Australia v India, 1st Test, MCG, 1st day December 26, 2011

Cowan calls for uniformity in DRS use

240

Ed Cowan has reiterated Australia's calls for a uniform approach to the Decision Review System on a day when he and Michael Hussey fell to decisions that would have been overturned had they been reviewed. As a Test debutant at the age of 29, Cowan has spent longer than most men watching the game from the outside, and he believes the ICC should take the lead on the DRS.

Cowan's call came after Michael Clarke, the Australia captain, had said before the match that he wanted consistency from the DRS, which the ICC mandated in Tests and ODIs earlier this year only to reverse the decision three months later. The BCCI's opposition to review technology meant that under the new rules, in which both boards must agree for the DRS to be used, the system was always going to be absent from this series.

Hussey was especially unfortunate to be given out first ball when umpire Marais Erasmus adjudged him caught behind, and replays showed Zaheer Khan's bouncer had clearly come off Hussey's sleeve. Later, Ian Gould gave Cowan out caught behind off R Ashwin, although Hot Spot showed no contact, and the batsman appeared to be surprised at the decision.

When asked if he hit the ball, Cowan said, "I was disappointed to get out, it was a bit of a lazy shot ... You saw the replays, you saw my reaction, you can join the dots I guess. With the DRS, I'm an interesting perspective because I've been a consumer of the game for so long; this is day one on the job for me.

"So as someone who loves his cricket and has watched a lot of cricket, I just don't understand why it can't be handed down by the ICC to be uniform in all games. And that's me speaking as an outsider, not as someone who has been in the bubble for a long time. It is an interesting one, we'll see how it pans out, I'm sure it'll even itself out over the course of the series."

Ricky Ponting, speaking to ABC radio, also called for uniformity. "I thought it was compulsory in every series we are going to play, but apparently not. As players you want uniformity around the world and consistency in the technology and things that you are using in the game. And it's just this one series against India that keeps poping up where we are not using the system. As players that's what we are after"

Those two dismissals, which took Australia from 4 for 205 to 6 for 214, gave India the advantage in the final session, although resistance from Brad Haddin and Peter Siddle later eased concerns for the hosts. Cowan said the loss of Hussey for a golden duck straight after the departure of Michael Clarke was pivotal in the day's play.

"It was a massive moment in the game, a huge moment," he said. "We'd just had a 100-run partnership [between Cowan and Ricky Ponting], wrestled back the momentum, almost a 50-run partnership [Cowan and Clarke]. We felt we were half an hour away from really nailing them, grinding them into the dust. We get through that Zaheer spell unscathed and it is a completely different complexion to the day's play.

"It's not an issue of DRS. It doesn't matter what cricket you play in, umpiring decisions always change momentum in the game. It doesn't matter whether it is an MCG Test match or me playing club cricket, that's the game - we all accept that. Today momentum went against us because of it, two of your top six, but that's the game and we'll take the good with the bad."

This series is the first time Australia have played Tests without the DRS since their last battle with India, away from home late last year. And while the decisions went against Australia today, Cowan said their final position was a good result at the end of a day on which batsmen had to knuckle down.

"I thought it was a really great day's cricket," Cowan said. "The bat had its moments, the ball had its moments, a good cricket wicket. If you bent your back and put it in a good spot you got something out of it. There was turn, there was bounce, but if you were good enough to play your shots, you could score runs. So it was great to see a good cricket wicket on day one. They bowled really well in patches. I thought we batted really well in patches and I think we've got our noses ahead."

That position came largely thanks to Cowan's level-headed innings of 68 on debut, an effort that showed the value of developing his technique on a difficult, green Hobart pitch over the past few seasons. He faced the first ball of the Test and while wickets fell at the other end, he stayed calm, a result of what he described as a lack of jitters.

"I was strangely not nervous, I can't explain why," Cowan said. "I was a little anxious when we won the toss and batted, but no more than we would've been if I was playing state cricket for Tasmania at Bellerive.

"Those nerves of wanting to contribute for the team upfront, it is my job to set the game up. I should've been a lot more nervous. I had to keep pinching myself to think, 'mate you should be more nervous here, more anxious', but being relaxed really helped me through it and it felt like another bat-on-ball contest."

Brydon Coverdale is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • yorkshire-86 on December 29, 2011, 13:01 GMT

    To those advocating 3rd umpire review systems. - Firstly the 3rd umpire is NOT a professional technician with 20+ years of training on ball tracking, he is an onfield umpire doing an unfamiliar job that he is untrained for in an unfamiliar environment. To properly use something like ball tracking you should have at least 4 years at university on a relevant subject and 20 years on the job - umpires get a few hours training. You can see this when they do things like forgetting to turn the mike up or not setting the ball tracker properly. Secondly the umpires would review EVERYTHING and the over rate rate would drop by half - the replays would be called for EVERY time the ball hit the pad 'just to be sure'. Want proof - look at how they handle runouts now - EVERY runout is referred to cover their backs.

  • hhillbumper on December 29, 2011, 10:01 GMT

    Is the reason for not backing the review system because it would show how often certain players are really out and start to deflate some of the averages? Lets face it in a fair fight India will always lose because they just don't have the talent. i think they should stick to 20/20 or just play tests against second ranked nations and leave test cricket to Aus,Eng,Sa and Pak.

  • simpleguy2008 on December 29, 2011, 8:54 GMT

    ICC PLEASE IMPLEMENT THIS UDRS SYSTEM NOW I AM TELLING YOU OUT OF 100 VOTINGS 80% WILL BE INDIAN FANS 20% DONT KNOW

  • simpleguy2008 on December 29, 2011, 8:28 GMT

    I think now ICC should implementthis UDRS when seeing that 4 decision went wrong the rickyponting in which he made 15 runs given not out and then 2day when hussey twice was out when lbw and then the nick down the leg side caught by dhoni it was shown on hot spot nick.

  • rajeshmc24 on December 29, 2011, 6:32 GMT

    Hey Guys.... I am a proud supporter Of UDRS but the Problem associated with this system is umpire/person who is using the this technology to make decision are not good or in other words they are fit for nothing... Majority of the times INDIAN team suffered a lot because of those guys/Umpires.... In Sri Lanka (2008) and England (2011) Series many decisions went against us even after using UDRS.... In England series Dravid was given out on number of occasions even after using UDRS.. In the 4th Test Dravid asked for review but was given out when hotspot dint find any edge… In this case it was the failure of Umpire Not UDRS… So Finally, I would like the best Umpires who knows about technology to use UDRS System rather than giving to dumb guys….

  • shuvo1470 on December 29, 2011, 5:46 GMT

    yahoooooooooooooo india have lost this game. india should loose the game continuously as BCCI thinks they will rule out the whole world of cricket nations and whatever they decide everyone has to follow? ICC cant be run only by india. other cricketing nations should raise their voice to stop such monopoly. UDRS should be implemented compulsory for all cricketing nations.

  • Alexk400 on December 29, 2011, 5:12 GMT

    It is utterly laughable to hear indians and especialy sachin fans to say no to DRS. Indian team need DRS more than any other team because indian team bowling is more weaker than others. India needed ponting wicket and he was out clearly in DRS. India would have won the first TEST. It is bad KARMA we are losing first TEST. When majority makes a blunder there is a 100% negative feeling and whole world wants india to lose. Because BCCI is in wrong side of HISTORY. Every one has to be pro growth or every one gets destroyed eventually.

  • Jahan.MS on December 29, 2011, 4:22 GMT

    Guys I have real joke on India's Foot Ball. I can't remember the year but once they selected to play world cup. You know what happened, they intended to play in bare foot without wearing any boot. But FIFA didn't allow them to play.. LOL.... I am with the DRS anyway, life in modern days without technology beyond of imagination. Since technology used in the Game already such as snicko, hawk eye etc. why not using hotspot. It would not benefit to the Australian only, guys.. its for all other nations playing cricket. Why you guys are thinking this way..? So come on guys, nothing in the world are 100% accurate.

  • cheesemethod on December 29, 2011, 1:41 GMT

    I like the UDRS and always have. I don't mind the stoppage in play as it adds to the tension and excitement of the game.Test wickets need to come at a high price and the UDRS gives that. One new innovation that im not a fan of is giving a player OUT and then check for a possible noball while they walk off. NoBalls should be monitored by the 3rd umpire with a close up camera. Give him something to do rather than sitting there waiting for a runout appeal

  • on December 28, 2011, 22:41 GMT

    speaking about the systems how would it certainly support, when the system is permitted in the match, then there are limited- it can only be viewed 3 or 4 times and so on, it cant be viewed for every time either of the team wishes to view and no matter they were wrong they can ask for viewing on every appeal, if it is limited, then there can be a time many certain decisions which would be averted are not permitted due to its limited, then what is the use of the system it its limited when applied or introduced, as then there are equal chances the umpires deciions still can be inaccurate, so then its best entirely to rely on the umpire.

  • yorkshire-86 on December 29, 2011, 13:01 GMT

    To those advocating 3rd umpire review systems. - Firstly the 3rd umpire is NOT a professional technician with 20+ years of training on ball tracking, he is an onfield umpire doing an unfamiliar job that he is untrained for in an unfamiliar environment. To properly use something like ball tracking you should have at least 4 years at university on a relevant subject and 20 years on the job - umpires get a few hours training. You can see this when they do things like forgetting to turn the mike up or not setting the ball tracker properly. Secondly the umpires would review EVERYTHING and the over rate rate would drop by half - the replays would be called for EVERY time the ball hit the pad 'just to be sure'. Want proof - look at how they handle runouts now - EVERY runout is referred to cover their backs.

  • hhillbumper on December 29, 2011, 10:01 GMT

    Is the reason for not backing the review system because it would show how often certain players are really out and start to deflate some of the averages? Lets face it in a fair fight India will always lose because they just don't have the talent. i think they should stick to 20/20 or just play tests against second ranked nations and leave test cricket to Aus,Eng,Sa and Pak.

  • simpleguy2008 on December 29, 2011, 8:54 GMT

    ICC PLEASE IMPLEMENT THIS UDRS SYSTEM NOW I AM TELLING YOU OUT OF 100 VOTINGS 80% WILL BE INDIAN FANS 20% DONT KNOW

  • simpleguy2008 on December 29, 2011, 8:28 GMT

    I think now ICC should implementthis UDRS when seeing that 4 decision went wrong the rickyponting in which he made 15 runs given not out and then 2day when hussey twice was out when lbw and then the nick down the leg side caught by dhoni it was shown on hot spot nick.

  • rajeshmc24 on December 29, 2011, 6:32 GMT

    Hey Guys.... I am a proud supporter Of UDRS but the Problem associated with this system is umpire/person who is using the this technology to make decision are not good or in other words they are fit for nothing... Majority of the times INDIAN team suffered a lot because of those guys/Umpires.... In Sri Lanka (2008) and England (2011) Series many decisions went against us even after using UDRS.... In England series Dravid was given out on number of occasions even after using UDRS.. In the 4th Test Dravid asked for review but was given out when hotspot dint find any edge… In this case it was the failure of Umpire Not UDRS… So Finally, I would like the best Umpires who knows about technology to use UDRS System rather than giving to dumb guys….

  • shuvo1470 on December 29, 2011, 5:46 GMT

    yahoooooooooooooo india have lost this game. india should loose the game continuously as BCCI thinks they will rule out the whole world of cricket nations and whatever they decide everyone has to follow? ICC cant be run only by india. other cricketing nations should raise their voice to stop such monopoly. UDRS should be implemented compulsory for all cricketing nations.

  • Alexk400 on December 29, 2011, 5:12 GMT

    It is utterly laughable to hear indians and especialy sachin fans to say no to DRS. Indian team need DRS more than any other team because indian team bowling is more weaker than others. India needed ponting wicket and he was out clearly in DRS. India would have won the first TEST. It is bad KARMA we are losing first TEST. When majority makes a blunder there is a 100% negative feeling and whole world wants india to lose. Because BCCI is in wrong side of HISTORY. Every one has to be pro growth or every one gets destroyed eventually.

  • Jahan.MS on December 29, 2011, 4:22 GMT

    Guys I have real joke on India's Foot Ball. I can't remember the year but once they selected to play world cup. You know what happened, they intended to play in bare foot without wearing any boot. But FIFA didn't allow them to play.. LOL.... I am with the DRS anyway, life in modern days without technology beyond of imagination. Since technology used in the Game already such as snicko, hawk eye etc. why not using hotspot. It would not benefit to the Australian only, guys.. its for all other nations playing cricket. Why you guys are thinking this way..? So come on guys, nothing in the world are 100% accurate.

