'Mother Cricket' delivered a payback for Michael Vaughan after his alleged lunchtime tirade at AB de Villiers.

It was Vaughan, according to South Africa coach Mickey Arthur, who led the line as England left De Villiers in no doubt what they thought about him claiming a slip catch against Andrew Strauss on the first morning of the second Test.

Strauss was recalled - as was Hashim Amla, albeit less promptly, much later in the day after Arthur had gestured from the players' balcony that his number three should turn back and query a catch Vaughan thought he had taken off Andrew Flintoff at mid off.

"It's fair to say that AB took a lot of criticism at lunchtime from some of the England players - from Michael Vaughan himself," Arthur revealed, as he reflected on an intriguing day which finished with his team 101 for three in reply to 203 all out.

It was the controversy which overshadowed the scoreboard, though - and left Arthur philosophising about natural justice.

"It's amazing there's a lady up there called Mother Cricket, who doesn't sleep - and it came back to haunt Michael Vaughan later in the day," he said.

Arthur is an enthusiastic advocate of a video referral system which was suggested but ultimately not adopted for this high-profile series - although it seems third-umpire advice nonetheless played a part in today's decisions.

Whatever those details, Arthur is in no doubt the correct conclusions were reached in both cases.

Still recalling the raised voices over the lunchtime crockery, he added: "AB didn't say anything to Michael. I think he just listened.

"He is a really good, honest guy who plays the game in the right spirit - and he would never for one minute consider claiming a catch that he didn't think was out.

"He thought it had gone from one hand to the other."

The South Africa coach accepts, however, that the ball was grounded - as was Vaughan's attempted catch.

Of De Villiers', he conceded: "It looked pretty ugly on the telly.

"He felt really bad about it, and that is the nature of AB.

"They are two separate incidents. I think both balls have hit the ground."

The difference by close of play was that Strauss survived to add just four more runs towards an inadequate England total, in which fast bowlers Morne Morkel (four for 52) and Dale Steyn (four for 76) mopped up most of the wickets - while Amla remained unbeaten after his reprieve.

"I'm 100% sure it bounced," Arthur said of the Amla incident.

He had no concerns either about making sure the batsman - who very nearly made his way terminally off the pitch - eventually stopped and turned round before it was too late.

"When it actually happened we thought it looked 50/50. Luckily the replay came up before Hash was off the ground, and I could get out there and tell him to stand," he said.

"It is very much my business. Hashim Amla is probably the most polite guy in the world, a very disciplined boy. He wouldn't have questioned anything.

"I felt I was well within my rights to go out there and tell him to stand so we could get the correct decision - and I believe the correct decision was made.

"I think it was very, very clear."

Amla himself, on nine at the time, had his doubts from the outset.

"Hash did have some thoughts. He was walking off, and (his partner) Ashwell (Prince) questioned the umpire - because he felt he saw it bounce," Arthur explained.

"I felt I needed to tell one of our key batters, a guy in form, to stay on the ground so that the correct decision could be made."

Arthur was at pains to make it clear, though, that he is not calling into question the England captain's integrity.

"I would never say Vaughan was dishonest," he said. "I'm not for one minute saying Michael Vaughan knew it had bounced."

Arthur's thoughts were echoed by Steyn.

"As Mickey said, the right decisions were made. We got on with the game - and I think so should they," he said.

England coach Peter Moores unsurprisingly stood up for his man too.

"Vaughany caught it clean, but when he was in the huddle there was a big commotion - because of what was on the big screen," he said.

"It was Vaughany who said to the umpires, 'I think you should refer it'. But he said he thought it was a clean catch - and still thinks it's a clean catch."