It probably cost Bangladesh around 45-50 runs. India made 302 for six and while there's nothing to say India might not still have reached 300 - as they were going like a train at the time - there's equally no doubt a target of, say, 260 would have been within Bangladesh's reach.
On paper, anyway, but as they were no match for India's fine bowling attack, who dismissed them for 190, it probably didn't affect the outcome, although the Bangladesh mindset would surely have been stronger.
The decision has produced a storm of protest in Bangladesh. The International Cricket Council president Mustafa Kamal reacted, in his words, as "a fan" not a top ranking official of the sport, claiming the umpires had gone into the game with an agenda.
He questioned whether the decision was "deliberate or not".
"There was no quality in the umpiring. It seemed as if they had gone into the match with something in mind", and said the backlash would compel the ICC into further investigation. "Umpires may make mistakes. The ICC will see if this was done deliberately."
Inflammatory stuff.
At Dhaka University an effigy was burned with protesters chanting the names of the umpires.
Let's reverse the situation. Had it been, say, Shakib al Hasan, given not out in the same situation, how would India have reacted? That might have depended on the outcome.
But the bigger point is why there was no right to revisit the decision at the time.
Teams are entitled to one referral per innings. Get it wrong and that's your lot; get it successfully reversed and that one life remains.
Why not extend it to the no ball rule?
Earlier in India's innings, Mashrafe Mortaza had a hairline appeal for lbw against Suresh Raina go in favour of the batsman by a millimetre or two, the ball having been shown to have landed squarely on the edge of the pitch map.
The umpire's initial call was not out, therefore, by that millimetre or two, Bangladesh missed out. It also counted them out for any further referrals.
Surely in those situations teams should be entitled to keep their one referral. Use the available technology to help.
All food for thought for the ICC when it runs the rule over the cup, what worked, what didn't and remedy it. Sitting on their hands won't do.
It may only need a small tinker but fairness dictates it should be done.
