THE one moment of big disappointment for the 6,000 Durham fans at Lord's on Saturday was the controversial dismissal of Phil Mustard one run short of a thrilling half-century, which would have brought the house down.
It looked a bad lbw decision by umpire Ian Gould even before replays showed that the ball had pitched outside leg stump.
But what followed did little for the game's image as Mustard had almost reached the gate before, with the benefit of the replay, he was encouraged to refer the decision to the third umpire.
Under a much-maligned trial, teams have been allowed two referrals each in televised Friends Provident Trophy matches this season. But in what looks a clear case of mates sticking together, there has not been a single instance of the third umpire over-ruling a decision.
The rules say the referral must be made immediately, so most fans would have wondered what on earth Mustard was doing when he turned before going through the gate, obviously confused about what to do.
He had left it too late, but it would have been a brave call on his part to make an immediate referral as he would have known it was a dubious decision but could not have been certain he wasn't out.
The third umpire was Trevor Jesty, a former Hampshire player who has never given Durham the lickings of a dog. So it was no surprise at all when they did later make a referral that he turned it down.
This came when Kevin Pietersen drove the ball straight back to Ottis Gibson, who clearly felt he had touched the ball before it hit the non-striker's stumps with John Crawley well out of his ground.
Gibson's immediate appeal was rejected by Peter Hartley, but Dale Benkenstein referred the decision to Jesty and replays seemed to suggest that the ball had brushed Gibson's finger.
But again the rules state that "a clear and obvious mistake" has to have been made for a decision to be overturned and Jesty could just about get away with arguing this wasn't the case.
Crawley was on two at the time and went on to make 68, keeping Hampshire afloat when they might have been sunk without trace.
While these cases ultimately had no bearing on the result, the referrals experiment has obviously failed.
In the unlikely event that it is to continue it should be with an independent arbiter making the decisions, not a member of the umpires' panel.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article