Reviewing decisions in cricket can either be good or bad. It can be a brilliant tool if you will always get your way or a nightmare with the opposite. When a captain chooses to review a decision, various methods are used to determine the outcome.
One of these methods is Snicko. This technology will show whether a batsman has nicked the ball before it reached the fielder. It's usually foolproof and can be the final say on determining if a batsman is out or not.
However, it's caused nothing but problems in the current third Ashes Test. There was a mulfunction that has called for the technology to be scrapped or upgraded; as per pundits and players.
The technology shows replays in frame by frame pictures with a waveform created to display if there has been contact between bat and ball. It was invented by English computer scientist, Allan Plaskett, during the mid-1990s but it's no longer used in Tests in England.
Snicko has caused controversy during this Ashes series, with Australian batter, Alex Carey, given not out in the third Test due to "human error" by its operators. Carey was 72* at the time and went on to make 106 in the first innings in Adelaide.
Broadcasters in Australia and New Zealand both use Snicko, while their counterparts in England, India and South Africa all use the more developed UltraEdge technology invented by Hawk Eye. UK broadcaster, Sky Sports, stopped using Snicko in 2016 due to the increased detail and accuracy that is made available by UltraEdge.
UltraEdge gives the third umpire access to tracking cameras which can analyse up to 340 frames per second, providing more accurate information.
Fox Sports, Australia's host broadcaster, has opted to use Snicko instead of UltraEdge for the series. Host broadcasters have the option to select either UltraEdge or Snicko as sound-based edge detection technology, which are both approved for use by the International Cricket Board (ICC).
The ICC themselves don't pay for the Decision Review System (DRS) outside of their tournaments - such as the T20 or 50-over World Cups.
In the Ashes, the choice of technology is selected by, and paid for, by the host broadcaster, who will make their decision based on their budgets. Channel Seven and Foxtel reportedly paid £750m for the rights to show the sport in Australia until 2031 - a 10.5% per year increase on the previous deal.
Last year, the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) paid for the technology for the first time as part of their broadcast deal with Sky.
Costs between the two different technologies vary in each territory but it's understood that UltraEdge is significantly more expensive to license than Snicko.
At virtually the halfway point of this Ashes series, there have been several controversial incidents involving Snicko.
The biggest controversy came when keeper-batter Carey was adjudged not out on review during the first day of the third Test in Adelaide. Carey later admitted he edged the delivery but survived because the Snicko technology showed a discrepancy between the sound and pictures of the edge.
Snicko used the sound captured by the stump microphone at the non-striker's end, rather than the striker's end. BBG, the company that provides Snicko, has admitted responsibility for the error.
On day two, Australia's fielders could be heard saying "this could be anything" and "just review everything" in relation to Snicko decisions. Another fielder said "Snicko needs to be sacked" and was caught on the stump microphone.
England wicketkeeper, Jamie Smith, was controversially dismissed on day two in the second Test in Brisbane following a questionable Snicko review for being caught behind. Smith was also controversially dismissed in the first Test in a similar incident, with Snicko showing a spike after the ball went past his bat.
In the same Test, a similar incident happened involving Australian batter, Marnus Labuschagne, although he was not given out due a lack of "conclusive evidence."
Former England captain, Michael Vaughan, has been a vocal critic during the series and said he has "lost faith in the Snicko system." "It's a shocker. It's wrong. The players have lost trust in it," he told BBC Sport's Ashes Debrief.
"The ICC need to look at themselves in the mirror because who pays for this? The host broadcaster aren't going to pay for the best technology, they pay so much for the rights. The home board aren't going to pay for it.
"The ICC should be paying for whatever the best technology is. This is an ICC event, it's the World Test Championship."
Marcus Trescothick, England's batting coach, called on "the powers that be" to resolve the matter. "It's not an ideal situation," he said. "Of course, we've been on the back end of a poor one yesterday, and a few ones that you sort of question over the course of today. It's up for the powers that be behind the scenes to try and work that out."
Former Aussie captain, Ricky Ponting, echoed his former adversary and said the umpires had expressed concerns about its use. "This technology that we are using here is simply not as good as technology that is used in other countries," he told Seven Cricket. "You talk to the umpires, they'll tell you the same thing. They can't trust it."
Mitchell Starc called for Snicko to be "sacked" after the edge-detection technology's reliability came under the scanner for a second consecutive day in the third Ashes Test at Adelaide Oval, as Cricket Australia's (CA) chief executive sought answers over its previous malfunction.
