Related Articles
England captain Heather Knight expressed disappointment over the absence of the Decision Review System (DRS) during the historic women’s Test against South Africa in Bloemfontein, calling it a “sign of the status of the game”. England cruised to a commanding 286-run victory on the third day, marking their first Test win in a decade, but Knight highlighted the need for better investment in women’s cricket.
While the lack of DRS did not determine the result—South Africa were bowled out for just 64 in their second innings—its absence fueled controversy with at least three contentious umpiring decisions going against the home team.
The most notable incident came when Lauren Bell appealed for a catch off Annerie Dercksen, taken cleanly at short leg by Tammy Beaumont. Umpire Kerrin Klaaste initially ruled Dercksen not out but after consulting with her colleague, called for an on-field umpire review—a rare procedure not involving DRS. TV umpire Bongale Jele overturned the decision, even though replays showed uncertainty over an inside edge.
Knight voiced her confusion: “We all thought she hit it and obviously the umpire delayed the decision. I think the review was around whether it was a bump ball, but it was pretty clear it wasn’t, so I’m not really sure what happened there.”
South Africa head coach Mandla Mashimbyi also found the process baffling. “There was no communication and I didn’t understand why. But the umpires feel they made the right decision, and we can’t go against that.”
Table of content
More Controversial Decisions
On day one, Klaaste turned down an lbw appeal from Marizanne Kapp against Beaumont, who was batting on 2 at the time. With no DRS available, South Africa could not challenge the close call.
Day two saw another incident when Laura Wolvaardt, batting on 65, was given out lbw to Sophie Ecclestone. Wolvaardt’s frustrated reaction—throwing her hands in the air—earned her a demerit point for dissent, further underlining the tensions created by the absence of technology.
Financial Constraints Cited
According to Enoch Nkwe, South Africa’s Director of National Teams, the two boards had agreed not to use DRS for the Test during planning. Nkwe justified the decision, stating that white-ball cricket had been prioritized due to its impact on rankings and CSA’s strategic focus. He added, “Resources are currently being directed at the white-ball formats due to the significance of ODI and T20I cricket in the current women’s international cricket landscape.”
However, this reasoning sparked debate as CSA recorded a financial profit of R815 million (US$45.6 million) for the 2023-24 fiscal year. The estimated cost of DRS for the Test—US$48,500 (R880,000)—accounts for just 1% of that profit.
Knight: “It’s a Real Shame”
Knight, frustrated with the situation, revealed that the team learned about the absence of DRS only on the eve of the match. “I was pretty shocked when I found out in the umpire’s meeting. I think it’s a real shame. You come to expect it as a player now. Particularly in Test cricket, where wickets are at such a premium, it’s a really important thing to have.”
Knight concluded that the lack of DRS reflected the status and underinvestment in women’s Test cricket.
Marizanne Kapp’s Take
South African star Kapp echoed mixed feelings, noting DRS had been impactful in the white-ball series: “It’s a new thing that we have DRS available in ODIs and T20s. If I’m honest, I’d probably prefer having it in those two formats.”
While white-ball cricket remains the commercial focus for many boards, the debate around DRS highlights the need for equal investment to grow women’s Test cricket and ensure fairness in key matches. For now, the absence of the system remains a glaring reflection of the challenges women’s cricket continues to face on its journey to parity.
