The controversy around the now infamous stumping of Bairstow by Alex Carey on the fifth morning of the second Ashes Test at Lord’s is not dying down any soon. Broad, who replaced Bairstow on the crease after his wicket and was at the centre of all the action, has hit out at the senior Australian players for not rescinding the appeal.

Broad wrote in his Daily Mail column that Bairstow was not looking to gain any advantage when he stepped out of his crease after having assumed ‘over’ was called.

He also justified that the two videos doing the rounds on social media: one of the Bairstow stumping attempt of Marnus Labuschagne in the first innings of the Lord’s Test, and one of Colin de Grandhomme’s run out in the Lord’s Test last year, both had an element of the batter seeking an advantage in them.

“The crux of the matter for Jonny Bairstow’s dismissal at Lord’s on Sunday was whether he was looking to gain an advantage. Yes, I have seen a clip from earlier in the match when in his guise as wicketkeeper, Jonny himself threw the ball at the stumps. But that was because Marnus Labuschagne was batting outside of his crease — in doing so, attempting to take the lbw out of the game. In other words, seeking an advantage.

“Clips of Colin de Grandhomme being run out in the Lord’s Test last year have done the rounds, too, and that is just the most ludicrous comparison ever, because he got hit on the pad coming down the pitch, was searching for a run and Ollie Pope threw down the stumps from gully. Again, trying to gain an advantage.”

Broad went on to explain the circumstances surrounding the Bairstow dismissal. He said that Bairstow had marked his crease and come out for a chat with the non-striker assuming the ball was dead, just like everyone in the crowd as well as people on commentary: “With regards to the Jonny incident, zero advantage was being taken there: he let the ball go, scratched his mark within the crease, and acknowledging it as the end of the over, went to speak to Ben Stokes.

“And if you look at the footage of when the stumps were broken, one umpire has got the bowler’s cap in his hand, the other is head down, walking in from square leg — actions that suggest they too thought the over had finished.

So, within the laws of the game, is the ball still live because Alex Carey catches it and throws it? Probably. Is there any advantage being taken by England? No. Does a full stadium of people think that ball has been and gone? Yes. On BBC radio commentary, Jonathan Agnew has already moved on from the calling of the ball,” wrote Broad.

[breakout id=”0″][/breakout]

Ever since the ball-tampering scandal hit Australian cricket in 2018, they have tried to change the perception of their team in the eyes of the public and have worked on creating a better legacy. Broad touched upon it in his column, saying that it surprised him all the more that despite Australia’s attempts at changing the kind of legacy they want to leave behind, none of the senior players on the field had second thoughts about the Bairstow stumping.

“What amazed me, and what I told the Australians I could not believe as we left the field at lunch, was that not one senior player among them — and I very much understand in the emotion of the game that the bowler and wicketkeeper would have thought ‘that’s out’ — questioned what they had done.

“Especially given what their team has been through over recent years, with all their cultural change. Not one of them said: ‘Hang on, lads. I’m not really sure about this.’ Not one of them thought: ‘He’s gaining no advantage. He’s not trying to get a run. It’s the end of the over. It’s a bit of a random dismissal. We should cancel that appeal.’”

Broad said that he had never seen the Lord’s crowd like it was on the fifth day after Bairstow’s stumping and that he let Pat Cummins know that crowd was booing for him when he came out to bat.

“The Lord’s crowd are obviously huge cricket lovers and never before have I seen a reaction from them like that. They were so angry. I just said to Pat on repeat: ‘All these boos are for you, for your decision.’ And: ‘What a great opportunity you had to think clearly.’”