England had a review reinstated by match referee, Jeff Crowe, on the second morning after BBG Sports, the suppliers of Snicko, conceded operator error had led to an incorrect reprieve for Alex Carey during his opening-day century. The ECB plans to lobby the ICC to review its protocols and systems as a result of the error.
Australia's players were then incensed when Jamie Smith was adjudged not out when the on-field umpires reviewed a possible catch at first slip by Usman Khawaja off Pat Cummins' bowling. Chris Gaffaney, the TV umpire, suggested that the ball had hit Smith on the helmet after consulting Snicko but Australia were convinced that it had hit him on the glove.
"Snicko needs to be sacked. That's the worst technology there is," Starc said, standing close to the stump microphone, after the decision was confirmed. "They make a mistake the other day and they make another mistake today."
Smith himself was left frustrated when given out caught behind off Cummins two overs later, when Snicko showed a spike one frame after the ball had passed the bat (within the accepted margin for error). The on-field umpires hadn't made a decision and instead referred it to Gaffaney.
Simon Taufel, the award-winning former umpire, argued that the ICC had made an error when removing the 'soft signal' from the game two years ago. "I love to see umpires making decisions," Taufel told Channel 7. "Technology is there to support [umpires]; technology is not there to replace."
"We've gone back 20 years. We've gone back to, when there's an element of doubt with the technology, the batting side are always going to get the benefit and the batter is going to stay there… The game deserves better than that and I would love to see the soft signal back in there."
Snicko, officially Real-Time Snickometer, is one of two edge-detection technologies licensed by the ICC along with the more commonly-used UltraEdge, which is owned by HawkEye. The choice of technology falls on the host broadcaster, who are also responsible for its funding, and Snicko is understood to be the cheaper of the two options.
Todd Greenberg, CA's chief executive, told SEN Radio that the governing body were "asking the right questions of the right people" after the error on the opening day. "The short answer is we're not happy with it," Greenberg said. "We don't think it's good enough, and we definitely think that we need to be assured that it won't happen again."
"Careers are at risk because of failing Snicko technology," Australian cricket's players' union says. The Australian Cricketers' Association (ACA) is demanding an urgent review into the technology, which has caused controversy in the Ashes.
ACA chief executive, Paul Marsh, says it is "nonsensical" that decision review technology rests with host broadcasters instead of cricket governing bodies.
"The players are frustrated," Marsh said on Friday. "Careers are on the line with this sort of stuff. If you go back to why it was brought in, it was to get the decisions right. And clearly we have had some issues in this match and other matches where it's not right so it's something that should be looked at urgently."
The broadcaster is using Snicko in Australia rather than the more accurate and more expensive UltraEdge technology, pioneered by Hawk-Eye Innovations and owned by Sony that is used everywhere in the world except Australia and New Zealand.
Marsh said the sport's global body, the ICC or home-nation boards should pay for the technology. "It doesn't actually make any sense that it's on the broadcasters to carry the cost of this," he said. "Their interests aren't aligned, they're different, they're about producing the broadcast for people watching."
"The game is the one that should be making sure that the right technology is making the right decisions. It's nonsensical that it doesn't sit with the ICC or the home boards."
CA has distanced the organisation from the ongoing furore, leaving it as a matter for host broadcasters.
A Fox Sports spokesman declined to comment on Friday.
"People are seeing there is an issue here that needs to be looked at," Marsh said. "We have got other parts of the world that are doing it differently and better so it's not like there's not a model out there to have a look at."
The ECB has held talks with CA about the possibility of replacing the decision review system (DRS) technology Snicko with an alternative UltraEdge for the Boxing Day Test at Melbourne after controversy on the opening two days of the Adelaide Test.
CA and Fox would need to reach a financial settlement with BBG. The ECB is understood to be involved in the discussions but the final decision rests elsewhere. BBG issued a statement accepting responsibility for the Carey error at the close of day one but didn't respond to the controversies on day two.
Speaking to the Australian radio station SEN before the start of the second day’s play, Cricket Australia’s chief executive, Todd Greenberg, expressed his unhappiness with BBG’s handling of the Carey incident. "There’s supposed to be a fail-safe with the technology and it didn’t happen. In my view that’s not good enough,” he said. “We’re asking a lot of questions of the providers through the broadcasters and hoping to get some answers so we can be assured it won’t happen again."
Any changes to protocols or licensed technologies would need to be approved and signed off by the ICC's cricket committee and chief executives' committee at their next meetings.
It's an absolute travesty at what's happened. An improvement should be made. I think it would be best for the respective host board to pay for the system and not the broadcaster. The best technology should be used. There's no room for being cheap when it comes to making critical decisions that could potentially decide the .