  • cheesemethod on December 29, 2011, 1:41 GMT

    I like the UDRS and always have. I don't mind the stoppage in play as it adds to the tension and excitement of the game.Test wickets need to come at a high price and the UDRS gives that. One new innovation that im not a fan of is giving a player OUT and then check for a possible noball while they walk off. NoBalls should be monitored by the 3rd umpire with a close up camera. Give him something to do rather than sitting there waiting for a runout appeal

  • on December 28, 2011, 22:41 GMT

    speaking about the systems how would it certainly support, when the system is permitted in the match, then there are limited- it can only be viewed 3 or 4 times and so on, it cant be viewed for every time either of the team wishes to view and no matter they were wrong they can ask for viewing on every appeal, if it is limited, then there can be a time many certain decisions which would be averted are not permitted due to its limited, then what is the use of the system it its limited when applied or introduced, as then there are equal chances the umpires deciions still can be inaccurate, so then its best entirely to rely on the umpire.

  • on December 28, 2011, 22:14 GMT

    I like how prashkannam cites instances of the DRS costing India, yet fails to mention the let off Tendulkar got in the semi final against Pakistan where Saeed Ajmal's trapping of him plumb in front suddenly became a delivery which ragged away from the stumps.

  • SL_BiggestJoke on December 28, 2011, 17:14 GMT

    "i soo remember when ganguly was given out by then new umpire ricky ponting in sydney 2008"

    That was really funny :-))).. almost forgot that!!!

  • Sabi79 on December 28, 2011, 17:02 GMT

    No need of DRS. Just give the umpires to take descision on field after couple of reviews, both fast and slow from different angles if required by them. It will reduce the mistakes by 98 percent atleast.

  • on December 28, 2011, 15:51 GMT

    I want TUDRS (Third Umpire Decision Review System) not UDRS (Umpire Decision Review System). Rules for this will be simple, third umpire will review the decisions and inform on-field umpire if any decision he made was wrong. Instead of players challenging umpire decision why not go for the most technologically advanced person to review their own colleagues? I don't want complicated systems to be part of DRS like hotspot and hawk-eye. Just simple ones like player nicked and it can be seen so if umpire did not give it out, third umpire can ask umpire to give it out. If a player has nicked it on to pad and he was given LBW, third umpire can ask on-field umpire to reverse his decision. If a player has not nicked the ball at all or the ball brushed his helmet or something which should not be given out. third umpire should intimate on-field umpire to reverse his decision. etc. People only complain when they sight things like these and umpires making wrong decisions.

  • SirViv1973 on December 28, 2011, 14:23 GMT

    It shouldn't matter if UDRS is only 90 - 95% accurate, we still have far more correct decisions made in series where the technology is used. If India are the only team who don't want to use it then fine they don't have too, but Aus wanted it in this series and so did Eng in the recent series, so if they want it let them have it and India won't get the opportunity to make any referrals, looks like there a plenty of India fans on here who want it implemented which is very encouraging.

  • 5wombats on December 28, 2011, 11:40 GMT

    @g.narsimha, @CricketIndiaFanatic and all India fans who want to see UDRS adopted by BCCI - we completely agree with you. We simply cannot understand why some fans complain like billyo about Umpire wrong decisions and then straight away they say "but this is the perfect system". Amazing logic! Also they say; "No to DRS, because it is not perfect". Also amazing! So - Umpire only is "More perfect" than DRS!?! No it isn't! This is impossible logic! It's time for these fans to stop complaining when Umpire makes a decision that they feel is wrong. You can't complain about "Umpire Only" system and in the same breath say "but this is perfect system".

  • on December 28, 2011, 9:58 GMT

    No technology is 100% accurate at all but it is better to be 90-95% accurate than 60-70% accurate. Saying that we should deny it because it is not perfect is a farce.

  • on December 28, 2011, 9:50 GMT

    @Drew12 DRS has to be impartial in the prediction of its outcome. Most importantly it must state its inability to provide an outcome based on available evidence. HotSpot still has some way to go (for feathered edges) before it can be considered acceptable. Ball tracking based on video frame analysis can have glitches and must be backed up by an alternate method like golf ball radar tracker.

    By not adopting DRS in its present form, India is driving innovation. I hope proponents of DRS will not object to that.

    PS: I was talking Bayesian stats.

  • on December 28, 2011, 9:28 GMT

    I think we can safely say that regardless of whether the UDRS is used or not, there are going to be some contentious decisions made. I for one though have really enjoyed seeing the power being given back to the umpires in this series. The anticipation waiting for the umpire to either raise his finger or shake his head to an appeal has been somewhat lost due to DRS. It's just not quite the same effect if you know either team can review the decision, so it's great to see one of the human aspects of cricket back in the game.

  • TYJAY on December 28, 2011, 3:45 GMT

    This guy should concentrate on his batting first. He only had his very fist test inning! He is playing into others hand. He looks very inexperience.

    I think Simon Katich should be opening the batting for Australia.

  • Alexk400 on December 27, 2011, 23:42 GMT

    Who ever wants UDRS , they will pay the money. if other team do not want , then they don't pay. Team who pay for UDRS gets better decisions than the team that do not have. Make your choice BCCI. It is easy ..i think people are afraid to challeng BCCI illegal reasons and demands.

  • Alexk400 on December 27, 2011, 23:38 GMT

    Allowing captain to appeal is a 100% flawed system. Some captain are more brilliant than others. You give an advantage to one team not on cricket grounds more on how smart they are. Players should not be allowed to appeal. They should just play. Coaches should be appealing. It is a common sense. if Hawk eye is not accurate after 2.5 meter it is never accurate. This is one issue where rule is flawed. What your eye say? if it looks hitting it is. Umpires go by flawed hawk eye rule which created all the issues. Technology should assist not decide 100%. Umpires still have eyes to see.. i think there is a problem of dumping decision on technology going on instead of what is their gut instinct say. Hiding behind bad rule is a bad idea. For me UDRS should be used not the way it is now. Rules should be independent of technology!. But technology only assist rule not become the rule

  • Alexk400 on December 27, 2011, 23:31 GMT

    Ok People. Lets remove all accusation and mud slinging from each side. I think UDRS is flawed not on technological point but the rule point. I really think you can not allow players to appeal , it should be appealed by coaches who has better view. You are allowing blind man to appeal , he will appeal every time because he is blind unaware because he is looking at from his angle. So please change the rule to allow coaches appeal. Same amount of appeal but people with better view can appeal. Idea is to remove howlers. Instead it is becoming laughing stock. Technology is not perfect atleast it is same for both sides. My gues is you continously evolve rules such that we continue to reduce error margin and get close to 99% accuracy and get back to playing the game. if hawak eye is not accurate after 2.5 meter, it should not be used. I think slow motion replay is good enough. if there is any doubt , field umpire decision is final. By allowing captains to appeal you bring human brain factor

  • sahajb on December 27, 2011, 22:37 GMT

    To all those who are saying channel 9 comentators proved that sound was from his boot scarthing the ground, Did you also hear what they said after that? Ed cowen asked haddin on the non striker end and he said it was out. and even if DRS was available, Ed Cowen (Coward) clearly said he would have asked Haddin before reviewing the decision. so i think umpaire saw and heard same as haddin. and No matter what they say he nicked it. i dnt know y is there so much fuss just because one decesion went against australia. i would like to know how many of you compalin when tendulaker or shewag given out wrongly? Cricket has been played over 90 years now and there was no DRS till last 2 years. Every one accepted whatever umpaire decision was so y suddenly so much fuss. I thhink good or bad decisions are part of the game and some goes for you and some against you. and As they say at the end of your carrer it always evens out.

  • Kays789 on December 27, 2011, 22:11 GMT

    its comical to see the amount of indian fans here blindly endorsing their cricket board's and purported superstars' ridiculous claims about the DRS while lambasting those with logic and reason. theres a reason why no one else besides india disagrees with this technology. the first time they used it in SL in 2008, their colossal ineptitude in using the system became apparent and since then logic and reason go out the window everytime an indian fan starts talking about DRS. sure its not foolproof! but nothing is! and more importantly it IMPROVES the accuracy of decisions made significantly!! what else do you want?? its a pity that the indians' ignorance of the system is keeping the game from moving forward. an absolute shame!

  • Lord_Dravid on December 27, 2011, 22:10 GMT

    @VIJAYKM..haha i soo remember when ganguly was given out by then new umpire ricky ponting in sydney 2008! LOL

  • menelaus on December 27, 2011, 21:44 GMT

    Rumours are circulating the cricket world that some influential senior Indian players are against the DRS (and hence its absence from the Australian test series). I guess if the players were for it why would it be not used? If the rumours are true, then those players need to get over themselves and help to advance the game not obstruct its development. In most global sports, advances in player capability have led to rule changes (eg blocking across the net in volleyball, the 3 sec zone in basketball and video evidence in AFL. Time for players to step up and push for a positive change. BTW, no player is bigger than the game. JMO of course.

  • gsmsundaram on December 27, 2011, 21:05 GMT

    I don't understand why people make a huge cry over DRS. Decision in favor of either one team or opposition is a part and parcel of every game. If you see in a popular game like Football, FIFA has not changed the rules much (Referee decision is still final).May be then ICC should ask both the on field umpires to leave the field and put the big TV screen on the pavilion. Then there will be the game sans enjoyment.

  • on December 27, 2011, 20:54 GMT

    I don't understand why there is so much negativity around Cowan voicing his opinion just like you are. Technology is there to be used. Yes, cricket isn't a video game. But, we already use technology to determine catches being cleanly taken, boundaries, run outs and actions being cleared for throwing. OBVIOSLY, there are some issues with the technology which is WHY the rules clearly state that if technology cannot prove the original decision wrong, it stays with the onfield umpire's call. Which in my opinion is an efficient use of what is available to us. If it is uncertain, we stay with the onfield umpires call. If the ball is clearly pitching outside leg, or clearly missing the stumps then overturn the out decision but if its 50 -50 then we stay with the onfield call. In some cases, there are issues with the DRS where the technology doesn't portray what actually happend. This is when the third umpire should be allowed to add his input into the decision. What do you think?

  • prashkannam on December 27, 2011, 19:22 GMT

    The BCCI has always been against the DRS and its concerns increased during this year's tied World Cup match against England when an lbw appeal and then a referral against Ian Bell was rejected. While a Hawk-Eye replay showed that the delivery would have hit the stumps, the Indians were incensed when the referral was quashed on the grounds that Bell had been struck more than two metres from the stumps, the distance at which the technology wanes and accuracy cannot be guaranteed. Even during the mid-year Test series in England, Rahul Dravid thrice found himself on the wrong end of contentious video replays. "It (DRS) should be introduced if it's correct. We were in England in the summer and it wasn't foolproof," Ganguly was quoted as saying in the Sydney Morning Herald on Tuesday. SO I GUESS....MOST OF THE DIE HARD AUSSIES FANS SHUD KNOW WHY DRS IS NOT FOOLPROOF..........BTW IT WAS AGREED B4 THE SERIES THAT THIS WUD B A DRS FREE SERIES AND BOTH BOARDS AGREED 2 THIS ,,,,,,,,,,!!

  • IndianaJones79 on December 27, 2011, 19:00 GMT

    Umpire decision against Hussy was howler? It was decision which could go either way without help of technology. Cowan was out. Sniko confirmed that. Howler were the decisions which happaened in Sydney, Symond's wicket, Dravid's wicket, Ganguly's wicket, where Aussie cheated by appealing for anything and give out behalf of umpire..lol:)..Same aussie supporter said at that time that Umpire decision could have gone both way..now they are whining...What double standard..And what about Haddin was not given out lbw? Aussie journalist are same as Aussie supported, Biased to the extreme..They don't respect anybody unless he is Aussie...What kind of cricket followers are they who doesnt respect game itself.

  • IndianaJones79 on December 27, 2011, 19:00 GMT

    Umpire decision against Hussy was howler? It was decision which could go either way without help of technology. Cowan was out. Sniko confirmed that. Howler were the decisions which happaened in Sydney, Symond's wicket, Dravid's wicket, Ganguly's wicket, where Aussie cheated by appealing for anything and give out behalf of umpire..lol:)..Same aussie supporter said at that time that Umpire decision could have gone both way..now they are whining...What double standard..And what about Haddin was not given out lbw? Aussie journalist are same as Aussie supported, Biased to the extreme..They don't respect anybody unless he is Aussie...What kind of cricket followers are they who doesnt respect game itself.

