KL Rahul was controversially given out caught behind with the third umpire reversing the original not-out decision despite the lack of a front-on angle.

The incident occurred during the second ball of the 23rd over when Mitchell Starc bowled a good-length ball across the off stump. Rahul, who was batting on 26 and looked at ease on the crease, got forward to defend. The ball was close to the bat and the Australia fielders, assuming there was an edge, went up in appeal. However, it was given not out by the on-field umpire. The bat had also hit the pad, making it a close call.

Pat Cummins took the DRS, which is where all the controversy began. The TV umpire was provided two angles, one from behind the stumps and one from the leg side, along with a Snicko, which threw up a spike as the ball was close to the bat. However, from those angles, it was not clear whether the spike was from an edge or the bat hitting the top of the left pad.

The TV umpire immediately asked for the front-on and off-side angles, which were not supplied to him. To the surprise of many, he then proceeded to give Rahul out despite not getting the angles he desired. The decision left many surprised, with Mark Nicholas, on commentary even suggesting that he did not have enough evidence to overturn the on-field call, and that the spike on the Snicko was a thicker one than would have been the case if it was a faint edge.

Rahul walked back visibly frustrated.

There was also controversy on whether there was a deviation as the ball passed the bat. Sanjay Manjrekar later explained that the Snicko should have thrown up two spikes if it was bat-pad and there had been an edge. However, only one spike was shown. Manjrekar later explained that the visual evidence provided indicated there was no edge, and the lack of adequate technology coupled with a hasty decision was criticised.

Matthew Hayden also questioned the decision: "His pad and bat are not together at that point in time as the ball passes. It's (bat hitting pad) after, in fact, the ball passes the edge. Does Snicko pick up the sound of the bat hitting the pad?

"We're assuming (Snicko) may be the outside edge of the bat but that may not be the case."

Former umpire Simon Taufel, however, claimed that the spike had occured when the bat had not reached the pad, meaning it must have been due to the ball brushing the outside edge.

"We saw with that side on shot there was a spike on RTS with the bat away from the pad, in other words the bottom of the bat hadn't reached the pad," he said. "Therefore rolling that through in its natural course, you may have seen that second spike (on Snicko, to indicate bat hitting pad) come through, had it been rolled all the way through."

India fell to 51-4 by the lunch break, with Rishabh Pant (10) and Dhruv Jurel (4) batting on the crease.

Follow Wisden for all cricket updates, including live scores, match stats, quizzes and more. Stay up to date with the latest cricket news, player updates, team standings, match highlights, video analysis and live match odds.

Related tags:

India Cover StoriesTrending StoriesCover Stories UKCover Stories IndiaKl RahulSeries Cover Stories