The International Cricket Council has no plans to ask TV umpires to assume responsibility for front foot no balls despite last week's Ashes controversy.
The issue of bowler's overstepping without being called by the on-field officials was firmly in the spotlight at the fifth Investec Test, with both Steven Finn and Mitchell Marsh denied wickets after the line was checked retrospectively via replay, Finn having had a similar experience at Trent Bridge.
Sky television went on to show eight examples of Australia's Mitchell Johnson overstepping without being called, leading to a number of commentators suggesting the TV umpire should assume the job.
But ICC general manager, Geoff Allardice, told Press Association Sport: "The ICC is not considering any proposal to move the responsibility for calling no balls to the TV umpire, but it has been looking at new technology that allows the TV umpire to judge the legality of a delivery much faster than he has been able to in the past.
"An incorrect no ball could cost the bowling team a wicket, so the umpires have been instructed to call no ball only when they are certain that no part of the foot has landed behind the line.
"If the umpire is uncertain that the delivery is legal and a wicket falls, the no ball can be checked immediately on replay and the batsman recalled if the delivery was found to be illegal."
Allardice is eager to stress that there has been no instruction for umpires to ignore front foot until a wicket falls and also sought to praise the quality of the decision making during the series.
ICC statistics suggest a record three per cent of on-field calls were proved incorrect.
"Cricket fans usually judge the performance of international umpires by the correctness of their out and not out decisions, and in this regard the umpires have had an excellent Ashes series, with 97 per cent of their decisions correct before DRS," said Allardice.
"This is the best decision-making performance the ICC has recorded for a five-Test series.
"During the Ashes series the umpires have done an outstanding job with the correctness of their decisions, but there were some no balls that were not called and this is an area in which they can improve.
"It is incorrect to suggest the umpires aren't watching the front foot landing, and it is incorrect to suggest that the umpires are not talking to the bowlers between deliveries about their front foot placement."
Source: PA
