Who reviewed Kohli's caught behind?

[Trichromatic]

NZ didn't, umpires?

[Adamant]

Yes, the Idiot Umpire. 

 

[Adamant]

Hey Kane, why waste your reviews? Let me take a review myself. 

Edited June 19, 2021 by Adamant

[Serpico]

It was an umpire's review for a low catch, and not a player review. And the third umpire is allowed to check if bat was involved 

[Tibarn]

Umpire reviewed, but on cricinfo Dale Steyn and Manjrekar both agreed he was wrong. Steyn said that he has never seen something like this happen before. 

 

Has a review in this fashion ever been taken before?

[Trichromatic]

13 hours ago, Serpico said:

It was an umpire's review for a low catch, and not a player review. And the third umpire is allowed to check if bat was involved 

 

What was the soft signal in that case?

[Serpico]

1 hour ago, Trichromatic said:

 

What was the soft signal in that case?

not out i think 

 

[New guy]

2 minutes ago, Serpico said:

not out i think 

 

The attachment says soft signal was out. I think people are getting it wrong. Umpires thought it was out, so they asked third umpire to check for clean catch.  Third umpire checked for nick too and said kohli didn't. 

 

So basically third umpire saved time otherwise kohli would have had to review. It was equivalent to umpire giving it out LBW and then third umpire over ruling 

[Sandeep99]

Umpire was convinced it was out, didn't dare to give it out and asked third umpire to check. Plain and simple.