  • on December 27, 2011, 18:20 GMT

    Can someone please explain how can the implementation of DRS in it's current form be called even and fair? Take this example: Ball 1 - There is a shout for LBW and umpire turns it down. Bowler challenges it and in the hawk-eye it's shown that the ball would have clipped the outside of the off stump. So, the on field umpire's call stays and the batsman survives. Ball 2 - Action replay of Ball 1 only difference being the umpire gives it out and the batsman challenges it. Again the hawk-eye will show the same thing and once again the on field umpire's call will stay. But this time the batsman will have to depart.

    Someone please explain how can 1 ball, where everything remains same except for the on field umpire's call, can have two different results? And if it does give two different results, how can that system be called fair?

  • Texmex on December 27, 2011, 18:19 GMT

    There was no hot spot when Gambhir got out - why isnt he complaining I wonder.

    When Sehwag was caught at short leg even the Aussies didnt appeal so vigorously. But hotspot showed multiple spots on the glove!

    Hotspot does not improve decision making. We already learnt that in England.

  • Jack_India on December 27, 2011, 17:53 GMT

    India too had to deal with a wrong decision when Brad Haddin was on 19. He wasn't given out leg before off a Zaheer Khan delivery even though he looked absolutely plumb.

  • on December 27, 2011, 17:52 GMT

    DRS activists seem to be talking as though there was never fair Cricket before 2007. As long as there are neutral umpires who are not blind as a bat (like Steve Bucknor) i is a fair game. Hotspot is 95% accurate and so are the umpires. And DRS matches have as many controversies as DRS-less ones.

    Hotspot showed hardly any edge for Gambhir's dismissal even though it looked very clear to the naked eye. In the first 2 days, we are more antagonized by the current state of the art. Maybe with much better gadgets, more standardization DRS is possible. But, not now.

  • ravi_musti on December 27, 2011, 17:13 GMT

    Aussies, I remember when Ricky Ponting looked at Benson, told him that he thought that the catch was taken cleanly and Benson giving the batsman out, Sydney 2008. Do not justify the actions of Sydney 2008. To be honest, its India that should fear the umpiring as it has always borne the brunt of bad umpring decisions and its India that should make a case for DRS what with the events of Sydney 2008. Yet, India doesn't want it. Understand that there is no ulterior motive. The DRS can be used in case of catches, and in case of run outs/stumpings. LBWs cannot be judged by DRS, the system is not active enough .The onfield umpire is at a better position of judging the trajectory of the ball. The use of fluid dynamics to determine the ball's trajectory is logically insane since it doesn't take into account the swing of the ball, rather just assumes that the ball will move in a straight line from the point of impact.

  • on December 27, 2011, 16:57 GMT

    Hussey was unlucky but Cowan's wicket was plump this guy is blaberring something in front of the mic. Indian had a bad experience with UDRS in the world cup itself unless they are not properly convinced they will not go forward. As a matter of fact in the last australian tour we were treated with atmost injustice because of that tour UDRS came into limelight. In short Mr. Cowan kindly concentrate only on batting at the moment.

  • on December 27, 2011, 15:52 GMT

    Cowan should not cry on the umpire's decision. Umpires are humans after all humans. they will mistakes. Even the technology makes mistakes. Now there have been several instances of hot spot not picking faint edges. So if the technology is not 100% acuurate what's the point of using it or even debating on it. A human making a mistake is acceptable but not the same with DRS.

  • on December 27, 2011, 15:47 GMT

    Every player who is fair wants DRS to be implemented in every game he playes to reduce silly mistakes like these. I think its Australia got unlucky with these decisions, But by the end of the series we may have many decisions which may change the fate of series for either sides. I think ICC should not allow test matches with out use of technology atleast for some type of decisions. You dont want to win games by luckyly..

  • g.narsimha on December 27, 2011, 15:12 GMT

    AJMAL 1998, why other boards towing on bcci lines, the reasons known to all , no need eloberate ,today just suspected bad decision you people got some thing to harp on you said cares gawaskar& shastri ,we cares them ,that metters ,

  • Jack_India on December 27, 2011, 14:51 GMT

    @primexx ::: Nobody is one word. No one is two words. Please.

  • worldcricket-salix01 on December 27, 2011, 14:39 GMT

    DRS should be used - its fairly simple - in a democratic society everyones opion is taken in not just some experienced batsman who don't get given out in India due to severe pressure and their godlike status.

    Great players - but poor from them holding cricket back like this.

  • 14.08.1947 on December 27, 2011, 14:03 GMT

    In the recent time of Cricket, i think it is very important to use the DRS System. Because there is a lot of money in the game and if we have the opportunity to avoid this kind of mistakes through this DRS System, then it is very very important to have an andvantage from this new System.Which were also helpful in the World Cup 2011 and specially in a Test Match.

  • SL_BiggestJoke on December 27, 2011, 13:15 GMT

    As it stands, DRS is a joke. 1. Standardise DRS (every aspect of it). 2. Get it tested by independent agencies. 3. Get ICC to own and manage DRS... not some local channels. 4. Sort out who is going to pay for DRS (cost splitting). 5. Get the rules for DRS out and clear. Not some grey "guidelines". 6. Address the howlers with cold spot.. sorry hot spot.. too many cases of batsmen nicking and nothing showing up!! 7. Sort out Virtual Eye/Hawk eye or whatever its called now... seems like it becomes unavailable under "certain light conditions" (seriously!!) Then... BCCI should have no issues in using it.

  • silly_pt on December 27, 2011, 13:06 GMT

    @LillianThomson:And how does channel 9 explain Haddin/Gambhir's edges not being recognized by Hotspot? Lol.I tell you what, a shrewd engineer can explain any damn thing in the world in either ways with conviction. That doesn't necessarily mean it's the truth. For me Cowan was out for1 Dhoni isn't Gilchrist to go up spontaneously without feeling the nick.2 That was the plot against Cowan since he is an overconfident cutter especially against spinners (That is how they got him in the tour match) 3.If you see the replays the bat & ball were pretty close & obviously the sound 4.Umpire also didn't ponder over it much so he must have felt something.5 Cowan's word cannot be trusted because of my previous experience with the Aussies. Look, if technology isn't uniform like Hotspot there is no point using it because it will only serve to complicate luck dependence instead of removing it in spite of spending so much money.Better wait till it gets accurate & everyone would consent.Cricinfo publish

  • LillianThomson on December 27, 2011, 13:03 GMT

    A lot of Indians on this forum like to talk about Australia's recent 47 all out, while omitting to mention that they bowled South Africa out for 96 immediately prior to that innings. But the key was the superb operation of DRS, which made the innings so memorable and removed the sort of rancour about umpiring which has ruined two consecutive Indian tours of Australia. On the third ball of the innings, Watson failed to review - and should have.Five overs later, Ponting did - but the umpire's decision was upheld. 7 balls later a review was required to see whether Hughes was caught - he was. 5 balls later, Clarke unsuccessfully reviewed an lbw. 4 overs later the umpire failed to give a valid lbw - and South Africa successfully overturned it with DRS, leaving Australia 21-9. Make no mistake, DRS was the true Man of the Match, and helped make a dramatic passage of play into an all-time great one. I'm a Kiwi, but I'm happy to say that DRS is the best thing to happen to cricket for years!

  • rahulcricket007 on December 27, 2011, 12:48 GMT

    @IDSUTD . CAN YOU PLEASE REMIND ME WHAT WERE THE DECISION THAT WENT IN FAVOUR OF INDIA IN THE THIRD TEST AT CAPETOWN ???? ALSO YOU SAID INDIA ESCAPED WITH DRAW , YOU SHOULD CHECK AGAIN THE SCORECARD , SA WERR 128/6 AT ONE TIME , THANKS TO SIR KALLIS WHO MADE 100 IN PAIN & SAVE SA OTHERWISE MATCH WOULD HAVE BEEN OVER VERY EARLY . & INDIA DIDN'T ESCAPE , WE MADE 184/3 IN THE SECOND INNINGS BATTED WHOLE DAY .

  • RandyOZ on December 27, 2011, 12:42 GMT

    @avmd, I found your brilliant post in a sea of nonsense from Indian fans, but that was very humerous, and proabably 100% true. The sooner the ICC grow a pair and make this smart technology mandatory the better. Anything to improve the howlers we saw today and cricket will gain much more credibility.

  • rahulcricket007 on December 27, 2011, 12:35 GMT

    GAMBHIR 'S EDGE WAS ALSO NOT SEEN ON THE HOT SPOT . DOES THAT MEAN HE WAS ALSO NOT OUT ? NO . COWAN WAS CLEARLY OUT . WE SEE A DEFLECTION IN THE BALL TRAJECTORY & THAT WAS DUE TO FAINT EDGE & HOT SPOT UNFORTUNATELY HOT SPOT CAN'T PICK FAINT EDGES .

  • rahulcricket007 on December 27, 2011, 12:30 GMT

    @ALLSL FANS . WHY ARE YOU COMMMENTING HERE ? PLEASE WIN A TEST MATCH EITHER AT HOME OR AWAY THEN WE WILL TALK .

  • Barnesy4444 on December 27, 2011, 12:15 GMT

    Use of the DRS should be at the discretion of the umpire. If the umpire thinks it might be out but isn't sure, they can ask the video umpire to look at the replays and make a decision from there. There shouldn't be one rule for India, another for the rest. Why did the ICC change the rule regarding use of DRS? because India pressured them to.

  • on December 27, 2011, 12:04 GMT

    The same sort of technology ought to be used in every single game.If hotspot is creating certain discrepancies,ICC should introduce snicko to aid the 3rd umpire in making the correct calls.UDRS has primarily been used to eliminate the umpiring bloopers.Instances where the technology cannot remove all the doubts,the calls made by the onfield umpires should be upheld.The only real issue with the way DRS is currently operated arises when a batsman has to be adjudged and one of the factors to be considered is the batsman's distance from the stumps at the time of impact.I think ICC should rule that if the distance between the pads and the stumps exceeds 2.5 metres at the time of impact,the batsman should be given the benefit of doubt.At the same time,there shouldnt be 2 or 3 companies offering ball tracking technology.ICC should standardise everything.You cannot have different technological paraphernalia in different stadia or countries.

  • on December 27, 2011, 12:03 GMT

    lillian thomsan instead of crying watch matcchyouare loosing lolzzzzzzz

  • satish619chandar on December 27, 2011, 12:02 GMT

    @IndiaNumeroUno : Very well said.. ICC should first be clear on what its DRS does and how it does.. Let it call for all country meet and then frame the laws based on good discussion between teams and then look for uniformity.. Now, someone is trying to force others invention on others.. Tony Greig who was very critical of India against DRS itself now a bit silent as he can see the issues with the hot spot which he hailed as the best ever the when the match begun.. Cowan and Gambhir decisions are the best examples..

  • T.R.GHANCHI on December 27, 2011, 11:49 GMT

    DRS should have been on. If it would have, then Cowan and Hussey would have taken Australia to a good total. But then again, BCCI=ICC.

  • on December 27, 2011, 11:39 GMT

    @Lillian Thomson: As usual, you make complete sense.

  • primexx on December 27, 2011, 11:22 GMT

    If I am not wrong, Rahul Dravid got a faint edge and was given out based on the sound . The hot spot showed nothing. Dravid himself admitted it and noone cried out saying he should not be given out. Noone questioned the umpire why he gave him out when there was nothing on Hot Spot?? So Cowan instead of crying out , try to concentrate on your future. Many guys have got this raw deal before and I think there was definitely a sound when the ball passed the bat. It's upto u to own it. @ Nischal82... Money power??? R u kidding??? I am one of the fans of Bucknor. But there is no excuse for Sydney. How r u supporting an umpire who dint ask for third umpire when Symonds was stumped. Leave alone DRS.. He was not ready to ask for a replay. Funny u support him and DRS in the same note. One bad decision and one debatable decision has gone against the aussies and u have started whining. Remeber the same umpires can give decisions against India. Both the teams should take them in stride.

  • on December 27, 2011, 11:08 GMT

    Why is India so afraid of the truth? The DRS is the best technology available now and it should be used to give everyone that sense of fairplay. Maybe India is doing what the Australians did when they were on top; refuse to use the technology because they think that umpires, when faced with a doubt, will err on the side of the perceived superior team.

  • on December 27, 2011, 11:04 GMT

    Mr. Cowan must focus on his cricket rather then press conference..two desicion went indias way hussy probably Mr. Cowan and two went aussies way haddin/siddle both were plum LBWs.

