Opinion: Was Smith cheating in DRS move?

The leg-before-wicket decision in cricket has to be the most inflammatory law in any sport.

It is primitive at best, almost as seductive as the gladiatorial sport of the Roman Empire where the masses, baying for blood, chose thumbs up or down for mercy or death as the predator, foot on the prey's throat, waited for a ruling from the marquee corporate box in the coliseum.

It may appear a bit more civilised now but, in test cricket especially, the rule has a tendency to bring out the worst in people sporting red-stained battle scars on whites.

It speaks volumes of a summer code in all its glory and wickedness.

Fans are hooked to every slow-motion replay angle on TV, not to mention hot spots, snicko meters and Hawk-Eye's virtual bounce and path of a projectile hurtling towards the fickle furniture behind the batsman.

No matter what evidence is presented through the decision review system (DRS), one-eyed spectators, coaches and players will forever see only what they want to.

The forefinger in the air for an lbw dismissal of batsmen or a shake of the head to deny vociferous bowlers and their chorusing teammates makes the farcical dangerous yellow-card ruling on Highlanders rugby player Malakai Fekitoa last Saturday look like a tantrum in a kindergarten sandpit.

The "trigger", as many batsmen called the dreaded finger, has the propensity to erode a player's confidence at best and end their careers if they don't snap out of it so it's hardly a joking matter.

On Tuesday night Australia captain Steve Smith again showed no matter how much money and collective intelligence are invested in upgrading the DRS protagonists will find ways to circumvent the rules of engagement.

India bowler Umesh Yadev, in Australia's second dig on day four, had trapped Smith lbw on a dusty track in Bengaluru as the tourists were on 74-4 on their way to dramatically failing to chase down 189 for victory in levelling the Border-Gavaskar test series 1-all.

It's well documented that Smith's heckles rise when lbw rears its head but the emotionally-charged Aussie skipper blatantly did something that should prompt an urgent International Cricket Council special meeting.

Unhappy with the pointed finger, he charged towards non-batter Peter Handscomb obviously for a second opinion on whether he should demand a review as the seconds ticked away under the watchful eyes of umpires Nigel Llong and Richard Illingworth.

Whether Handscomb suggested it or Smith had a brain fade, the captain turned his head in the direction of the Australia stable perched in the stadium for its opinion on whether he should ask for a review.

India captain Virat Kohli latched on to Smith's gesture and lost his rag, after Llong charged down the wicket to convince the Aussie skipper to march.

Whether Smith was dead man walking is a moot point because, had he stayed, he would have burnt Australia's final review.

What is certain is his ill-fated attempt to communicate with his camp in the enclosure, which opens up the debate on whether teams should be allowed to have technology that enables them to make hasty judgements on dismissals.

Does it constitute cheating and how many teams have done that in the past?

"There are lines you don't cross on the cricket field ... I don't want to mention the word, but it falls under that bracket," Kohli reportedly said after the match.

It'll have to be a more convincing argument than Smith suggesting to Shaun Marsh's referral as: "I sort of said 'go'. As in go, have a look at it. He sort of turned around and started walking so I should have probably put my hands up and done it."

A lot was made of South Africa test captain Faf du Plessis using mint in his mouth to shine the ball so where does Smith's action sit in the scale of illegal tactics?

Devices such as laptops, tablets and TV should come under the microscope although players aren't allowed such gadgets in changing rooms.

Their impact is undeniable. For instance, the minute the camera zoomed in on a despondent Smith someone tipped him off and he quickly changed his expression and stance in the stands. Imagine how effective that can be in masking behaviour of players on the field.

Having lost the opening test match, Kohli and Smith had come under scrutiny in the tempestuous second match.

The traditionally placid Indians are a different beast under Kohli.

If there are any doubts then former Australian internationals Ian Healy and Mark Waugh lend credence to that metamorphosis when they start questioning Kohli's tactics and his lack of decorum for umpires and the opposition.

For what it's worth, Kohli going out cheaply is giving other batsmen an opportunity to show their worth because the captain needs to tone down his overbearing demeanour so that his charges don't feel intimidated on the crease.

No doubt a rash of players from both sides will lose their match fees in fines but the stage has been set alight for an intriguing third test from Friday next week.

The Bureau of Justification will be out in force, cranking up propaganda on player civility and host-friendly wickets but the reality is provocative lbw-type rules are designed to evoke hostility and nothing sells better than that.