To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
By Shilpa
July 25 2013
Shilpa is thankful that Indian fans don't have to contend with DRS in India series but having seen its usage in the recently concluded Champions Trophy and now in the first two Tests of the Ashes series she has some keen observations
First, if this is not already being done, it is crucial that just like umpires are trained in their normal umpiring craft there should be proper training for them in using DRS. There should be detailed and in-depth sessions explaining how the technology works and what its limitations are. In particular they must be trained properly on how to assess various pieces of technology together, such as Hawkeye, Hotspot, Stump Mic, Slow Motion camera, and Snicko. As things currently stand, not each and every technology is used for DRS referrals in each and every match, and umpires, including 3rd Umpires sitting in the box off the field must be well versed in how these various technologies, complement and or negate each other, and which is more reliable etc. when there is conflicting evidence.
Second, it is clear that the rules for DRS implementation themselves are a work in progress. It would appear that the ICC is trying to formulate rules on the fly as they go along, trying in a piecemeal manner to work out kinks in the system. For instance currently the same delivery hitting part of the stump is sometimes out and sometimes not out depending on what the on field umpire decides. Yet after two appeals on such decisions that a team loses, even absolute howlers given by the umpire cannot be reversed. This really defeats the whole purpose of the DRS system, so it must be reviewed.
There are two main options to address this problem. One is to allow teams that lose appeals on close 50/50 decisions also called umpire’s call decisions to not have those count against them. Only decisions by umpires that are clearly right but still appealed by a team should count against that team. After all if the umpire is not sure, how can you penalize a side for asking for a review of the decision? The second option is to leave the decision to use DRS to the umpires themselves. But this runs the risk of umpires not reviewing close decisions against certain sides. However if you look at how often even relatively straightforward run outs are asked to be reviewed by umpires, this won’t be that big an issue. Of course one could envision a hybrid of the two options that allows for limited DRS review by teams as currently practiced, but giving the 3rd Umpire the unilateral right to review for howlers.
Thirdly, there are those setting and operating the equipment used in the DRS, who are neither the Cricket Boards of a particular nation nor the ICC but rather a third party, often associated with a broadcaster or other media outlet. And when sometimes they do not set the equipment right or do not operate it accurately and appropriately, there is nobody for the players and administrators to hold accountable.
Finally, on field umpires have mentally switched off a bit or have gotten mentally lazy. They believe there is a second chance that the DRS will fix their less than perfect decisions. Hence they don’t aspire for perfection, almost like when we know there is a spell check we type approximate spellings in a word document, assuming that the software will correct the mistakes, which it often does incorrectly and with hilarious results.
Thus in the past poor decisions which would see an umpire roasted by the fans and hauled over the coals by the media, is now conveniently passed on by the umpires and the focus is shifted to the debate between pro-DRS(look we told you we need technology ) and anti-DRS lobby ( look DRS sucks) while the umpire gets away scot free. In the first two matches of the Ashes inept umpiring was being shielded and the umpires were getting away with far less criticism then they deserved.
Some may say that human error of the on field umpire has been replaced by human error of the on field umpire + equipment operators error + 3rd umpire's errors and multiplying three fold the potential for cock-ups which in the name of reducing umpiring errors is actually making cricket a game of inglorious uncertainties and dragged out anti-climactic controversies instead of glorious uncertainties and high drama.
To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Indian Cricket Fever (IP Logged)
Date: 25/07/2013 20:00
What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014:03:06:18:10:45 by Birbal.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014:03:06:18:10:45 by Birbal.
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Birbal (IP Logged)
Date: 26/07/2013 03:46
Some very cogent and relevant points made by shilpa...
Especially on the training of umps and the interpretation of the results of various technologies...
Also, the idea that there is now three different places where HUMAN ERROR can creep into a decision: umpires on the field, umpre off the field, and technology operator... definitely means more places to mess up...
Especially on the training of umps and the interpretation of the results of various technologies...
Also, the idea that there is now three different places where HUMAN ERROR can creep into a decision: umpires on the field, umpre off the field, and technology operator... definitely means more places to mess up...