  • LillianThomson on December 27, 2011, 10:54 GMT

    For the benefit of Indians who don't have the Channel 9 commentary, Cowan really did miss the ball he was given out caught for. He missed it, but the sound was the stud of his boot scratching the surface of the crease as he tried to play the ball. In 2011-12 a noise is not enough cause to uphold an "out" decision. India have always been inept at using DRS, which is the real reason their players and board dislike it, but if Dravid had been sensible enough to use it when he hit his shoelace in England earlier this year he would have survived with equal merit to Cowan yesterday. Sadly, I find myself looking forward to Tendulkar's retirement so that India's mindless opposition to DRS can end. Every time India tours a major country they antagonise their hosts by refusing DRS for stupid reasons. Who cares if it is not 100% accurate - it's still far more accurate than not having DRS.

  • hattima on December 27, 2011, 10:45 GMT

    @nischal82 There is a difference between genuine mistakes and deliberate bias towards one team. Do you remember what happened in Sydney in 2008? A fielder fraudalantly claimed a catch; and the umpire went by his words, being unsure himself, ignoring the protests of the batsman. Is it the way to umpire a match, you ask one side what they *think* has happened, and base your decision on that? Umpires can go wrong at many different levels, but when they do something morally wrong they should be thrown out of the game, as was the case there.

  • gurumaster on December 27, 2011, 10:40 GMT

    All nations should work towards bettering OUR game. Technophobes are a dying breed when common sense shows the ridiculous howlers. I bet Dravid feels good for technology tonight. ICC make zero money out of technology. Maybe the TV stations would as it would make for more advertising and sponsorship properties towards rolling out the tech across the globe.

    Cowan deserves a medal for calling it as it is. He is far from alone in most dressing rooms.

  • SL_BiggestJoke on December 27, 2011, 10:26 GMT

    "Channel 9 in Australia proved that the Cowan "edge" was the noise of his stud scratching the pitch surface "

    That has got to take the cake! LOL!!!

  • vineetkarthi on December 27, 2011, 10:20 GMT

    One simple change will dramatically improve the quality of Umpiring decisions: give the 3rd Umpire powers to independently over rule decisions by on-field Umpires. Hawk Eye, Hot Spot, Replays, etc will be used by the Third Ump to review and correct all on-field umpiring mistakes without the drama of the review process. So if a batsman nicks and is not given out, the 3U will rule him out. If a batsman inside edges and is given out LBW, the 3U will rule him not out and so on. Only subjective decisions must be reviewed. NO CONTROVERSY, NO DEBATE. No question of involving players in the review process. Will the ICC ever do this - absolutely not. Else we would not have had the 15 degree flex rule. Or the rampant sledging that is a disgrace to the game.

  • SL_BiggestJoke on December 27, 2011, 10:19 GMT

    Forget 100% or 95%... it seems virtual eye was not operational at one point due to "light conditions"... what??!!

    DRS is a joke!!

    1. Not owned by ICC.

    2. Not Standardised. Technology is subject to vagaries of local technology/channels.

    3. Not tested/verified by independent agencies (just take word of seller?!)

    4. Not convinced a lot of match referees who have registered concerns (various series) giving examples of "plain to eye" cases.. even the recent Ind-Aus series is a good example... did Cowan own up on the nick yet? (thought not!)

    5. No agreement on paying for the cost.

    6. Basis of DRS accuracy is flawed (comparing with a flaw system is a basic flaw!).

    7. No clear cut rule book for DRS.

    Come on ICC, sort out DRS then India will have no issues using it!

  • gogoldengreens on December 27, 2011, 10:19 GMT

    ICC should make consistant rules for all series and not leave anything to do with umpiring calls be up to cricket boards... you cannot choose the umpire that the team wants why should referal calls be able to be turned on & off... Funny how India had a referal go their way today is that the referal you have when you are not having a referal

  • vijaykm on December 27, 2011, 10:18 GMT

    Remember the most controversial Sydney tour.. When our great wall Dravid was given out with a poor decision by STEEVE BUCKNOR during his match saving innings, and Ganguly been given out by the new umpire RICKY PONTING(what a spirit of game..) This is just a paying time!!

  • on December 27, 2011, 10:06 GMT

    to all those bickering about india getting cowan removed let me remind them...freids there were 7 decisions against india in that test not one or two and go and see the replays where it shows a thick edge of cowan's bat....coz i dont rtemember india crying over spoilt milk ever before even when sachin was given "SHOULDER BEFORE WICKET"...also if u saw the match today gambhir's dismissal too didn't come up on hot spot though he had hit it. simply put hot spot's not effective....instead the third umpire should have more of a say in the decisions...not flawed technology.

  • bhaloniaz on December 27, 2011, 10:01 GMT

    Its upto all the other nations to get united to deny playing india unless DRS is there.

  • on December 27, 2011, 9:20 GMT

    We have seen Indians cribbing about the wrong umpiring decisions before. Not it is Aussie's turn. How quickly things are getting reversed!!!!

  • Rohan_K on December 27, 2011, 9:17 GMT

    Logic is simple!!!! Get a technology which is 100% perfect or accept whatever onfield umpires give. No point in having technology where an edge is detected on Snicko meter and not on Hot spot. Hawk seems to be 99% alright. But hot spot is awful. Cowan played well but lets see if a decision like this goes in his favour, then what will he say. If all Australians let the umpires decide whether they are out even in cases of big edges, they must also learn to take it positively if there is a bad judgement. No point in blaming or showing bad behaviour to the umpire when the decision in not in your favour and guiltily accepting other bad decisions in your favour. BCCI is 100% correct on declining a technology which is average and has many cold spots. The better thing would be to nominate the best 3 or 4 umpires of elite panel and allow them to even stand in home matches. For example this is a high profile series and best umpire Simon Taufel cannot officiate because the is an Australian.

  • wc1992 on December 27, 2011, 9:08 GMT

    i think the simple solution to let others use the DRS against india and see how they feel ...

  • Impactzone on December 27, 2011, 9:00 GMT

    Lets get one fact straight. The 2 boards did not agree. Only BCCI disagreed therefore no DSR by default. Howlers are what DSR is to rid the game of.

  • voiceguru on December 27, 2011, 8:37 GMT

    To Unknow FB User on (December 26 2011, 22:43 PM GMT) ... Man whom so ever you are if sachin is out he will walkout himself before even umpire give him out .. that difference you will never understand. Regards to DRS .. the system has flaws we have seen it so using that wont make any difference. If the decision went bad for one team it also goes bad for another team. This is the game all about .. India never make fuss about bad decision. 2008 bad decision were too many & india didnt end anyone career but it got end by itself and everyone know that the person who was umpiring wasnt doing it right. How come Aleem dar and simon tuffel make right decision without using DRS.. Come on guys .. have base before you talk .. the game was played like this before for so many years and people enjoyed it .. so stop complaining coz there is technology.. but everything need perfection .. if it perfected soon u wont even need umpire .. technology will provide the decision directly.

  • on December 27, 2011, 8:35 GMT

    DRS is new but is an innovation in cricket and must be adapted and will only get better with time. We rely on technology in all walks of life then why not in cricket? Even in the presence of DRS, umpires will make the decisions and only if any party has a doubt, they can get use the DRS. All in all DRS will add fairness to the game. Cheers!

  • prashkannam on December 27, 2011, 8:01 GMT

    LISTEN AUSSIES.........................THERE WAS ALREADY AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE 2 BOARDS PRIOR TO THE ERIES THAT DRS WOULD NOT BE IMPLEMENTED SO WHY MAKE A HUE AND CRY ABT IT NOW!!

  • Sakthiivel on December 27, 2011, 7:54 GMT

    Ed Cowan asking to connect dots.. Why cant he give answer yes or no.. Its clear that he had edged it...

  • baskar_guha on December 27, 2011, 7:52 GMT

    The so-called technology is imperfect -- hotspots dont work 10% of the time by the inventor's own admission, LBWs are based on statistically determined trajectories by the inventor's own admission, and so on. Accept that cricket is a sport amongst humans judged by humans. It is not a video game of some sort.

  • on December 27, 2011, 7:51 GMT

    weather plays major part in Australia matches in half dozen matches like Ashes series 2009- 2 nd test match,2010 - Sydney test match,2011 - Melbourne,2011 - Hobart,2011- kings-mead - personally i feels sorry for Aus Batsman who played in this matches and failed to make impact with the Bat , even today the same when punter and cowan playing its hard to score runs , by tomorrow the sun will be brighter then the opponent team scores hundread its some thing bull shit ... Aussie hold your nerves Bat positively in second innings and make them Pay in Perth with Cummins,harris,Siddle .... even today in solid batting condition Dravid escaped with Huge number of Luck .... Dnt worry Luck Never Remains Same .............

  • on December 27, 2011, 7:49 GMT

    Stop crying Cowan on your first test innings dismissal. If you ever want to be a good player, let bat do all the talking & not your mouth. Also, be fit enough to come & field the next day. One innings of 68 earned you a sore back !!!

  • on December 27, 2011, 7:47 GMT

    I think Cowan should concentrate on his career. He has only played 0.5 test match. He should leave all these matters to seniors. Also, probably should have a look at previous matches to see how these umpiring blunders won matches for Australia team.

  • pavan210 on December 27, 2011, 7:44 GMT

    ICC just wants to earn money by promoting use of additional technology in cricket. Why isnt it promoting the simple TV replay for a doubtful decision? It is available since ages and is the most basic for of technology assistance available to the umpires. The additional technology do not provide much value addition to the decision but only to ICC's pockets.

  • shuvo1470 on December 27, 2011, 7:43 GMT

    all bad decision by umpire should go against indian team then BCCI will realise DRS is effective or not.

  • waheed1233 on December 27, 2011, 7:42 GMT

    The question is whether u hav the supportin tech that can assist da on-field umpires or not. Given da DRS system, it obviously assists da on-field umpires & like Clarke & Cowan said, ICC shud, not considerin any particular country's opposition, implement a uniform approach. There r many people saying abt 2K8 controversy. People, in 2K8, did the cricket world hv this advanced DRS technology? No, they didnt hv & had to rely entirely on the on-field umpires. In addition, 1 wrong decision in "ONCE UPON A TIME" CAN NEVER justify 2 critical wrong decisions today. Finally, regarding Cowan's out, only sm of the Indian fans here could hear the nick or see the deviation clearly, even though there were no such evidences in replays and hotspot, mainly due to the fact that obviously there was no nick to it. I dont blame the Indian players in asking for caught behind when there was no nick for sure, coz they wud do anythin & everythin 2 get Aussies out even if its requires some ethical downgradation

  • Nischal82 on December 27, 2011, 7:38 GMT

    In 2008, when the umpires gave wrong decisions against Indian team, there was a huge uproar from BCCI & others. They not only made sure the umpires are removed but also destroyed their career. This clearly shows what money power can do. Now when Aussies are at receiving end of wrong umpiring, are they reacting to it the way we did? It shows maturity, which we would need to learn. We at one hand are against the usage of DRS and on the other hand also make it a big fuss if umpires go wrong. I wish that the ICC show up some spine & make the DRS compulsory.

  • simpleguy2008 on December 27, 2011, 7:38 GMT

    ICC should implement this UDRS system coz it is the ICC who is this big boss of cricket not the BCCI so they should implement now frm the second test yes but not for this test series but for all international series test one days twenty twenty also.

  • ssenthil on December 27, 2011, 7:28 GMT

    What goes around will comes around, Take it Hussey, you were clearly out in Sydney 2008 and stayed ground despite knowing you are Out Twice and this is Karma. Coming back at the right time to hunt you. Take it. As far as ED Cowan considered, he proves he is an typical Aussie lier, Every one in the world knows he was OUT unless he is blind/biased. Don't cry like a Baby, you are OUT and accept that. Now you start this way, I wish you get so many bad scores this series.

  • on December 27, 2011, 7:26 GMT

    I like to see the technology used consistently in all Tests or not at all. However, noone can have it both ways. Yes, it was the Australian team that was worse off yesterday, but it was not always one way. Haddin was let off as well. So, all of you Indian and Aussie fans and the journos be fare and report that both teams got bad decisions and get on with it until there is true democracy within the ICC. Mind you, India has the power now, but it was England and Australia who controlled ICC not too long ago. No single cricket board should be able to control the body that governs the game.

  • on December 27, 2011, 7:24 GMT

    7 decision against Australia turned down by Steve Buckner in that 2008 Sydney match which caused a match and series for India.. now AAAASSSIEEs crying for 1 or 2 umpire faults.. ridiculous..

  • ldsutd on December 27, 2011, 7:19 GMT

    Indians can quickly remember when they were "done in" but forget the advantages they gained. Their last test series in SA ended in a draw but they were outplayed for most part and escaped with the draw when decisions in the final test gave them the advantage( unfairly). So remember it works both ways. It is not only India that get the dodgy calls. Forget hotspot and hawkeye but use television replays to correct. If it is inconclusive then benefit goes to the batsmen.

