The third Ashes Test at Adelaide witnessed yet another Decision Review System (DRS) controversy, with England wicketkeeper-batter Jamie Smith’s dismissal becoming the latest flashpoint in an already technology-dominated match. The incident has sparked widespread debate among players, commentators, and fans, raising a familiar question: was Jamie Smith actually out, or did Snickometer once again get it wrong?
What happened during Jamie Smith’s dismissal?
The moment unfolded when Pat Cummins delivered a short-of-length ball outside off. Jamie Smith attempted to pull the delivery but appeared to be early into the shot. Australia appealed for a caught behind as Alex Carey completed a looping catch. On-field umpire Nitin Menon consulted his colleague and sent the decision upstairs, primarily to check whether the catch was clean.
As part of the review, Real-Time Snickometer showed a clear spike as the ball passed Smith’s bat. Despite replays suggesting a visible gap between bat and ball, third umpire Chris Gaffaney relied on the Snicko spike and ruled Smith out. The ball had clearly carried to Carey, removing any doubt about the catch itself.
Smith walked off shaking his head, while Ben Stokes looked visibly disappointed, clearly unconvinced by the decision.
Why the decision is being questioned
The controversy stems from the lack of alignment between visuals and audio. While Snickometer detected a spike near the toe-end of the bat, slow-motion replays failed to conclusively show bat-ball contact. This raised doubts over whether the sound originated from the bat, pad, or even bat hitting the ground — a known limitation of Snickometer.
Crucially, this decision came just a day after another Snicko-related controversy involving Alex Carey. On Day 1, Carey survived a caught-behind review due to “inconclusive evidence,” despite a sound spike appearing before the ball reached the bat. That incident later escalated when BBG Sports admitted the wrong stump microphone had been used, directly impacting the decision.
The contrasting outcomes have intensified scrutiny. England’s camp and neutral observers have questioned why Snicko was dismissed as unreliable in Carey’s case but treated as decisive in Smith’s dismissal.
Was Jamie Smith out or not out?
From a laws-and-protocol perspective, the third umpire followed the existing DRS framework. A visible Snicko spike combined with a clean catch was deemed sufficient evidence to overturn any doubt. However, from a cricketing and visual standpoint, the absence of a clearly visible edge has left room for debate.
If judged strictly on video evidence, the decision appears marginal at best. If judged by DRS protocol, the spike tipped the balance in Australia’s favour.
The bigger picture
Jamie Smith’s dismissal has once again put Snickometer under the microscope, highlighting ongoing concerns about consistency, microphone selection, and audio-video synchronization. With two major Snicko controversies in consecutive days of the same Test, questions are now being raised about whether current DRS technology is equipped to handle high-stakes moments in elite Test cricket.
As the Ashes series continues, the Smith incident is likely to be remembered not just for the wicket itself, but for what it represents — a growing unease around cricket’s reliance on technology where interpretation, rather than certainty, increasingly decides the outcome.