DRS or no DRS - Part 2 
Posted by: chak de Dilli (IP Logged)
Date: 01/08/2013 13:12
he he
even howlers are being given by on field umpire and not being corrected by third umpir with DRS!!!
I am so glad India hasnt chosen DRS until it's fit for the purpose
even howlers are being given by on field umpire and not being corrected by third umpir with DRS!!!
I am so glad India hasnt chosen DRS until it's fit for the purpose
Re: DRS or no DRS - Part 2
Posted by: chak de Dilli (IP Logged)
Date: 01/08/2013 13:15
BTW, I am talking about Khawaja. Not that it would have mattered but who knows! it would have
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Birbal (IP Logged)
Date: 01/08/2013 17:18
HOWLERS continue... DRS is exactly as shilpa pointed out.. .3 TIMES the human error..
What a FACK was the 3rd umpire thinking in the Khawaja decision?
What a FACK was the 3rd umpire thinking in the Khawaja decision?
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: shilpa (IP Logged)
Date: 01/08/2013 17:32
the ashes
T3
D1
Usman Khwaja b. DRS
DRS gets his customary minimum one victim per inning.....that's 10% of the wickets eaten up by DRS.
he is taking wickets.....but he's driving nails in his own coofin..this guy DRS
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013:08:01:17:33:43 by shilpa.
T3
D1
Usman Khwaja b. DRS
DRS gets his customary minimum one victim per inning.....that's 10% of the wickets eaten up by DRS.
he is taking wickets.....but he's driving nails in his own coofin..this guy DRS
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013:08:01:17:33:43 by shilpa.
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Birbal (IP Logged)
Date: 01/08/2013 17:56
Actually another HOWLER was when Smith survived LBW and England having no appeals left had to just take it...
THree Reds but FUDDY DUDDY Tony Hill thinks NOT OUT...hahahaha
DRS as currently used SUCKS!!!
Broad to Smith, no run, massive appeal for lbw, it looks mighty close! Tony Hill thinks for a long time they shakes his head. He was caught coming forward by a delivery on off stump. Only thing could be outside the line? No reviews left and that was out. Three reds on the replays
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013:08:01:18:02:18 by Birbal.
THree Reds but FUDDY DUDDY Tony Hill thinks NOT OUT...hahahaha
DRS as currently used SUCKS!!!
Broad to Smith, no run, massive appeal for lbw, it looks mighty close! Tony Hill thinks for a long time they shakes his head. He was caught coming forward by a delivery on off stump. Only thing could be outside the line? No reviews left and that was out. Three reds on the replays
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013:08:01:18:02:18 by Birbal.
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: shilpa (IP Logged)
Date: 02/08/2013 10:05
DRS reactions:
Gideon Haigh
Last updated at 12:01AM, August 2 2013
“You’re messing with my career, Darrell,” Mark Ramprakash complained to Hair of that ilk when disgruntled to be given out in a Lord’s Test some years ago. Right or not, at least Ramprakash knew who to blame.
As Usman Khawaja walked off just before lunch at Old Trafford yesterday, he could only shake his head, and inwardly shake a fist at “the system” — a technological/bureaucratic nightmare that has almost become a third competitor in this Asges series.
'The DRS had another of those days when it looks like your grandma trying to make a call on a smartphone'
DRS a Joke wearing thin
[www.thetimes.co.uk]
Richard Hobson
Kumar Dharmasena is sitting at home watching the Zapruder video of Kennedy’s assassination. “Interesting,” he thinks, and rewinds. After a few more plays he rings the Pentagon. “That bullet,” he says, “I think it missed.”
A man is in court for stealing a watch. The prosecution offers no CCTV evidence or witnesses and the watch is never found. Judge Dharmasena deliberates and comes to a guilty verdict. “I just thought he nicked it,” he explains.
Gideon Haigh
Last updated at 12:01AM, August 2 2013
“You’re messing with my career, Darrell,” Mark Ramprakash complained to Hair of that ilk when disgruntled to be given out in a Lord’s Test some years ago. Right or not, at least Ramprakash knew who to blame.
