The Ashes: Stuart Broad's 'miraculous' escape angers Australia

Australia were left fuming as England's Stuart Broad enjoyed a massive slice of luck on the third day of the first Ashes Test at Trent Bridge on Friday.

Broad, on his Nottinghamshire home ground, had made 37, with England then 297 for seven in their second innings, when he edged teenage debutant spinner Ashton Agar.

The ball clipped wicketkeeper Brad Haddin's gloves and then flew to Australia captain Michael Clarke at first slip.

Australia appealed for the catch but leading Pakistani umpire Aleem Dar ruled in the batsman's favour as Broad stood his ground.

The tourists couldn't believe the verdict but ultimately, as they'd already used up both their two permitted reviews in the innings, they had to accept it.

Australia coach Darren Lehmann's anger on the dressing room balcony was clearly visible after television replays showed Broad had got a thick edge, although it's possible Dar's view was obscured by Haddin's gloves.

At stumps on the third day, England were 230 for six in their second innings, a potentially decisive lead of 261 runs, with Broad (47 not out) having helped Ian Bell (95 not out) add an unbroken 108 for the seventh wicket.

"Every single batsman who plays cricket, no matter who you play for, has the right to wait for the umpire's decision," said England batsman Kevin Pietersen after stumps.

"We play hard and we play very, very fair and every single batsman has the right to wait for the umpire.

"Aleem Dar is a fantastic umpire and we respect his decisions. We want to worry about what goes forward and we've got a Test match to win tomorrow (Saturday)."

But Australia great Shane Warne, who captained Pietersen at Hampshire, slammed Dar's ruling and said it was just the latest in a line of crunch calls the official had got wrong.

"He always gets the crucial decisions wrong & always has, that's why he's not a great umpire!," Warne told his Twitter followers.

"We all make mistakes & it's a very tough job being an umpire, but when Dar continually makes crucial mistakes why does he keep getting a gig?"

Former England captain Michael Vaughan, who played alongside Lehmann at Yorkshire, sympathised with Australia.

"The review system was brought in to get rid of the howler, I don't see why umpire Dar couldn't have had someone in his ear saying you've got that one wrong let's just overturn that quickly," said Vaughan, now working as a commentator for BBC Radio's Test Match Special.

"This has been a terrific game but I think a lot will be talked about that incident, which is sad."

Earlier on Friday, Australia ran out of reviews when they decided to challenge a not out verdict following James Pattinson's hugely optimistic lbw appeal against Jonny Bairstow, which replays showed was missing leg stump.

And Glenn McGrath, a team-mate of Warne's in the all-conquering Australia sides of thr 1990s and early 2000s, said Clarke's men had to follow England captain Alastair Cook's example when it came to using the Decision Review System.

"DRS was brought in to correct obviously wrong decisions and that is how captains should use it. Alastair Cook does just that, he is very sparing with it, and hopefully Michael Clarke does the same after this," said fast bowling great McGrath.

'Walking', the practice whereby batsmen gave themselves out without waiting for the umpire's decision, was once a long-established tradition in English county cricket and 'non-walkers' were considered unsporting.

However, the custom in Australian cricket, from even as far back as batting great Don Bradman's time, has been to wait for the umpire's verdict.

Clarke himself didn't 'walk' when during the second Ashes Test at Adelaide in the 2010/11 he got an inside edge onto his pad off part-time spinner Pietersen and was caught at short leg. England had to seek a review before Clarke was given out.

Despite former Australia wicketkeeper Adam Gilchrist, who retired from international duty in 2008, being a noted 'walker', few other modern players have copied his lead, particularly now that decisions can be challenged by recourse to technology.