New Zealand seek ICC clarification on DRS 'clanger'

New Zealand have contacted the International Cricket Council seeking answers over a contentious review that went against them at a crucial time in the fluctuating day-night Test against Australia, coach Mike Hesson said today.
Hesson is still fuming over the much-criticised decision by TV umpire Nigel Llong on Saturday's second day to turn down a Decision Review System (DRS) referral for a catch off Australia's Nathan Lyon.
Lyon survived after the "Hot Spot" thermal imaging revealed a mark on the back of his bat before he had scored.
It was a major let-off for Australia, in trouble at 118 for eight and still trailing the Kiwis first innings total by 84 runs in a low-scoring Test.

Lyon was walking off the ground believing he was out before returning to continue batting and join in a record Australian trans-Tasman series 74-run ninth-wicket stand with Peter Nevill to deliver his side a vital 22-run first innings lead. Australia won the low-scoring Adelaide third Test by three wickets on the third day Sunday to clinch a 2-0 series victory.
"It was excellent, wasn't it? I think everyone at the ground saw what unfolded," Hesson told reporters.

"It's been spoken about a lot. We've certainly made a representation to the ICC and at present we're still awaiting an acceptable response."

Hesson said he had contacted match referee Roshan Mahanama but did not comment on what his side was specifically demanding from the ICC.
But Hesson was clear about his views on Llong and the
DRS.
"I don't think there's anything wrong with the technology at all. The technology has got a bit of a bad rap. We've put our case forward and we are awaiting a response."
Hesson said his side would "never know" whether the disputed decision could have changed the result.
"The game carried on and took a number of other twists and turns after that, so it's something that I can't answer. But it certainly had an impact," he said.

ICC chief executive Dave Richardson told the Sydney Daily Telegraph he was adamant Llong followed correct "process", and in the end it boiled down to a "judgement call".
"That's not appropriate for me to comment on. I'm sure people have already made their mind up about that already," he said. "Sometimes a decision can be quite crucial in the context of a match.
"No issues (with the process). I was watching it on television when it happened and I think the process was OK," he added.
"Umpiring decisions are mostly up to the umpire's judgement and you can't be guaranteed which way it's going to go in individual instances.