As Usman Khawaja walked off just before lunch at Old Trafford yesterday, he could only shake his head, and inwardly shake a fist at “the system” — a technological/bureaucratic nightmare that has almost become a third competitor in this Asges series.
'The DRS had another of those days when it looks like your grandma trying to make a call on a smartphone'
DRS a Joke wearing thin
[www.thetimes.co.uk]
Richard Hobson
Kumar Dharmasena is sitting at home watching the Zapruder video of Kennedy’s assassination. “Interesting,” he thinks, and rewinds. After a few more plays he rings the Pentagon. “That bullet,” he says, “I think it missed.”
A man is in court for stealing a watch. The prosecution offers no CCTV evidence or witnesses and the watch is never found. Judge Dharmasena deliberates and comes to a guilty verdict. “I just thought he nicked it,” he explains.
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: shilpa (IP Logged)
Date: 02/08/2013 10:06
Agnew on DRS writing on BBC
A lot of the newspaper headlines will be about the decision review system again and it is very frustrating and disappointing that in an Ashes Test we are talking about something that should only be a minor aspect of the contest.
I have always felt that the game has pushed DRS too quickly, too soon. I have gone a bit quiet on that over the last couple of years because it is here and it is pointless to rail against technology that is being used.
But this series has shown there are still issues with it technically and in terms of its implementation by umpires. The TV umpire has to find good reasons to overturn the on-field decision and in the case of Khawaja's dismissal there were plenty.
There were several instances on Thursday that led you to believe there are still issues with DRS. Hot Spot did not seem to reveal itself at all, and there were strange things going on with the 'Snickometer' marks, which were not matching up to where the sound looked like it was being made.
DRS is not satisfactory at the moment and, unless it is going to be 100% accurate, what is the point of it? It is still causing all these arguments and it was supposed to come in and kill the arguments stone dead.
Test Match Special analysis
Alec Stewart
Ex-England captain & Test Match Special summariser "Ridiculous decisions by both the on and off-field umpires. DRS is creating yet more controversy. Is it any wonder players don't walk?"
With each passing day of this Ashes series, India, who have taken a lot of stick for their anti-DRS stance, have been proved to be more and more right. It is just not working properly.
The authorities will not withdraw it but they are going to have to do something about it pretty quickly because it is losing credibility - and once it loses credibility there are going to be more problems.
A lot of the newspaper headlines will be about the decision review system again and it is very frustrating and disappointing that in an Ashes Test we are talking about something that should only be a minor aspect of the contest.
I have always felt that the game has pushed DRS too quickly, too soon. I have gone a bit quiet on that over the last couple of years because it is here and it is pointless to rail against technology that is being used.
But this series has shown there are still issues with it technically and in terms of its implementation by umpires. The TV umpire has to find good reasons to overturn the on-field decision and in the case of Khawaja's dismissal there were plenty.
There were several instances on Thursday that led you to believe there are still issues with DRS. Hot Spot did not seem to reveal itself at all, and there were strange things going on with the 'Snickometer' marks, which were not matching up to where the sound looked like it was being made.
DRS is not satisfactory at the moment and, unless it is going to be 100% accurate, what is the point of it? It is still causing all these arguments and it was supposed to come in and kill the arguments stone dead.
Test Match Special analysis
Alec Stewart
Ex-England captain & Test Match Special summariser "Ridiculous decisions by both the on and off-field umpires. DRS is creating yet more controversy. Is it any wonder players don't walk?"
With each passing day of this Ashes series, India, who have taken a lot of stick for their anti-DRS stance, have been proved to be more and more right. It is just not working properly.
The authorities will not withdraw it but they are going to have to do something about it pretty quickly because it is losing credibility - and once it loses credibility there are going to be more problems.
