DRS Absence Casts Shadow Over Women’s Test; ‘Right Decision, Wrong Process’ Cited

South Africa’s captain, Laura Wolvaardt, was dismissed lbw for 65 runs during her team’s first innings, though she indicated having made contact with the ball. Regarding Annerie Dercksen’s dismissal in the singular Test match between England and South Africa, former England bowler Alex Hartley described it as “the right decision but the wrong process.” England secured a decisive 286-run victory over South Africa, concluding their 2024 fixtures on a high note before heading into January’s Ashes. However, the contest was overshadowed by widespread discontent and bewilderment stemming from the absence of the Decision Review System (DRS). This technology typically allows teams two or three reviews per innings to challenge and potentially reverse incorrect umpire rulings. Cricket South Africa opted against implementing DRS due to associated costs, despite reporting profits of £35.9m last year. Notably, the system had been utilized in the preceding white-ball series, marking its inaugural deployment in a bilateral women’s series within the country. Early in the match, on just the second delivery, Marizanne Kapp and the South African side were convinced they had England opener Tammy Beaumont out lbw following a strong appeal; however, the umpire ruled not out, and England’s opening pair went on to accumulate 53 runs for the first wicket. Proteas captain Laura Wolvaardt was batting confidently and appeared poised to guide her team to a first-innings score matching England’s before she was given out lbw to Sophie Ecclestone on 65. Wolvaardt reacted with visible anger as she left the field, striking her bat against her helmet and murmuring that she had hit the ball – an action for which she was subsequently fined by the International Cricket Council (ICC). Nevertheless, the most contentious ruling, despite having less bearing on the ultimate match outcome, occurred in South Africa’s second innings when England appealed for a catch at short leg off Dercksen. The on-field umpires then referred the decision to the third umpire, akin to a review. Even without DRS, umpires are generally permitted to consult the third umpire for clean catches and bump balls, situations where real-time visibility might be compromised; yet, in this particular instance, the catch was taken at chest height. “The right decision was made in the end, because it did look like there was an edge, but I just think it was the wrong process,” Hartley told BBC Test Match Special. “There was never any doubt around whether it was a clean catch or not. It’s the fact that nobody knows what the decision-making was. “What it has shown is that DRS needs to be in place for every international match and then we wouldn’t be talking about it. It should be a wake-up call for Cricket South Africa.” England captain Heather Knight stated that the non-use of DRS for the match was a “sign of the status of the game,” acknowledging it was “a bit frustrating.” “I was pretty shocked when I found out in the umpire’s meeting the day before, that we weren’t going to have it,” Knight told a news conference after England wrapped up victory.”I think it’s a real shame. You come to expect it as a player now, and I guess the reason is always money. But, particularly in Test cricket, where wickets are such a premium, it’s a really important thing to have.” Proteas head coach Mandla Mashimbyi commented that the choice not to employ DRS was beyond his “pay grade,” but he expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of clarity surrounding the “bizarre” decision that resulted in Dercksen’s dismissal. “There was no communication – I didn’t understand why [it was out],” said Mashimbyi. “If it’s out it’s out and if the umpire isn’t sure, the benefit of doubt goes to the batter. It was quite bizarre, I guess the umpires felt they made the right decision so we can’t go against that.” During the ninth over of South Africa’s chase of 351 runs for victory, England appealed for the wicket of Annerie Dercksen, believing she had been caught by Tammy Beaumont at short leg off Lauren Bell. The catch was described as very straightforward, rising directly to Beaumont at chest height. Initially, the standing umpire remained unmoved, leading to apparent disappointment from England. Following a discussion, both umpires conferred and referred the incident to the third umpire, leaving Dercksen and her batting partner Sune Luus visibly perplexed. With no ambiguity regarding a clean catch, the umpire proceeded to check for bat involvement. While slow-motion replays suggested contact, the absence of Ultra Edge technology prevented absolute certainty. The third umpire ultimately ruled Dercksen out, a decision that visibly displeased the South African coaching staff and Wolvaardt. The Proteas head coach subsequently approached an ICC official at the boundary edge. The host team then suffered a collapse, losing 7 wickets for 42 runs, culminating in their all-out total of 64. According to the playing conditions, established by the ICC, for matches without DRS, the third umpire’s role is restricted to verifying clean catches or bump balls. In such scenarios, the third umpire is indeed required to ascertain if the bat was involved before a wicket can be confirmed. In her post-match interview, England’s Bell stated her understanding was that the umpires were checking for a bump ball, which falls within their authority. However, it was difficult to comprehend why the on-field umpires could not discern that it was a clean catch, given it was not close to the ground and appeared undisputed. Spectators were unable to hear the conversations between the umpires and the third umpire, unlike broadcasts in some other cricket matches, football, and rugby. BBC Sport sought a comment from CSA, while the ICC declined to provide one.