South Africa v England: Annerie Dercksen dismissal was ‘right decision but wrong process’

From the very second ball of the match, Marizanne Kapp and South Africa were confident they had opener Tammy Beaumont lbw with a very persuasive appeal, but it was not given out and England’s opening pair went on to add 53 for the first wicket.

Proteas captain Laura Wolvaardt batted fluently and looked to steer her side to parity in the first innings before being given out lbw to Sophie Ecclestone on 65.

Wolvaardt was furious as she marched off the field, banging her bat on the helmet and muttering that she had hit it – a reaction for which she was eventually fined by the International Cricket Council (ICC).

But the most contentious of the decisions – despite having less impact on the final outcome of the match – came in South Africa’s second innings when England appealed for a catch at short leg off Dercksen and the on-field umpires went on to get it. checked by the third referee, just like a review.

Even without DRS in play, umpires are generally allowed to check with the third umpire for clean catches and stumpings, cases which they may not see cleanly in real time – but in this case the catch was taken at chest height.

“The right decision was made in the end because it looked like there was an advantage, but I just think it was the wrong process,” Hartley told BBC Test Match Special.

“There was never any question whether it was a clean catch or not. It’s the fact that nobody knows what the decision was.

“What it has shown is that DRS needs to be in place for every international match and then we wouldn’t talk about it. It should be a wake-up call for Cricket South Africa.”

Proteas head coach Mandla Mashimbyi said the decision not to use DRS was above his “pay grade” but lamented the lack of communication surrounding the “bizarre” decision which led to Dercksen’s wicket.

“There was no communication – I didn’t understand why (it was out),” Mashimbyi said.

“If it’s out, it’s out and if the umpire isn’t sure, the benefit of the 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 the.”