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: shilpa (IP Logged)
Date: 02/08/2013 10:07
and more reactions:
[www.espncricinfo.com]
Usman Khawaja's dismissal before lunch at Old Trafford, adjudged caught behind after the on-field umpire's call was reviewed and upheld, has triggered an outpouring of furious tweets from former players and even the Australian prime minister. Here's a selection:
Kevin Rudd: "That was one of the worst cricket umpiring decisions I have ever seen" © PA Photos
"I've just sat down to watch the test. That was one of the worst cricket umpiring decisions I have ever seen. KRudd"
Kevin Rudd, Australian prime minister
"Usman Khawaja has every right to knock on the umpires door over lunch & just ask HOW?"
Tom Moody, former Australia batsman
"That is a ridiculous decision by both the on & off field umpires. DRS creating yet more controversy. Any wonder players don't walk!"
Alec Stewart, former England captain
"And people say you should Walk .... No chance when you get decisions like that...."
Michael Vaughan, former England captain
"DRS was introduced to eradicate the human howlers...humans are out to prove that no technology can eliminate human errors."
Aakash Chopra, former India batsman
"Umpires protecting each other is the main reason DRS is causing controversy!"
Scott Styris, former New Zealand allrounder
"Shocking decision to give #usmanKhwaja out. What is the technology there for? Umpires may need a trip to specsavers n get a hearing aid."
Azhar Mahmood, former Pakistan allrounder
"Thing to remember is that without DRS we would still be saying that was a shocking decision. Not the system's fault but those operating it."
Steve James, former England batsman
"Now that's b.ull-shyytee !!! Sorry ... Now you all know why I hate DRS! b.ull-shyytee."
Dean Jones, former Australia batsman.
"It's really quite obvious why we end up enslaved to robots in the future."
Jarrod Kimber, ESPNcricinfo
"just saw the khawaja dismissal. oh dear. you dream of playing the ashes and this is what you get...."
Harsha Bhogle, commentator and ESPNcricinfo columnist
[www.bbc.co.uk]
Legendary Australia leg-spinner Warne added: "That's a shocker, that's an absolute shocking decision."
The decision review system has been under constant scrutiny during the Ashes following a series of controversial decisions
[www.espncricinfo.com]
Usman Khawaja's dismissal before lunch at Old Trafford, adjudged caught behind after the on-field umpire's call was reviewed and upheld, has triggered an outpouring of furious tweets from former players and even the Australian prime minister. Here's a selection:
Kevin Rudd: "That was one of the worst cricket umpiring decisions I have ever seen" © PA Photos
"I've just sat down to watch the test. That was one of the worst cricket umpiring decisions I have ever seen. KRudd"
Kevin Rudd, Australian prime minister
"Usman Khawaja has every right to knock on the umpires door over lunch & just ask HOW?"
Tom Moody, former Australia batsman
"That is a ridiculous decision by both the on & off field umpires. DRS creating yet more controversy. Any wonder players don't walk!"
Alec Stewart, former England captain
"And people say you should Walk .... No chance when you get decisions like that...."
Michael Vaughan, former England captain
"DRS was introduced to eradicate the human howlers...humans are out to prove that no technology can eliminate human errors."
Aakash Chopra, former India batsman
"Umpires protecting each other is the main reason DRS is causing controversy!"
Scott Styris, former New Zealand allrounder
"Shocking decision to give #usmanKhwaja out. What is the technology there for? Umpires may need a trip to specsavers n get a hearing aid."
Azhar Mahmood, former Pakistan allrounder
"Thing to remember is that without DRS we would still be saying that was a shocking decision. Not the system's fault but those operating it."
Steve James, former England batsman
"Now that's b.ull-shyytee !!! Sorry ... Now you all know why I hate DRS! b.ull-shyytee."
Dean Jones, former Australia batsman.
"It's really quite obvious why we end up enslaved to robots in the future."
Jarrod Kimber, ESPNcricinfo
"just saw the khawaja dismissal. oh dear. you dream of playing the ashes and this is what you get...."
Harsha Bhogle, commentator and ESPNcricinfo columnist
[www.bbc.co.uk]
Legendary Australia leg-spinner Warne added: "That's a shocker, that's an absolute shocking decision."