  • on December 27, 2011, 7:18 GMT

    I have seen a test in australia where justin Langer would have lost his wicket around 5 times before he reached his 50, however he went on to make a double hundred. I am all for the DRS system, however this argument and debate should have been prior to the match and not after the errors. Aussies, stop whining and get on with the game.

  • on December 27, 2011, 7:18 GMT

    I like to see the technology used consistently in all Tests or not at all. However, noone can have it both ways. Yes, it was the Australian team that was worse off yesterday, but it was not always one way. Haddin was let off as well. So, all of you Indian and Aussie fans and the journos be fare and report that both teams got bad decisions and get on with it until there is true democracy within the ICC. Mind you, India has the power now, but it was England and Australia who controlled ICC not too long ago. No single cricket board should be able to control the body that governs the game.

  • on December 27, 2011, 7:12 GMT

    I would love to see some decisions going against India and then it will be realized how it feels. DRS might not be 100 percent accurate but even if it adds 1 percent to umpires then why not. All the boards are happy with it except one and it just does not make sense at all.

  • shrnk on December 27, 2011, 7:12 GMT

    It is just a game. The DRS is EXPENSIVE. From an Indian standpoint, despite the huge fan following and ad revenues, it still is a huge expenditure on a LUXURY while the rest of the nation is starving. Keep it simple. Try to ensure that umpires are consistent. Even if they err, if they err consistently its probably okay. The controversy would be toned down if both teams are at the receiving end of similar decisions. However, it would be blown up if one team gets it one way and the other team another way.

  • Mfalme on December 27, 2011, 7:11 GMT

    @Alexk400 - Absolutely agreed. I was about to suggest the same. UDRS should be made mandatory for all matches. Let the team that wish use it. The other can abstain from using it. So simple and both teams should be happy.

  • satish619chandar on December 27, 2011, 7:07 GMT

    How people still think Cowan is not out is a bit funny.. It was a clearcut edge..

  • Drew12 on December 27, 2011, 7:05 GMT

    @Somnath Mitra if that is what they are contesting then they are contesting the most basic fundamental of umpiring: decisions go in the batsman's favour. By the way, are you referring to Baysian stats on your figures?

  • mixters on December 27, 2011, 7:02 GMT

    Hey Test_Match_Fan Everyone has been ripped of by umpires EVERYONE just about everyone on this forum is calling for DRS because they want the RIGHT decisions made for the benifit of the game. The best team playing the best cricket should win. Luck will always play a part but wrong calls by the Umps should not influence the outcome, Luck or as you say suspicious decisions and who makes them and WHY will always be an aguing point beween hystirical cricket fans. Which is just the point DRS gets rid of all that rubbish and lets skill be the biggest most influential factor in deciding a cricket match. Every other nation wants this WHAT POSSIBLE REASON HAS BCCI got for desputing this. I posted earlier about there opposition and WHY is it better to call foul and the Umps head as they did for Steve Buknor (DRS would have fixed everone of those bad calls and the best team may well have one) Stop calling spitful names and get with the program

  • on December 27, 2011, 6:57 GMT

    What a joke of a sport!

    First, two Australian batsmen are given out, when they CLEARLY weren't. Of course, no review is available.

    Then, an Indian batsman is given out, BUT the umpire VOLUNTEERS to review the decision.

    Consistancy???

    What a joke!

  • anver777 on December 27, 2011, 6:37 GMT

    Sorry Aus !!!! in first place Ind has to accept the DRS system.....otherwise no wonder always a firm "no" from ICC.... never give up keep trying folks !!!!!!

  • on December 27, 2011, 6:18 GMT

    Proponents of DRS argue that the percentage of false positives (given out by DRS when actually not out) is almost negligible. BCCI and the Indian team aren't disputing that. They are disputing that the percentage of false negatives (declared not out by DRS when actually out) is non-zero. Case in point is Ed Cowan's dismissal. Hotspot would have cleared him. Explain what sound came as the ball passed his bat?

  • CricketIndiaFanatic on December 27, 2011, 5:59 GMT

    @johnathonjosephs -"Show them who's boss and Ban BCCI until they agree. Don't let international players in the IPL and see how much money is lost to BCCI". Please, someone do that. I too want those high flying BCCI officials bloodied financially. But I am scared that if ICC bans BCCI that might be the end of ICC and this might be the real reason ICC is incapacitated in taking decisions against BCCI. I don't know how this dynamics can be changed? Most boards will ally with money magnate India and desert the ICC. As a cricket fan I can just say that UDRS should be applied uniformly with some modifications. All out decisions should be reviewed and appeals should be allowed only to fielding team for not out decisions. And what about scenarios where a team has used all its appeals - don't we go back to the same old stone age of umpires calling the shots. I consider India matches as tests where both teams have used up all their appeals. But on question of uniformity- definitely YES.

  • on December 27, 2011, 5:55 GMT

    Why IND do not like URDS/DRS?.Becauses they are people who are benefitting most by not using this.Real examples is this test.Further in Galle SRT not walked even ball hit the bat while he was sweeping.Wicket keeper got the catch and appealed but umpire was not given.Then UDRS came to play and given him out.So now you know why IND does not like this. Day by day every will improve along with technology and people also get used to it.That is how world is going.(Eg.Mobile,Laptop,Computers etc). But one thing I can Human can teke his decision once only,but if you use technology you can see it few more times and take correct decision.If IND can not used URDS then why they use technology for run outs.

  • Salim_123 on December 27, 2011, 5:28 GMT

    Why are we in the first debating about DRS. ICC will not do anything without the green light from BCCI perod. What if India had these two decisions going against them? It is very clear that India always benefits from the umpriring decisions that is why it is opposing DRS otherwise can BCCI give one good reason why they are opposing. Shame on other cricketing nations for supporting BCCI and not standing up.

  • on December 27, 2011, 5:06 GMT

    BCCI Spoiling Cricket for their benifits & Commonding ICC in all aspects,for every team new rules r getting applied but when it comes 4 us they all goes in bin,talking abt UDRS & Hotspot referal systems, our Board & Players Behaviour is not fare,Rule is Rule for all so why these guys not going according to rules, I request them plzz Play cricket as a Game but dnt play game with cricket !!!it really shame to gentlemen's game & hurts Cricket Lovers :(

  • g.narsimha on December 27, 2011, 4:57 GMT

    BCCI is totally wrong in opposing UDRS, but i may not be wrong in saying that INDIA was the wrost victim of bad unpiring over the years they were always at the recievigng end ,now the AUSSEEs are crying foul ,where are these guys during the SYDNEY, test , in the last tour of INDIA ,the umpires denied INDIA of its maiden series victory in AUS , WE HAVE SEEN LOT OF UMPIRING BLUNDERS , most amazing among them was , HEAD BEFORE WICKET OF SACHIN in a match in AUS , we had few bad dicisions even diring our last disastrous tour to eng , we have NOT comlained, just one doubt full decision ,all are at their feet, we too were denied a lbw , how ever it is right time that BCCI agrees for UDRS.

  • srilana on December 27, 2011, 4:44 GMT

    Indian lost all four test matches in England where DRS was implemented, so it clearly shows that BCCI do believe that india can not win oversees matches if the decisions are true & fair, that's what we experienced world cup semifinal against Pakistan the LBW for Tendulkar changed the entire match. Why should ICC amend the rules for sake of india, why cant ICC implement a voting system for issues like this. If this continues for the favour of India, then india is the only country will play cricket in the world.

  • on December 27, 2011, 4:41 GMT

    It is true that maybe the decisions were doubtful. But that is cricket. There were several close calls for LBWs not given. One has to accept these as part of the spirit of the game. DRS is not perfect and there is no use introducing something which is not perfect to improve on what is considered imperfect. Umpires must control the game and not he TV. There have been some decisions under DRS which were also doubtful! Ed Cowan is a babe in Test cricket and did play well but in his case the decision was 50-50. He should learn to accept and respect the umpire. There will be several occasions when he maybe out but given not out by the umpire! So dont start on the wrong foot.

  • on December 27, 2011, 4:33 GMT

    Hawk-eye is more error prone... Hot spot just does not work for thin edge....

    These technologies came under fire when Aus-SA series as well as India-England Series.

    Remember world cup match between India and England. Ian Bell bell was not given out though Hawk eye shown it hitting middle of middle stump. Reason - ball has to travel a good distance so hawkeye may be incorrect. It not only given benefit of doubt to Ian bell, but India lost one review. Too much advantage to other team.

    Sachin has been given out so many time incorrectly. No one from India made so much halla gulla that Aussie are making for Hussie's wicket. Cowan might be out but after realising that Hot spot failed to detect edge, he has opportunity. If he really did not nicked it, why he is not telling directly that I did not nicked it.

    By the way, Aussie also has stroke of luck when Haddin was give not out.

  • on December 27, 2011, 4:29 GMT

    Considering yesterday's decisions on Hussey & Cowan, I would always wish the OZ's to repeat the infamous Sydney 2008 so that the BCCI can understand.

  • on December 27, 2011, 4:21 GMT

    To all those yelling at BCCI for adopting the technology,the last visit of India to Australia was a draw just because of all these fake decisions by retirement aged umpires. Still we did not ask for the technology. First reason for not adopting the technology you will loose of the match by making so technical(why do we need umpires then,why dont we use technology-save money),also its equal for both the teams. Last time we were on the receiving end,this time the Australians. Its a false argument that Indians cant adopt technology, for some one who made this statement,most of US based techno companies are managed by Indians.Still have comments go through sydney test reviews from last tour -critics say Australia played with 14 batsmen(With symonds who made 4lifes because of false decisions) and India played with7 batsmen.Thats the fun of the game,lets enjoy the spirit of cricket in its true form

  • Sakthiivel on December 27, 2011, 4:16 GMT

    Can any one tell me is DRS gives 100% correct decision atleast 85%. We saw what happened in England.. DRS is a trash. Then why you go for that..

  • Dimitri_SL on December 27, 2011, 4:16 GMT

    Bottom Line: India can not draw, let alone win any test matches if DRS is in play. BCCI being the controling body of world cricket easily manipulate all rules and regulations to ensure their team will win/draw as must as possible, the rest(Matches which india looses even with the umpires/technology supporting them) indian general public go out in force on forums like this to build the case against the the team to whom they lost....Get used to this people this will not change for a long time to come.

  • on December 27, 2011, 3:52 GMT

    drs is allrubbish gambhir edged and see hot spot showing no edge same with cown was clearly out hussey was unlucky but 2008 got three chances scored145

  • on December 27, 2011, 3:48 GMT

    Aha!!I don't see DRS forcing its way into the cricket coz it simply doesn't have enough accuracy. Cowan's edge can be detected with the noise which couldn't have com from any other way and the so called technology couldn't detect it. With this percentage of accuracy batsman will start to refer thin edges which they believe could be reversed with the inadequate technology. Batsmen will start to gamble with it. Why the hell you use the technology which also makes some stupid howlers in spotting edges projected ball paths.

  • on December 27, 2011, 3:34 GMT

    I am totally agree with the view that DRS should be compulsory in all form of games, least you can take it out in T-20 because of time factor, but in Tests and ODIs it's a must. With the invent of technology which is quite supporting for the game we can't always excuse of human error. ICC should take strong steps to make it compulsory regardless of any board's affirmation. A group of any board member or players should not dominate the game. But I would like to add that can't third umpire or field umpires reverse a wrong decision after seeing it on the giant screen (these are now almost in any ground). One thing ICC should take into account that now wrong decisions of umpires are intolerable and one wrong decision can't be compensate with another wrong decision.

  • Sayedgee on December 27, 2011, 3:03 GMT

    The reason BCCI does not like DRS is, by in large, the overturns go in favor of the batsmen, just as it would have in favor of Hussey and Cowan. India being a weak bowling side, taking extra wickets for overturns can potentially be the difference between winning and losing a test. Shrewd but not good for cricket.

  • satish619chandar on December 27, 2011, 3:01 GMT

    @johnathonjosephs : There is no doubt who is the boss.. Who provides 70% of fuel to run the ICC bus is the boss and they dont need the flawed DRS to show their power.. Atleast BCCI si saving 5000$ per day so that that money can be spent somewhere usefully..

