I read an article in The Australian Newspaper and was frankly astounded. This article on the Jonny Bairstow stumping was not written by a sports journalist, but instead by another writer that I do not recall ever seeing before. The whole premise of the article was incorrect, the author put forward a case that Australian captain Pat Cummins should apologise to the English team, then put a caveat on that apology. Luke Slattery suggested we were aggrieved by the Mitchll Starc catch that was disallowed.

Firstly, the off-field umpire ruled on the catch and ruled that Starc had grounded the ball. Whether I or anyone else agrees or disagrees is irrelevant, the umpire has made a ruling based on the Laws of Cricket. The matter is closed, Ben Duckett returned to the crease and continued batting – incident closed. The team accepted the spirit of cricket, accepted the umpire’s decision and moved on, it wasn’t that big a deal.

The next incident is the Jonny Bairstow stumping, this time out as ruled by the off-field umpire. Therefore, the two incidents are not interlinked tit-for-tat. The off-field umpire ruled on both incidents and the umpire made the final decision. Therefore, whether you agree with the decision or not, each decision is made in isolation and on the merits of the appeal. The umpire ruled this time in Australia’s favour, the stumping was within the Laws of Cricket.

Ben Stokes was out in the centre for the Duckett non-catch and if he felt so strongly about walking, he could have indicated to Duckett to keep walking – he did not. The umpire ruled Duckett not out and he returned to the crease, so that is the end of it. The umpire ruled Bairstow out and he had to trudge off, not happy admittedly but he knows why. The spirit of cricket is to respect the umpire’s decision and that is what happened.