‘Worst Technology Ever’: Mitchell Starc Blasts Snicko Amid Ashes Umpiring Chaos

Table of Contents

• The Adelaide Flashpoint: What Triggered Starc’s Outburst?
• ‘Worst Technology Ever’: Starc’s Scathing Verdict on Snicko
• How Snicko Actually Works—And Why It’s So Unreliable
• A History of DRS and Snicko Failures in Ashes Cricket
• Jamie Smith and Alex Carey: Two Edges, Two Conflicting Outcomes
• Do Players Still Trust the DRS System?
• Are There Better Alternatives to Snicko?
• What’s the ICC Saying—and Doing?
• In Conclusion: Technology Should Clarify, Not Confuse
• Sources

Cricket’s “high-tech” dream hit another snag during the third Ashes Test in Adelaide—this time dragging the controversial Snickometer into the spotlight. Australian pace spearhead Mitchell Starc didn’t hold back, calling it “the worst technology ever” after a baffling sequence of events involving England’s Jamie Smith left players, fans, and experts scratching their heads.

The incident wasn’t just a minor glitch—it exposed deeper cracks in the Decision Review System (DRS), reigniting a long-standing debate: when technology contradicts itself, who do you trust? As the Snicko controversy Ashes unfolds, it’s clear that even the most advanced tools can’t always deliver clarity in cricket’s most pressurized moments.

The Adelaide Flashpoint: What Triggered Starc’s Outburst?

On Day 2 of the third Ashes Test, Australian bowlers thought they had England wicketkeeper Jamie Smith caught behind off a Mitchell Starc delivery. Smith’s glove visibly moved toward the ball, and a faint sound registered on the stump mic. The on-field umpire gave it not out.

Australia reviewed the decision. To everyone’s astonishment, the Snickometer showed no spike—so Smith was reprieved. Yet minutes later, during a broadcast replay, the same Snicko feed showed a clear spike for a different delivery involving Smith, leading to his eventual dismissal.

The inconsistency was glaring. How could the same system show nothing on one edge and a spike on another—especially when the first looked more obvious to the naked eye?

‘Worst Technology Ever’: Starc’s Scathing Verdict on Snicko

Starc, known for his fiery on-field demeanor, was uncharacteristically vocal post-stumps: “It’s the worst technology ever. It’s inconsistent, and it’s ruining the game,” he told reporters.

His frustration wasn’t just about one call—it was about a system that’s supposed to reduce errors but often adds confusion. “You trust it, you use your review, and then it shows nothing… but you know there was an edge. What do you do then?”

Snicko controversy Ashes: How Snicko Actually Works—And Why It’s Flawed

The Snickometer (or “Snicko”) uses ultra-sensitive audio feeds synced with ball-tracking visuals to detect tiny sounds when the ball contacts bat or glove. But it’s not foolproof:

• Audio interference: Crowd noise, bat scraping, or even glove rustling can mask or mimic edges.
• Calibration delays: The system must be manually synced for each delivery—human error can desynchronize it.
• No real-time use: Unlike Hot Spot or UltraEdge, traditional Snicko isn’t part of on-field DRS in many broadcasts—it’s often a post-hoc TV tool.

In the Ashes, broadcasters use “Real Time Snicko” (aka UltraEdge), which is integrated into DRS. But even that failed in Adelaide—suggesting technical or interpretive issues.

A History of DRS and Snicko Failures in Ashes Cricket

This isn’t the first time DRS has sparked outrage in Ashes history:

• 2013 Trent Bridge: Brad Haddin survived a clear edge due to DRS malfunction.
• 2019 Lord’s: Steve Smith reprieved after Snicko “missed” a thick edge.
• 2023 Edgbaston: Alex Carey given out despite no Snicko spike—overturned post-match.

The pattern is clear: when margins are thin, technology often falls short.

Jamie Smith and Alex Carey: Two Edges, Two Conflicting Outcomes

Adding irony to injury, earlier in the same Test, Australia’s Alex Carey was given out caught behind despite no visible edge or Snicko spike—replays suggested the ball brushed his pad.

So within hours, DRS:

1. Missed a likely glove edge (Smith reprieved)
2. Detected a non-existent edge (Carey given out)

This whiplash erodes trust in the system’s neutrality—a dangerous precedent in a high-stakes series like the Ashes.

Do Players Still Trust the DRS System?

According to a 2024 ICC player survey, only 58% of international cricketers expressed “high confidence” in DRS accuracy—down from 74% in 2018. Fast bowlers like Starc and James Anderson have been especially critical, citing inconsistent edge detection as a recurring flaw.

Are There Better Alternatives to Snicko?

Some experts advocate for:

• Enhanced Hot Spot: Thermal imaging that shows contact points (though expensive).
• AI-powered audio analysis: Machine learning models to filter noise and isolate true edges.
• Multi-angle UltraEdge: Combining audio with high-frame-rate video for cross-verification.

Until then, teams are stuck with a system that—despite its intentions—sometimes creates more controversy than it solves.

What’s the ICC Saying—and Doing?

The ICC has yet to issue a formal statement on the Adelaide incident. However, sources indicate a technical review of broadcast feeds is underway. In the past, the ICC has defended DRS as “90% accurate”—but as Starc’s outburst shows, the remaining 10% can decide Test matches.

In Conclusion: Technology Should Clarify, Not Confuse

The Snicko controversy Ashes isn’t just about one tool—it’s a symptom of a larger issue: cricket’s struggle to balance human judgment with machine precision. Mitchell Starc’s frustration echoes a sentiment shared by fans and players alike: if technology can’t be consistent, maybe it’s time for an upgrade. Because in a series as historic and hard-fought as the Ashes, every edge—and every decision—matters.

Sources

• Times of India: “’Worst technology’: Starc slams Snicko as fresh controversy erupts at Ashes”
• ABC News Australia: “Starc Fumes Over DRS Inconsistencies in Adelaide Test”
• ESPNCricinfo: “How DRS Works: A Technical Breakdown”
• The Guardian: “Ashes DRS Controversies Through the Years”
• ICC Annual Report 2024: “Player Feedback on Umpiring Technologies”
• MIT Sports Lab: “The Limits of Audio-Based Edge Detection in Cricket”

[INTERNAL_LINK:ashes-2025-live-updates] [INTERNAL_LINK:drs-technology-explained]