The decision review system has been under constant scrutiny during the Ashes following a series of controversial decisions
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: shilpa (IP Logged)
Date: 02/08/2013 10:11
i believe DRS in it's current form is already deemed untenable.
it has to undergo major changes before the next major series that is the ashes in Australi...else it will be put in atleast temporary suspension
it has to undergo major changes before the next major series that is the ashes in Australi...else it will be put in atleast temporary suspension
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: chak de Dilli (IP Logged)
Date: 02/08/2013 11:42
Technology is not advanced enough to be made good use of as DRS. Half cooked tech is going to provide howelers after howlers and even marginal decisions become howlers. Once number of reviews are finished, umpires takes it easy and become complecent as they know that their decision cannot be challanged. Hence you ge more howlers from umpires. The whole thing is a complete farce. I am so glad India is against it. Still there are nuts in cricketing world who think technology is the aswer to umpiring woes. How daft can one get is beyond my understanding
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Meet_New_Mr_India (IP Logged)
Date: 02/08/2013 18:26
Hahahahahahah --> Siddle to Bresnan, OUT, back of a length, Bresnan pulls, there's a cry for caught behind and it's given out. Just a little too full for the stroke and Bresnan was late on the shot, was given out as Haddin took the catch to his right and walks off after a chat with Cook. But the replays show he missed it comfortably, the ball caught his trousers. Obviously Cook decided it wasn't worth a review but Bresnan was actually nowhere near that
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Birbal (IP Logged)
Date: 02/08/2013 20:40
It is like that JErry Sienfeld episode and Elaine saving her last "sponge" for someone "sponge worthy".... guess Bresnan was not "DRS worthy"...hahahahaa
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Martian (IP Logged)
Date: 02/08/2013 20:50
Quote:Birbal
It is like that JErry Sienfeld episode and Elaine saving her last "sponge" for someone "sponge worthy".... guess Bresnan was not "DRS worthy"...hahahahaa
ha haaa..that was very funny..It should hurt him worse than given out by DRS ..lol
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: shilpa (IP Logged)
Date: 03/08/2013 07:11
the DRS comedy show continues.......even the master-of-the-art-of-review-team Eng doesn't trust what button the 3rd umpire might hit when a clear case of inches of air between bat and ball is referred.
total collapse of all the underlying principle(s) that DRS was introduced to address.
I hate to say......i told ya nails in the coffin of this guy with every passing inning
total collapse of all the underlying principle(s) that DRS was introduced to address.
I hate to say......i told ya nails in the coffin of this guy with every passing inning
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Birbal (IP Logged)
Date: 03/08/2013 15:53
Now Clarke fails to review Pietersen...
C'mon Mikey... Kevin is definitely "sponge worthy"...Hhahahaha...
C'mon Mikey... Kevin is definitely "sponge worthy"...Hhahahaha...
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: shilpa (IP Logged)
Date: 03/08/2013 19:00
yesterday Bresnan didn't review inspite of being 6 inches away from the ball..for the lack of trust " god knows what the DRS will show or not show and who knows what button umpire might press"
and today KP reviewed very well knowing he was a goner thinking
" god knows what the DRS will show or not show and who knows what button umpire might press"...let's take a chance and see if I get a lucky break
the joke continues to be on DRS
and today KP reviewed very well knowing he was a goner thinking
" god knows what the DRS will show or not show and who knows what button umpire might press"...let's take a chance and see if I get a lucky break
the joke continues to be on DRS
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Birbal (IP Logged)
Date: 03/08/2013 22:23
Actually, Clarke failed to Review Peitersen lbw... to Lyon...and then Hawkeye showed that even if given not out it would have been out...i.e. basically a HOWLER...
But Clarke was so scared of using up his precious two wrong decisions that he chickened out from using it against Pietersen...
Then when Lehmann signaled out from the pavilion... he looked gutted...hahahaaa...
But Clarke was so scared of using up his precious two wrong decisions that he chickened out from using it against Pietersen...
Then when Lehmann signaled out from the pavilion... he looked gutted...hahahaaa...
