England defeated Australia by 14 runs in Trent Bridge Test that concluded on 14/7/2013. The Test was marred by DRS controversy. Marais Erasmus was the third umpire.
Two decisions were wrong. First one was not DRS but referred by field umpire Kumar Dharmasena when Ashton Agar was ruled not out. He was on 6. He went on to score 98 and created many records. Those included highest score by a No. 11 batsman and highest 10th wicket partnership of 163 runs. Australia were 131/9. They overtook England’s first Innings total of 215 runs and ended on 280.
In Jonathan Trott’s case DRS decision was wrong. Lack of side-on Hot Spot was said to be the reason for wrong decision. Marais Erasmus did not go by video replay that showed the bat touching the ball. Jonathan Trott was out on 0.
Stuart Broad was right in not walking when he was on 37 in second Innings. Umpire Aleem Dar ruled him not out. Australia had exhausted their two appeals under DRS. A batsman has to leave if he is wrongly given out by field umpire or on appeal by third umpire. Stuart Broad was out on 65.
The Test was decided by DRS when Alastair Cook used DRS against Brad Haddin who was on 71 and for 10th wicket Australia had put on 65 runs and needed 15 to win. England got it right and won the Test by 14 runs. Australia were all out for 296.
The inadequacies of DRS are exposed. India had opposed DRS. Other countries are happy when it suits them and raise questions when it goes against them. Number of appeals can be increased. Some inadequacies can be set right. But there is no protection if the third umpire knowingly gives a wrong decision due to fixing or some other reason.
I agree there is no protection if the third umpire is subjective in his decision.