Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That's not how it works because hotspot is known to sometimes give false negatives. If there's a mark we can safely say he hit it but if there's no mark it doesn't mean we can be sure he didn't hit it. It's not hugely unusual for a batsman to admit nicking one that didn't show up on hotspot.I wonder: is there a provision in the rules to "reinstate" a review? I don't think there is. So keep in mind all the claims that the slightest shred of doubt even if the technology shows no evidence to support it should side with the on-field umpire's call is effectively punishing the reviewing team. Dar said not out because of an edge (presumably), Australia reviewed because they didn't think there was an edge, hotspot showed no edge but some camera angles suggested a possible deviation so we side with the on-field umpire and Australia loses a review even though the technology suggested their review was justified and the umpire was most likely wrong.
Also, the relevant evidence (i.e. side-on hotspot) wasn't even available here, so a false negative is even more likely.