  • satish619chandar on December 27, 2011, 2:55 GMT

    @Rickaby : I would ask you one simple question stating examples.. 1. Dravid in England - Hot spot showed no edge. No deflection too in replays(Available ones) But umpire rules him out as there was a small sound in stump mike.. 2. JK Silva - First test against SA.. No deflection, no sound or any evidence but hot spot shows a very slight mark - fainter white nebular appearance on the glove. He is given out only because of that mark.. Now say, follow technology or common sense? We had a great experience in the Bell LBW in India.. 2.5m rule was simply accept on field decision if more than 2.5.. But the ball was hitting middle of middle stump.. Was ruled not out.. Follow rules or common sense? Uniformity in DRS need to consider all these cases..

  • satish619chandar on December 27, 2011, 2:49 GMT

    @Alexk400 : So, Aussies will be fine if decision goes wrong while bowling? It is the cost for that technology the main issue.. 5000$ per day for that is simply waste of money and time. Better we can have a DRS with replay and pitch map alone.. I am sure BCCI or anyone will disagree with this.. @sportz247 : England and SL both misused DRS against India.. @prafullobo : BCCI provides 70% of money to run ICC and they cant be compared with Soccer administration.. ICC is a child compared to FIFA..

  • priya65 on December 27, 2011, 2:49 GMT

    we have to accept that more often than not DRS leads to the correct decision. Why India is against his , really baffles me. It points towards a single argument, Indians must be thinking that their home advantage diminishes if the DRS is allowed. So in fact what they imply is that they expect a bigger margin of doubt for their 'greats' . This has always been the case with india especially. Cricketers have suffered in the hands of partisan umpires and gross misjudgements. With the DRS you get a fair chance. Even with that ( since you have 2 chances at DRS ) you could be unlucky. If you made two previous errors in asking for a DRS decision then your 'not out' could not be overturned. computers will get faster and the technology too. Actually we should move forward in allowing all the decisions to be reviewed and may be a penalty of 5 runs for an unsuccessful review request! ( imagine 3 runs to win 9 th wicket down, appeal turned down ! would you go for the review !!!? ) wake up india

  • satish619chandar on December 27, 2011, 2:44 GMT

    @cricketinny : BCCI have their own valid reasons for rejecting the DRS.. Why dont you guys see that? The real brokers are the ones who support the flawed technology.. Why are they strongly supporting a technology of such high cost which is going to predict something and it is not going to be accurate?

  • on December 27, 2011, 1:57 GMT

    well i think drs should only be used for near catches bat pad lbw's ! Bcci is ri8 .if the technology is accurate then we can use it if its nt then y shuld we ? stop poikng at bcci's nose guys ..get 100% accuracy and then talk about it !

  • Jithinvsjj on December 27, 2011, 1:46 GMT

    Hi friends...i could see many of our mates having a go at Sachin relating to DRS....All i want to say is that...if BCCI had approved and the implemented the use of DRS earlier, the only man who could have benefited from it will be Mr Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar..he was given out many a times by the umpires wrong decision .//..he could have extended his tally of 100's to nearly 150....

  • Abhiramb on December 27, 2011, 1:40 GMT

    BCCI and the Indian players have no business throwing their weight around. Indian players also oppose the "where about" clause in the WADA agreement!! However, one also wonders why ICC should allow them to have their way! Why is the central body so weak? I think every team should accept DRS or no team should be allowed such special privileges. ThevIndian teams and fans have the right to say what they want but it's time ICC told them you are like any other team!

  • IPLisdull on December 27, 2011, 1:26 GMT

    For those of you asking what Cowan means by connect the dots, he is not allowed to come out after the days play in a press conference and say he was not out, this is dissent for which he will be reprimanded and fined by ICC. By saying connect the dots he is clearly saying without saying it that he did not hit the ball, as the replays suggest. Can we all please move on!

  • avmd on December 27, 2011, 1:23 GMT

    Why the good umpires make poor decisions in India's favor, they have to earn some money in IPL and cannot make BCCI unhappy. Indian's are smart people and using the power they have to their advantage. They cannot improve their ranking just by performance on the feild. They will never let DRS use particularly in matches against Australia, England and South Africa.

  • LillianThomson on December 27, 2011, 0:47 GMT

    The umpires got four decisions out of seven correct. Australia was wronged twice and India once. Not in it's worst incarnation has DRS ever done so badly. Ever. Channel 9 in Australia proved that the Cowan "edge" was the noise of his stud scratching the pitch surface while he missed the ball by two inches but Indian viewers don't know that because Ravi "Conflict of Interest" Shastri was parroting the BCCI's discredited opposition to DRS to them at the time. Don't Indian fans ever wonder why noone else agrees with their opposition to DRS from the West Indies to New Zealand, from Australia to Zimbabwe?

  • Spook08 on December 27, 2011, 0:33 GMT

    Lets not forget that if we had DRS, Haddin would have been out as well

  • on December 27, 2011, 0:26 GMT

    Let ICC give us the numbers so that we have some idea of how good the DRS is. How many correct decisions were uphled and how many were reversed in matches wiith DRS in use. Is that difficult or is it under wraps? If we were to look further into the future the ICC should have a DRS going behind the scenes even when there isn't one in operation. Then we can talk with statistics. Otherwise we will have this endless discussion about the 100% which is obviously unattainable. The BCCI and most cricketers and some of the passionate supporters here are not expected to comprehend the science or the statistics behind this logical decision making process. Let the experts talk and ICC should appoint them.

  • Lord_Dravid on December 27, 2011, 0:01 GMT

    HOTSPOT IS UNRELIABLE ED COWAN COULD'VE BEEN OUT AND UMPIRES CALL IS FINAL.. JUST LIKE DRAVID WAS GIVEN OUT TWICE IN ENG DESPITE HOTSPOT SHOWING NOTHING. DRS IS UNRELIABLE! AND WHAT ABOUT HADDIN WHEN HE WAS CLEARLY OUT LBW NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT THAT? BUT LIKE I SAID GOOD AND BAD DECISIONS WILL EVEN OUT THROUGHT THE MATCH. AUSSIES STOP MOANING!!

  • 5wombats on December 26, 2011, 23:52 GMT

    @johnathonjosephs - good post. Spot on. BCCI are dinosaurs who are simply flexing their muscles. For some reason the rest of world cricket is being too pathetic to stand up to them. In a time and age when we routinely use mobile phone technology/Internet/Global Positioning... etc, all sorts of science; surely to goodness we can do better than 2 blokes (who maybe don't get paid enough....) standing out in the sun with a load of cricketers shouting the odds all day long. The refusal to accept DRS allows the fielding team/the crowd to scream at the Umpires and influence them. We've watched Test cricket in India and we know the reality. It's deliberate, it's provocatve and it's the BCCI's power policy. The rest of the world stands by and by not challenging it, colludes with it. DRS IS an improvement - so why not use it? even if only to protect the Umpires and their reputations; Bucknor is still coping it 8 years later!

  • on December 26, 2011, 23:33 GMT

    Cowan nicked the ball 100% and the sound meter picked it as well. Still there was nothing in the hot spot. So how can you trust things when the technologies used itself are contradictory. Come up with a system which is better than an umpire standing there then it make sense.

  • PACERONE on December 26, 2011, 23:31 GMT

    Why all the urgency now by Australians to use DRS.They used to benefit from all the bad decisions. Then if the two allowed reviews are used up by the number 1 and 2 batsmen,then what happens when the umpires makes wrong decisions after that? All batsmen should have two reviews if it is to be a fair system. We also have players appealing when they must know that it is not out.There was a caught down the leg side recently,when the keeper was the only one appealing,trying to negate an extra.He did not call the batsman back.Why blame the umpires for wrong decisions.The constant appealing for every sound is ridiculous.The players have to be more honest if the game is to be played fairly. Who is working the equipment making the DRS decisions? One representative from each team should be present. Can vaseline,linseed oil or some other chemical be used to avoid detection of an edge? Too bad the Australians are so upset when decisions go against them. Pakistan,west Indies have suffered.

  • sunilcricket on December 26, 2011, 23:26 GMT

    I believe an Out is always an Out and not out is always a not out in the game as per the rules defined in the game. I prefer a Third Umpire Intervene System instead of DRS for every out decision. If it is a wrong decision, 3rd empire can correct it no matter whether it's an our or not out.

  • tusharkardile on December 26, 2011, 23:20 GMT

    Learn to live with guys......

  • drgonzo76 on December 26, 2011, 23:11 GMT

    Either the ICC are 100% for DRS or 100% against it. It is mad that we go from one series with one set of DRS rules, another with a different set than another series with no DRS. Can't they show some leadership for once and make a decision one way or the other not this mess!

  • bouncer3459 on December 26, 2011, 23:08 GMT

    Aleem Dar and Simon Taufel for every match - Thats the only other Solution.

  • on December 26, 2011, 23:08 GMT

    why is no one talking about the lbw that was ruled in favor of the batsman?

  • Test_Match_Fan on December 26, 2011, 23:05 GMT

    HEY AUSSIE FANS, AGREE DRS SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED, BUT DO NOT FORGET THE PAST, THE MANY MATCHES AUSTRALIA WON AT HOME WITH UMPIRING ADVANTAGE. TAKE THE JAN 2008 SYDNEY MATCH, WHERE AUSTRALIA WON BASED ON SUSPICIOUS UMPIRING DECISIONS. EVERY COMMENTATOR AGREED STEVE BUCKNOR AND MARK BENSON HAD MESSED UP BIG TIME. I HAVE BEEN WATCHING TESTS FOR A VERY LONG TIME AND DECISIONS IN FAVOR OF INDIANS IN AUSTRALIA ARE AS RARE AS THE APPEARANCE OF A UNICORN. GO READ SOME HISTORY.

  • on December 26, 2011, 22:56 GMT

    What kind of an answer has Cowan given? It is statements like these which add fuel to the fire of controversy.. Why can't he offer a straight forward answer to whether he felt he edged it or not? watching on TV the nick was loud and clear and so was the reaction from all the players around.. that is very disappointing from Cowan.. he has to take an example from what AB De Villiers did in the last test vs SL.. wanting to play the game in the right spirit.. else this series will fast head the 07-08 way!!

  • sachinvirufan on December 26, 2011, 22:55 GMT

    Looks like C K carried away. He does not understand that's why making silly rubbish comments. If system is 100% accurate (Not accurate at all for LBW) then India will accept it. It was agreed before tour atarted then why all this noise. Why public vote? They can do that or leave it for man of the match so they can pick aussie player even if they dont deserve it

  • on December 26, 2011, 22:50 GMT

    And ppl talking about Haddin not being given out...this is not about making personal attacks...that incident just bolsters the case for DRS. When India got bad umpiring decisions, the whole team complained and got Bucknor removed...was that whining? Why single out Cowan now? Cricket is a game of skill of the players not the umpires. If you want to talk about keeping the human element, why have replays? Isnt it charming that you either see it live or you dont? For that matter, why use protective gear if it is not 100%. It would be a real test of skill if batsmen could survive against high quality bowling without protection.

  • on December 26, 2011, 22:43 GMT

    The only way I see India accepting DRS is if Tendulkar gets given out wrongly a few times this series on the cusp of his precious 100th 100 and India lose the series based on that. Then we will see how all the 100%ers magically change their stance.

  • cricketinny on December 26, 2011, 22:30 GMT

    Its amazing how the ICC mandated DRS then 3 months later reversed the decision because the BCCI (the real power of cricket) didn't like it. Why did the BCCI reverse it because some high profile Indian cricketers didn't like the DRS. It's so amazing that such a select group of power brokers can start to dictate their way of how cricket is meant to be when they don't like things yet every over nation doesn't seem to have a voice.

  • on December 26, 2011, 22:24 GMT

    I am appalled by the Indian fans response to the BCCI's stupid stance. The fact is that both Hussey and Cowan did not hit the ball and should not have been out. We had the technology to reverse the decisions but we did not. This is stupid.

    And both were clear not-outs not iffy LBWs.

    Nish8738, we had a life before electricity and in stone age also. Let's go back to it. Right?

  • on December 26, 2011, 22:15 GMT

    BCCI opposing UDRS is not a surprise for me. Because India is always late and slow in adapting new technologies. As long as they dont find financial or any other benefit from it people do not accept any technology. What would these Indian fans say if sachin is given out on 99 for such a howler. Do they accept umpire's decision as its agreed upon that no DRS will be used or they come out scolding and saying that Aus fixed umpires ?

  • mixters on December 26, 2011, 22:13 GMT

    @Nish8738 we had a life before the DRS didn't we? if its not 100% we won't use it period Well mate umpires dont get 100% right should we stop using umpires period? I can here the key boards across the world saying we have always had umpires so lets stick with them. If that was the wisest way we would still be living in caves. DRS has to be more consistant than the very best umpire you can argue with that but you would be wrong. It has to be an improvement period. Therefore the BCCI must have some reason to not want an improvment to the decision making of the umpires. Surely better is better it may not be perfect but it simply must be better than the human eye. And as for consistancy that was why nutral umpires and the Elite panal was created in the first place. The same Elite panal of Umpires that want the DRS in place. So what is BCCI real reason?

