps the stumps have not been broken by the laws of the game.
Ben Carter
Roar Guru
Hi Ben. Righto. Was it a clean catch? Yes. Is any decision to walk ultimately Broad's alone to make - whether fans like it or not? - yes. Were the rules of the series adhered to by the officials? Yes. Should the ICC consider altering such rules for future series? Yes. Should Clarke just get on with the game now regardless? Yes. Enough said.
Yawhoa of NSW and now WA
Guest
Cricket is all about playing in the spirit of the game and playing "hard and fair", it is the umpire that makes the final call as to who is out or not. Unfortunately even though it was without "doubt" that Egar had taken his 3rd wicket no batsman is going to rule himself out!. It's a reflection of our society - "I didn't do it", it wasn't me, i swear your honour!.
Ian
Guest
Can't stand all the sanctimonious w*nking about walking or not walking. Hardly anyone has walked in the last 40 years or so. Get over it.
Freddie
Guest
Fact is, these decisions even themselves up. Trott's dismissal would almost certainly have been overturned had the technology been working, now Broad gets away with one. The whinging convicts just can't cop it. Suck it up ladies.
englishmen
Guest
Haha u lot are whingers biggest ones aussie are just full of it.... What about yesterdays wrong decisions england would be 600 ahead!!!
Dirk
Guest
Whinge whinge whinging pom. First it was the IRB now the ICC. Their desperation to win is laughably pathetic.
englishmen
Guest
They umpires were the biggest frauds harper and hair... What about the one that gave bell out in the ct im sure he was aussie wasn't that cheating