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Meet_New_Mr_India (IP Logged)
Date: 04/08/2013 14:57
Birbal - looks like ICC might implement your idea after all... [m.espncricinfo.com]
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Birbal (IP Logged)
Date: 04/08/2013 17:14
Wonder if they will credit getting the idea from this board?...
I have been crying myself hoarse saying this for at least two YEARS!!!
I have been crying myself hoarse saying this for at least two YEARS!!!
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Birbal (IP Logged)
Date: 04/08/2013 17:17
Also notice the patronizing language... BCCI have been offered a solution... WTF are ICC to offer anything to the BCCI...especially after they rip the idea off from elsewhere...
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: shilpa (IP Logged)
Date: 05/08/2013 00:37
[www.espncricinfo.com]
it appears India has asked for unlimited reviews to accept DRS
and ICC has offered a number of compromises..including not losing reviews on marginal calls.
India's opposition to DRS with a constructive and open mind can be an undisguised blessing.
Constructively India can use their clout to guide the DRS ( means all 3 components--including technology, umpiring, laws)...towards a more consistently acceptable version.
the Chaos and Can of worms that it has been......India if acting constructively will get the support of most nations.
Dalmiya is a better diplomat...sophisticated and refined....who knows "Power is in knowing...and not showing"
unlike the crasss uncouth bully that Srinivasan comes across.
It will do Indian and world cricket a lot of good if Srinivasan does not get re-elected in the upcoming Septemer elections of BCCI. And it does appear highly unlikely that various politking factions would want to touch Srinivasan again in an executive role after all the accustaions and public opinion against him
it appears India has asked for unlimited reviews to accept DRS
and ICC has offered a number of compromises..including not losing reviews on marginal calls.
India's opposition to DRS with a constructive and open mind can be an undisguised blessing.
Constructively India can use their clout to guide the DRS ( means all 3 components--including technology, umpiring, laws)...towards a more consistently acceptable version.
the Chaos and Can of worms that it has been......India if acting constructively will get the support of most nations.
Dalmiya is a better diplomat...sophisticated and refined....who knows "Power is in knowing...and not showing"
unlike the crasss uncouth bully that Srinivasan comes across.
It will do Indian and world cricket a lot of good if Srinivasan does not get re-elected in the upcoming Septemer elections of BCCI. And it does appear highly unlikely that various politking factions would want to touch Srinivasan again in an executive role after all the accustaions and public opinion against him
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: chak de Dilli (IP Logged)
Date: 05/08/2013 12:56
ha ha
These eng, aus players and their supporters used to mock India for not supportign Technology and DRS. Now with egg with tar on their faces, they all are tlking about how tech is not advanced enuf and slow etc.... All of sudden, snicko is in favor and hot spot is out
soooo nice to sit on the side and watch eng-aus nuts talking about DRS. Such a huge enjoyment
These eng, aus players and their supporters used to mock India for not supportign Technology and DRS. Now with egg with tar on their faces, they all are tlking about how tech is not advanced enuf and slow etc.... All of sudden, snicko is in favor and hot spot is out
soooo nice to sit on the side and watch eng-aus nuts talking about DRS. Such a huge enjoyment
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: shilpa (IP Logged)
Date: 05/08/2013 15:04
the DRS drama of the day.....came from KP's dismissal,
given ct. Behind...but Hot spot showed nothing....but we were told...hot-spot is not always right
and snicko showed a clear nick....but we were told that Snicko is not offcial.
and then the pro-DRS lobby of commentators concluded that the Aussie appeal was confident .....andd KP didn't genuinely feel aggrieved so he must have been out and the correct decsion was made.
given ct. Behind...but Hot spot showed nothing....but we were told...hot-spot is not always right
and snicko showed a clear nick....but we were told that Snicko is not offcial.
and then the pro-DRS lobby of commentators concluded that the Aussie appeal was confident .....andd KP didn't genuinely feel aggrieved so he must have been out and the correct decsion was made.