  • johnathonjosephs on December 26, 2011, 22:09 GMT

    there is no such thing as 100% in science. Statistically it is impossible. You can get 99%, even 99.5%, or even 99.9999%, but never 100%. I believe Hawkeye at the moment is 95% when ball is pitched within that certain range, which I believe is enough to have in conjunction with a 3rd umpire who will account for that 5%. BCCI is not stupid, they know this, but are just playing their petty politics to show the cricketing world who is boss. They are touring other countries and demanding that there not be any DRS even though they are visitors. ICC ruled 2 years ago that DRS is MANDATORY in all Test Matches, then why isn't there any? Its ridiculous. Show them who's boss and Ban BCCI until they agree. Don't let international players in the IPL and see how much money is lost to BCCI. BCCI will be then overturned by the true Indian fans and a rightful change will soon come.

  • Fijicricket on December 26, 2011, 22:04 GMT

    Australia was against the use of technology to assist umpiring claiming they preferred the "human touch" in the game! All bad decisions went in Australias favour at the time. Surely no one following cricket has forgotten! Now if India is against the use of technology- THATS UNACCEPTABLE! Reminds me of when Pakistan bowlers used reverse swing- ITS CHEATING When England bowlers start reerse swing ITS AN ART!!

  • Digimont on December 26, 2011, 21:59 GMT

    Of course the REAL reason why the BCCI don't want DRS is because India then loses one of its great advantages - their ability to con an umpire through their well rehearsed team appealing.

  • CMCMCM on December 26, 2011, 21:57 GMT

    Remove LBW dismissals from DRS and it suddenly becomes 100% accurate - you either hit the ball or you didn't. You were out of your crease or you weren't. It was a no ball or it wasn't... Leave LBW up to the umpires - they are in the best position. Occasionally bat-pad dismissals will be wrong but I'll accept that if it means removing shockers like Hussey's dismissal today.

  • on December 26, 2011, 21:57 GMT

    DRS may not be 100% full proof but it still makes less error than the poor human umpiring decision. It can't be bad and unlike umpiring which is just human, the system / technology will grow over time.

  • on December 26, 2011, 21:57 GMT

    Saying that UDRS is not 100% true and hence we wont use it is so childish and ignorant. Why are using you mobiles, cars, PCs while they are still in the process of perfecting. Technology improves with time and experience. DRS is not 100% correct. Might be or might not be. But it helps teams from umpiring howlers. As the time progresses it will get better and better. Very soon we will be seeing the same Indian fans moaning and yelling out for the same umpires' mistake when India comes to bat.

    @Nish8738: we had life before electricity and computers. Start living your life by abandoning them. Can you?

  • RedRascal on December 26, 2011, 21:51 GMT

    Even though I am an Indian supporter-I do not understand this illogical approach India has regarding the DRS; if something is at 90% accuracy, and technology helps to get it to 99%, why hold off saying only 100% will do ? 99% is better and with time will get to 99.9% too. Having said that- must say it is most satisfying to hear the Aussies & their press "whinging" ( as they put it after Sydney back in the 2007-8 series) about umpiring ! Poetic justice !

  • Lord_Dravid on December 26, 2011, 21:47 GMT

    michael clarke himself said before the series he dosent mind playing the old ways without the drs..so this series is going to be played the old way..so whats the fuss about umpiring decisions be it bad or good? hotspot is soo unreliable look what happend against india in england! bottom line is good and bad decisions will even out..i dont know why cowan this 29 year old debutant is moaning about.. if he was really a class player like tendulkar, kallis, dravid, lara he wouldnt be moaning!

  • Rickaby on December 26, 2011, 21:43 GMT

    All this talk of 100% accuracy is ridiculous - nothing is 100% accurate! If the umpires can manage, say, 70% of those really tough decisions (eg. Hussey, Cowan) and the DRS about, say, 90%, why on Earth would we not use the available technology which will only continue to improve (especially if we actually use it). Yes, decisions balance out, blah, blah, blah, but some decisions are more crucial than others. It would be interesting to hear the tune of Indian supporters if the Little Master suffered the same fate as Hussey. Just think, a mere 2 minute delay and if the evidence is sufficient, he could deservedly continue his innings. And, obviously, if the evidence is inconclusive, the umpire's call stands and he departs, perhaps agrieved but at least satisfied that all the available information was used to send him on his way.

  • Baundele on December 26, 2011, 21:43 GMT

    BCCI wanting 100% error-free technology is laughable. Even the computer is not 100% reliable. Why use them?

  • on December 26, 2011, 21:42 GMT

    The DRS is good enough for the rest of the cricket playing world yet we see more nonsense from the BCCI.

    Get with the times and use it.

  • BlackArcher on December 26, 2011, 21:40 GMT

    Its not surprising to see that the Aussies didn't mention the Brad Haddin LBW that was plumb out and not given by the same umpire that gave Hussey out. the ball bowled by Zaheer landed on middle, straightened and hit Haddin on the back foot, well below his knee. They're complaining about decisions that went against them and staying mum on the one that went in their favour. How typical.

  • CricketLifer on December 26, 2011, 21:38 GMT

    Umpires made errors that benefited both teams. Haddin was plumb LBW which was not given either. Article would have more credibility if it mentioned that as well. Looks like one sided whining here.

  • Built_4_the_Kill on December 26, 2011, 21:36 GMT

    I think beating the drum of DRS will lead Australia to nowhere. If you review the past 20 years in cricket you will find (before DRS was born) Australian team for a very long time was the recipient of all the favors from umpires. Many matches were won by them b'coz umpires gave (their) batsman not out after they have nicked the ball and the sound could be heard on the moon and/or adjudging a batsman LBW when the ball hit the helmet. In all those matches...... Australian commentators and media just repeated one sentence..... It is an error from the umpire..carry on with the game. Now it is the turn of their opponent(s) to repeat the same sentence..... It is an error from the umpire..carry on with the game. Ed.... with all the courage was not able to lie that he did not nick the ball. Instead of lying he asked journalist to join the dots.

  • on December 26, 2011, 21:35 GMT

    Just have it uniform for all matches played or not used at all. It's ridiculous that we have one team refusing to use it now because they feel some of their players have been dudded in the past. The fact that it's an extremely effective way of reducing shockingly bad decisions appears to be lost on them, but it's not the ICC's job to educate.

  • smilemagi on December 26, 2011, 21:34 GMT

    @Deepak... Agreed. DRS can help avoid shockers... but remember there is only two unsuccessful attempts... imagine if AUS has made two unsuccessful reviews before Hussey came to bat... And he is given out by the field umpire.. Aussies can't appeal... Australia goes handicapped.. what do you think about this scenario? There are positives and negatives.. And BCCI has its right to decide...

  • on December 26, 2011, 21:30 GMT

    If India dont want to use it then dont play them. Then they will change their minds!

  • on December 26, 2011, 21:28 GMT

    @Nish8738 ... I truly don't understand this whole idea of it being "fool proof" - the CURRENT decisions made by he umpires are subject to human error - therefore, by its very nature, they are NOT fool proof - so with your logic we shouldn't have any umpiring until it becomes fool proof. I believe its a matter of the evolution of the game itself. The cricket world today uses equipment (bats, balls, gloves etc) that are significantly advanced than their previous counterparts so why not the DRS? In end umpiring in its very nature is NOT fool proof and human DRS eliminates SOME of that uncertainty - not "fool proof" and that is OK.

  • on December 26, 2011, 21:28 GMT

    Technology can't be 100% perfect - it still requires a human to look at it and humans make mistakes. But you are more likely to correct decision eg - the Hussey decision was clearly wrong and use of technology would have prevented that wrong.

    Years ago there was no TV, no technology and so nobody (except the recipient of the wrong decision) would complain. Times have moved on. Should we go back to no helmets? Poor padding? Old school bats? Why not pretend we live in the 1800s?

  • St.Helens on December 26, 2011, 21:26 GMT

    I wonder if anyone remembers what happened to India the last time when they toured Australia ? For those of you who don't know ask someone who does. This is India's fair share of luck. You just got to accept it and move on. As Sunil Gavaskar said "IT is always the Indians who act gentlemenly", why should it be the case now ? Remember England, Dhoni and Bell ??

  • griz1960 on December 26, 2011, 21:06 GMT

    @smilemagi - you forget that DRS exists BECAUSE of complaints about umpiring decisions. Most other professional sports now adopt technology to assist adjudicating, mainly due to the scrutiny from television. If we're going to drop DRS, we may as well go right back by scrapping television coverage and only listen to cricket on the radio.

  • on December 26, 2011, 21:02 GMT

    @nish8738 cricket isnt gentlemen's game anymore and atleast drs removes howlers

  • on December 26, 2011, 21:01 GMT

    yes we had a life before drs. agreed. but now drs is there if umpires have a 80% accuracy rate then surely drs has a 90 % accuracy. its a joke from bcci to go with 20% inaccuracy than 10% available. no other team has any prob with drs. except india. its time icc makes it compulsory for all formats. when something new comes to the game it will have both flaws and merits. just because india was on the receiving end in the england series that does not mean drs is useless, drs was a champion in the sa-aus series and it produced a great series . bcci take the game forward for a change. who knows it might be tendulkar, laxman , dravid who'll be on the receiving end tomorrow. then all you can do is keep ruing

  • on December 26, 2011, 20:58 GMT

    Mr. Cowan - What's the guarantee that you didn't use vaseline on your bat. There was definitely a clear sound and you also know you nicked it.

  • on December 26, 2011, 20:55 GMT

    @nish even umpiring decisions are not full proof. then do not use that also. lol

  • on December 26, 2011, 20:53 GMT

    @Nish8738

    Yes, we had a life before DRS. But what is the problem to accept new technology if it helps taking decisions better? Nothing is perfect but as it can reduce human error to a great extent, then why only India does not want to use it? Does it make sense at all?

  • on December 26, 2011, 20:44 GMT

    Aussies never wanted DRS in 2007 :P

  • on December 26, 2011, 20:31 GMT

    Just after one game he calls for the DRS and speaks all stuff about DRS, this shows how much respect the Aussies players have on the 2 Gentle men in the middle..

  • on December 26, 2011, 20:27 GMT

    BCCI says they want 100% surety if technology,It is nonsense ,DRS can help to get rid of shockers( real bad decisions) for example Hussey was not out today,many have gone against India also,

  • Nish8738 on December 26, 2011, 20:17 GMT

    we had a life before the DRS didn't we? if its not 100% we won't use it period

  • Nish8738 on December 26, 2011, 20:12 GMT

    hussey's decision was very close because the ball swung after it passed hussey so it gave the umpire an indication that it hit his glove on the way. All these decisions could have gone either way. its not like the sydney test match last time around.

  • smilemagi on December 26, 2011, 20:02 GMT

    well played cowan. i wish everyone looks at the game as if DRS never existed.. there wont be any complaints at all.. ICC has given the choice to cricket boards just because everyone who knows about the game is aware that DRS is not yet 100% fool-proof... Cricket will definitely be duller if we start looking up to the machines for every aspect.

  • frommoonman on December 26, 2011, 19:15 GMT

    All these arguments about DRS makes one or two basic assumption that a hot-spot or snicko or tracking technology is 100% accurate, which by the admission of the inventor themselves - it is NOT. (Refer to the article by the CEO of Hot-Spon on CricInfo couple months back). Second, if the idea is to remove human error (or hawlers) then what is the guarantee that humans who are operating the system will not make the error? (Refer to the Dhoni dismissal in WI where the review team showed the previous delivery which was not a no-ball as compared to the one where Dhoni was given out, which was actually a no-ball). It was interesting the same folks who are crying for DRS, swept the matters under the carpet saying - "it's a human error"...! Give me a break. Also the Oz media tend to miss the point that both Haddin and Siddle were plumb LBW but were not given - why are we not talking about it then? As we all know Double-standard and Oz Media are synonyms...!

  • on December 26, 2011, 19:03 GMT

    I also saw cricket as an outsider but what happened when DRS is taken ,indians has suffered a lot in past close decisions went in favor of opposing teams.He forgot to mention the lucky escape of haddin wen zak find him plumb.Though Hussey ws definately not out but cowan was.It was 1-1 in d context of d game....

  • satanswish on December 26, 2011, 18:55 GMT

    Get the technology right & there is no harm in having DRS mandatory for all international matches. Ed Cowan is still amateur when it comes to international cricket. However there is fashion for giving strong statements too early in your career. After a couple of years, same statement-givers do not qualify for their squads.

