I think there always will be a bit of controversy when someone is as clearly out as Broad was and opts not to walk. Personally, I'd prefer to see players walk but recognize that as the batsman's choice and am not sure I can complain too much as a player not walking is acting within the laws of the game.

From the other side, I was interested to read that Adam Gilchrist had been accused of showing disrespect to the umpires for his decisions to walk so perhaps you can't win either way.

As for tainting the series. I don't know how the rest of it will go by I think this particular match will be remembered for its twists and turns, Agar's remarkable innings at no 11 and an exiting finish. OK, there were a couple of controversial points (Trott given out was another) but I think very few would see the game itself as anything other than an excellent test match.