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Birbal (IP Logged)
Date: 05/08/2013 15:09
What a joke DRS is turning into...
all the points you make in your article shilpa stand validated...
all the points you make in your article shilpa stand validated...
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Meet_New_Mr_India (IP Logged)
Date: 05/08/2013 17:08
more DRS B.S in regards to K.P's dismissal - . The reason Dharmasena didn't "overturn" on-field umpire's call is because he couldn't find enough evidence to do so.. the official technology they use to determine edges is HotSpot. And hotspot revealed no edge during multiple replays.. aah. what a farce this is..
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Birbal (IP Logged)
Date: 05/08/2013 19:22
The way it seems the umpires are interpreting Hotspot is:
If there is a hotspot mark on the bat...that is sufficient evidence that there was a nick...but if there is NO hotspot mark on the bat it is only partial evidence of a lack of a nick...the sound from the stump mike can be used to overcome hotspot..
Dhoni's remark that DRS involves "Adultration of machine with human thinking" is looking like a GENIUS statement...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013:08:05:19:25:20 by Birbal.
If there is a hotspot mark on the bat...that is sufficient evidence that there was a nick...but if there is NO hotspot mark on the bat it is only partial evidence of a lack of a nick...the sound from the stump mike can be used to overcome hotspot..
Dhoni's remark that DRS involves "Adultration of machine with human thinking" is looking like a GENIUS statement...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013:08:05:19:25:20 by Birbal.
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: shilpa (IP Logged)
Date: 06/08/2013 11:10
One of the big talking points in this series has been the Decision Review System. The players have lost trust in Hot Spot. The umpires have, the crowd have, and so have we. So I would get rid of it. We are not seeing enough right decisions....Michael Vaughan
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Birbal (IP Logged)
Date: 06/08/2013 14:34
Sachin had said that he would support DRS only with BOTH hotspot AND snicko used simultaneously...another very well reasoned position... that the media totally ignored or dissed...
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: shilpa (IP Logged)
Date: 07/08/2013 09:51
and KP's incident is being used to highlight DRS cheating ongoing......
Australia and England are reportedly under investigation by the ICC over allegations their batsmen are using silicone tape on their bats to beat the decision review system.
In the latest umpiring controversy this series, concerns were raised after Kevin Pietersen's dismissal in the final innings of the third Test where the batsman unsuccessfully tried to have a decision overturned by the video umpire.
The attempt failed despite the infrared Hot Spot technology not recording an edge, though sound detectors picked up a clear noise as the ball passed the bat.
Read more: [www.smh.com.au].
Australia and England are reportedly under investigation by the ICC over allegations their batsmen are using silicone tape on their bats to beat the decision review system.
In the latest umpiring controversy this series, concerns were raised after Kevin Pietersen's dismissal in the final innings of the third Test where the batsman unsuccessfully tried to have a decision overturned by the video umpire.
The attempt failed despite the infrared Hot Spot technology not recording an edge, though sound detectors picked up a clear noise as the ball passed the bat.
Read more: [www.smh.com.au].
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Meet_New_Mr_India (IP Logged)
Date: 12/06/2015 19:03
LOL at DRS
Plunkett to Taylor, no run, very full on the stumps again, Taylor misses flicking to leg, not out given but England try the review. No bat involved, is this slipping down leg? Well not really, Hawk Eye has it taking a huge chunk of leg stump but only umpire's call so it stays on the field
Plunkett to Taylor, no run, very full on the stumps again, Taylor misses flicking to leg, not out given but England try the review. No bat involved, is this slipping down leg? Well not really, Hawk Eye has it taking a huge chunk of leg stump but only umpire's call so it stays on the field
Re: To DRS Or Not To DRS? Part II
Posted by: Birbal (IP Logged)
Date: 12/06/2015 20:20
Meanwhile in the West Indies v. Australia 2nd Test in Jamaica... debutant Chandrika was out to what looked like a no ball... but 3rd Umpire didn't thinks so...
Well..well..well so yes there is more places for umps to FACK up or show bias with DRS
Well..well..well so yes there is more places for umps to FACK up or show bias with DRS
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.