A row about cheating broke out as Australia beat India in the final session of a gripping and controversial Test match at the Melbourne Cricket Ground, to take a 2-1 lead in the series.

The pivotal moment on the final day in Melbourne came when Yashasvi Jaiswal was dismissed. India’s opener had reached 84 when he was given out caught behind after an Australian review. The third umpire’s decision to give him out came despite Snickometer finding no evidence of contact between ball and glove.

Jaiswal remonstrated with the on-field umpires and Australia-supporting sections of the crowd chanted, “Cheater! Cheater!” when he did not initially walk off.

The context

While India’s collapse was well under way, Jaiswal had serenely reached 84 off 208 balls, continuing his stunning start to Test cricket. Even at 140 for six, India were on course to save the Test match as long as Jaiswal remained at the crease. If he were left batting with the tail, Jaiswal would have taken as much of the strike as possible, thereby limiting Australia’s chance to attack India’s lower order.

The ball and edge

Pat Cummins, Australia’s captain, deployed a short ball, aiming to cramp up Jaiswal. The batsman shaped to pull the delivery but failed to make clean contact with the ball, which was taken by wicketkeeper Alex Carey. The ball passed very close to Jaiswal’s edge and gloves.

The appeal and decision

Australia immediately appealed, clearly believing that Jaiswal had edged the ball behind as he shaped to play a pull shot. But on-field umpire Joel Wilson ruled not out. Australia then reviewed the decision.

The review

The real-time Snickometer offered a clear verdict: Jaiswal had not made contact with the ball. Snickometer showed a flat line as the ball passed the bat and gloves.

But the video replays themselves offered a very different conclusion, seemingly showing a significant deviation in the ball’s flight after passing Jaiswal’s glove. Sharfuddoula, the Bangladeshi third umpire, trusted his eyes and identified a deflection. As such, he overturned the on-field decision, ruling that Jaiswal was out.

India were now 140 for seven. With Jaiswal gone, they promptly crashed to defeat. Yet the drama about his dismissal was only beginning.

The reaction

As he walked off, Jaiswal talked with the umpires, seemingly asking for clarity about why he was given out. The dismissal inevitably dominated the post-match discussion, with some people criticising Jaiswal for not walking initially.

Rohit Sharma, India’s captain, said his side were “unfortunate” to fall foul of technology but admitted that he thought Jaiswal had touched the ball.

“I don’t know what to make of that because the technology didn’t show anything, but with the naked eye it seemed like he did touch something,” Sharma said. “I don’t know how the umpires want to use the technology, but in all fairness, I think he did touch the ball.

“It’s about the technology, which we know is not 100 per cent – more often than not we are the ones falling on the wrong side of it. That’s where we are unfortunate.”

Cummins said he was bewildered by the debate, believing Jaiswal had clearly edged the ball.

“Think it was clear that he hit it, heard a noise, saw a deviation, so was absolutely certain that he hit it,” Cummins said. “As soon as we referred, you saw him drop his head and basically acknowledge that he hit. On screen, you can see he hit it. Ultra Edge, don’t think anyone has complete confidence and didn’t really show much, but fortunately there was enough other evidence to show it was clearly out.”

Simon Taufel, who won the Umpire of the Year award five times during his career and is now working as a pundit on Channel 7, also supported the third umpire’s decision.

“In my view, the decision was out,” Taufel said. “The third umpire did make the correct decision in the end. With the technology protocols, we do have a hierarchy of redundancy and when the umpire sees a clear deflection off the bat there is no need to go any further and use any other form of technology to prove the case. The clear deflection is conclusive evidence.”

But not all commentators agreed. Sunil Gavaskar, the legendary former India batsman, could not understand why Snickometer was ignored.

“We have seen it so many times, haven’t we, that the ball does not take the edge, but goes very close and swings later,” Gavaskar said while commentating. “From afar it seems that the ball has taken the edge. I am talking about a forward defence, not talking about this hook shot.”

Sanjay Manjrekar, the former India opener, bemoaned a lack of consistency in ignoring Snickometer. “Any other umpire would have gone, well, if the Snicko was not showing it – and I love Snicko as a technology – I’m not going to give that out. That also would be accepted by us.”

Telegraph Sport’s Michael Vaughan defended the officials and said on X: “Let’s not start saying some of the decisions were not right today. Every single decision was correct that ended up going upstairs to the third umpire.”

While the debate continues, India now need a win in the final Test to avoid relinquishing the Border-Gavaskar Trophy, which they have held since 2015.

Should Australia win at Sydney, beginning on January 3, they will seal a place in the World Test Championship final at Lord’s in June. South Africa have already clinched qualification for the final.

“It’s probably the best Test match I’ve been involved in,” said Australia’s captain and man of the match Cummins, who took three for 28 off 18 overs on Monday for six wickets in the match, and played valuable innings of 49 and 41 at No 8. “I don’t know what the crowd was today, but it was huge.

“Overall, it was one of those great wins.”