The laws of the game state: "The ball shall be considered to be dead when it is clear to the bowler's end umpire that the fielding side and both batters at the wicket have ceased to regard it as in play."

Carey clearly did not think the ball was dead - he threw it as soon as he could. Bairstow did believe it to be dead, with the added variable being the end of the over.

The key seems to be standing umpire Ahsan Raza, who was not watching the action and preparing to return a cap to bowler Green as the ball hit the stumps.

The fact that both batsman considered the ball to be dead is further enhanced by the fact that the standing umpire was not watching, which implies that he thought the ball was dead too. The fielding side obviously think it was in play, so the only unbiased opinion is that of the umpire who appeared to think that the ball was dead by his actions.

I supposed that had to come up with a new way to cheat since they can't use sand paper this time!

I am with you on this, just one point though, the laws being quoted refer to the umpire at the bowlers end (the one who was no longer interested in what was going on, giving the cap back etc, so when the umpires have made the decision to uphold the stumping was that decision made by the square leg umpire or the off field video (Cricket VAR types) & if so would the bowlers end umpire be consulted for his opinion ?

The Bairstow stumping was unsporting and shouldn't have happened. Bairstow was not trying to gain any advantage. It's very Australia to pull out a dirty trick like that. Cummins Mr Nice Guy reputation has gone down the pan, he's just as bad as Warner, Smith etc. The appeal should have been withdrawn. It does stoke the fire nicely for the Headingly Test.

However, the reason we lost the Test was due to the moronic batting against the short ball in the first innings. We were in a position to build a healthy lead but totally threw it away.

The teams are evenly matched, we just need to read the situation better. Ben Stokes was an excellent example of that yesterday with his diligent batting.

Two things:

First, a rule change which would have meant Bairstow wasn't legally out would be extremely hard, if not impossible, to frame.

Second, I don't think that that incident will be repeated for many years, if ever. As someone said, it was a "brutal lesson", which will have been learnt throughout the game.