  • on December 26, 2011, 18:53 GMT

    Why haven't you mentioned abt Haddin's reprieve from LBW due to absence of DRS? Why just talk about decisions against Aus? Why not against India as well?

  • cricpolitics on December 26, 2011, 18:52 GMT

    I bet you if these two decisions had gone against Indian batsmen there would have been calls for umpire's removal from standing in the match and even threats to abandon the tour. India's stand against DRS is just out right ridiculous and an arrogant one. There is no hope from ICC though who had bowed down to Indian pressure after they had reversed their decision to make DRS mandatory. It's a shame.

  • on December 26, 2011, 18:40 GMT

    Unless Simon Teufel and Aleem Dar are umpiring every Umpire needs technology assistance. I honestly believe India's intransigence against DRS is partially because of the systems short comings, and partly Indians always get the better of bad umpiring decisions. Umpires do not give bad decisions against India because they all want lucrative IPL and Champions Trophy assignments. In a sordid way BCCI is manipulating Cricket by not allowing DRS.

  • Shan_Karthic on December 26, 2011, 18:23 GMT

    Hussey's decision was a bad one but for Cowan there was a very clear sound similar to an edge. The sound was ball on wood, not ball on pad or bat on pad. Unfortunately we don't have Snickometer here but I believe that evidence would have shown him edging. What do we do when there is a high chance (and prior occurrences) when different technologies provide different results? That is the core reason for people opposed to DRS (not for BCCI who may or may not have different reasons).

    For all the talk about needing and supporting DRS, why are the supporters not doing any scientific analysis? There is nothing preventing ECB or CA or ICC to assess all competing technologies for a year in all matches for all balls without implementing DRS, do an offline comparison to actual event, what each technology says and then publish a %accuracy report. That would resolve this conflict.

  • Imran.Bush on December 26, 2011, 18:12 GMT

    I want to be clear at this very moment, I am far from an Australian supporter. But where are the INDIAN team supporters who love to clamor about their players receiving the worst umpiring decisions? Rest assured, the laws of averages don't lie the same decisions (perhaps howlers) will be meted out to the other side as well. Sadly, I feel, this series will be determined by umpiring decisions and in this day of helpful technology, this is not good for the game!

  • rohan024 on December 26, 2011, 17:10 GMT

    its a shame that Indians don't use DRS, also because it was bcoz of Indians, that DRS was introduced in first place..really, our big players should behave like statesmen and allow DRS to be used even if they don't believe in it..if 9 countries out of 10 want to use DRS, then it should be used...

  • Romenevans on December 26, 2011, 16:52 GMT

    Unnecessary from Cowan and yet another over-hyped wannabe type of a player from Australia who'll be sent back to the realty in Sub-continent against spinners. This guy made his debut today and already started talking big? Get a break dude and some matches behind you then come out and speak about what should be done and what shouldn't be. He was out and UDRS is a complete joke and big useless pile of flawed technology.

  • on December 26, 2011, 16:50 GMT

    yup DRS SHOULD BE COMPLETELY SCRAPPED

  • on December 26, 2011, 16:44 GMT

    Mr Cowan, just please don't line. You said it is a lazy shot and asks us to join the dots. Yes, technology help to be taken in cricket too. But only if it is fully cooked. So, please grow up dude.

  • Full-Blooded-Wallop on December 26, 2011, 16:44 GMT

    I'm sure it'll even itself out over the course of the series." ??|? LOL. wasn't it evened today only?

  • prafullobo on December 26, 2011, 16:38 GMT

    I do not understand the logic of the BCCI. They do not like to embrace technology. The DRS is not full proof but it is making progress all the time. The ICC should make it mandatory and not bow to the financial pressure of the BCCI. Can the Brazil Football federation dictate terms to FIFA? Absolutely not. The ICC need tough people in charge like Michael Holding, who always speaks his mind.

  • SaneVoice on December 26, 2011, 16:32 GMT

    What defines a howler? It is a decision which can be clearly seen on tv replays. A faint nick that can't be caught on replays can't be termed as a howler. Frankly, do we need Hot-spot and hawk-eye to eliminate howlers? What is ICC really upto? They keep saying that we need all this technology to eliminate howlers! Really? Whether 75% (or whatever) of the ball pitched outside leg is a howler?

    In England they relied upon snicko to give batsman out when hot-spot showed nothing. Howlers are not feather-nicks that even hot-spot finds it difficult to spot but a clear inside edge (visible through normal TV replays) onto pads given as an LBW.

    Never seen such lack of common sense in a professional sport as old as Cricket! Sad!! Very Sad!

  • Full-Blooded-Wallop on December 26, 2011, 16:31 GMT

    Had there been DRS cowan would have been saved by it. And it would have been another howler as cowan was 100% out! Simply loving the OZs crying....life goes full circle!

  • anuajm on December 26, 2011, 16:23 GMT

    "You saw the replays, you saw my reaction, you can join the dots I guess". Poor from Cowan, should have said on the face if he did not edged it. Didn't saw this neither could find something in the cricinfo commentary..so don't know if he was out or not!!

  • Nampally on December 26, 2011, 16:19 GMT

    Many Fans think that UDRS will ensure infalliblity. But think again!. Dravid was given out 3 times in the same test series in the recently concluded India Vs. England test series in England - bat/Pad catch, bat/pad LBW & caught behind. Each time DRS did NOT declared Rahul OUT, yet Umpire gave him OUT!. Many Aussies have criticized the Indian fans objections to the Sydney Test bad umpiring which went against INDIA with no DRS in place. In that match Symmonds was out twice once on the first ball caught behind & little later plumb LBW- went on to score a century to turn Indian win to a loss. So with or without DRS, the appeal by Cowan & Clarke should be for consistent application & interpretation of DRS for all test matches after (1) this v.expensive technology is perfected for thin "snicks" & (2) It is an Umpire's decision Review not a "decision review where the Umpire over rules the DRS"!. Where Dravid's DRS was overturned by Umpire the same might have happened in case of Cowan!.

  • on December 26, 2011, 16:18 GMT

    Why is it that only India refuses the DRS system? Is ICC controlled by India or vice -versa? All cricket playing nations should agree to it and any country that does not want could play their own game in their backyards. Come on ICC be firm with your decisions. Do not stoop down or bow down to money.

  • on December 26, 2011, 16:11 GMT

    I agree with COWAN for uniforming the DRS...but there are few picks which he did not express in his talks was 'First Cowan was dead out' becz hot spot is not at all 100%, its just a reference to make umpiring faults catchy. Stump mike clearly flashed the edgy wood noise from COWAN's bat...n secondly Haddin was absolutely dead plumb to Zaheer's swinger but was turned down by Erasmus...both team had 1 all to their favour...

  • Vernacular_Press on December 26, 2011, 16:11 GMT

    Cowan was clearly out.I didnt see hotspot but if it didnt show nothing then its a complete waste.

  • disco_bob on December 26, 2011, 16:07 GMT

    This argument about "it all evens out in the end", is nonsense. If each side gets 5 howlers in a series then that doesn't make everything all right.

  • Laulin on December 26, 2011, 15:58 GMT

    I think cricinfo is becoming a mouthpiece of countries other than india. You did not include the decision of Haddin that went against India? All India is asking is to prove that DRS really works and that it works consistently. Despite DRS, we did see umpiring errors in the past - all we need is replays and yet if you have, in my opinion, biased third umpires such as Clive Llyod, then nothing will work.

  • Cheeki on December 26, 2011, 15:52 GMT

    Aussies are turning into whingers, there was no talk of DRS when they were intimidating umpires for years. the Aussie press are putting subtle pressure on the umpires to go easy on their team. Cowan hit the leather of the ball but rues the absence of DRS. Had he nicked it and was given not out would he have walked?

  • SAcricFan on December 26, 2011, 15:50 GMT

    Cowan and Hussey clearly not out, DRS should be mandatory when Countries hosting have all available technolgy available!Dont know what Indias problem is with it when all other test playing nations are Happy with it!Maybe India feel it is the only way they can take wickets, by getting lucky with bad Umpiring decisions!

  • ARDjango on December 26, 2011, 15:35 GMT

    After the 2007 Sydney Test a bunch of Aussies including Symonds, Clarke, and Hussey were reprieved multiple times, I thought BCCI would make it a point to pioneer the use of Technology to improve umpiring decisions.

    Now, its surprising to see BCCI objecting to it. What are the reasons? Is it the Tech? Is it that UK and Aus companies create and run the technology and make money? Is it based on bad prior experience? Poor protocols on how to combine technology with on-feild intuitions, & 3rd ump - we saw in England?

    BCCI is not doing a great with regards to its execution and marketing on the current stand. ECB and ACB not showing leadership either. ICC have to take leadership, analyze and accept there are issues, lay out the current concerns, and chalk out a plan to resolve conflicts if they are keen on improving decisions. This might involve one of the boards taking initiative and spending some money. DRS is its current form is unacceptable is a vague statement.

  • naveenpnayak on December 26, 2011, 15:32 GMT

    Its really pathetic to see UDRS not being implemented in such an important series.. Poor decisions from the Umpires..Indian Board would have made a big issue of this if any of the Indian batsmen was given out like this, for a wrong decision from any of the umpires. Its better we get to see UDRS been implemented atleast in the second test, such that we get to see the right decisions been made which is good for the sport..

  • SirViv1973 on December 26, 2011, 15:29 GMT

    Are the BCCI the only governing body still opposed to DRS ? If the majorty of the full members want DRS then surley it should be implemented in every test series. Time for the ICC to put this to the vote and stop being scared of upsetting the BCCI! Either everyone uses it or no one does, that would seem fair.

  • isot on December 26, 2011, 15:28 GMT

    Why do you beat around the bush saying "you saw this..you saw that". Say straight whether you have edged it or not! And yeah, if only those 5 dismissals went India's way in 2007, we would have nailed you, ground you into the dust! Isn't it, Mr. debutante?

  • rahulcricket007 on December 26, 2011, 15:28 GMT

    what a start for this series . first day and the controversies have begun . it could go even furthur . seems lke we won't miss bhajji & symonds .

  • SirViv1973 on December 26, 2011, 15:27 GMT

    Are the BCCI the only governing body still opposed to DRS ? If the majorty of the full members want DRS then surley it should be implemented in each test series. Time for the ICC to put this to the vote and stop being scared of upsetting the BCCI! Either everyone

  • anuajm on December 26, 2011, 15:25 GMT

    Cowan looks like will play the role of Katich for Aussies, grind and get runs!! With Warner on the other endl, this would be a lethal combination!! Warner, Cowan,Marsh,,Clarke,Watson,Wade, Harris, Pattinson, Cummins, Lyon!! With a solid replacement at 4, this team really looks good for Aussies!! Talking of DRS, should have been in place for this series!!

  • simpleguy2008 on December 26, 2011, 15:21 GMT

    I am really against the BCCI decision of not using the UDRS system now after seeing the three controversial decision i can now see that ICC will now mandate this UDRS system and i hope this will happen from the second or third test but it should be happen now .

  • torsha on December 26, 2011, 15:15 GMT

    look, who is talking..NOT even he has completed his first match! Though I only respect Hussey in Aus team. Umpire should have taken the decision correctly. Please don't blame DRS. It is not only that Aus is suffering, Ind might have to suffer too. If suddenly one decision go wrong, people crying about DRS, funny game it is.

  • on December 26, 2011, 15:11 GMT

    Aussies are turning into whingers, there was no talk of DRS when they were intimidating umpires for years. the Aussie press are putting subtle pressure on the umpires to go easy on their team. Cowan hit the leather of the ball but rues the absence of DRS. Had he nicked it and was given not out would he have walked ?

  • on December 26, 2011, 15:09 GMT

    Strange, Brydon. No mention of the plumb Siddle LBW that was not given out? Hmm,.. a clear case of showing a bias by selective fact sharing.

  • bingorighton on December 26, 2011, 15:04 GMT

    typical articles of those who would like to blame poor performance on something else. cowan was out . was a fair decision . hussey was unlucky agreed. but what about the lbw decision that went against india when zaheer had haddin plumb in front of stumps. these decisions even out itself. hussey was notout but haddin was out. dont tell me hussey has never been notout when he actually was out. drs problem is clearly visible in the wicket of cowan. he had a knick for sure but drs showed nothing. drs by itself is not complete. icc should combine drs with snicko meter and other available technologies and let 3rd umpire take a decision on the appeal.

  • on December 26, 2011, 15:00 GMT

    If the Technology DRS is available why we not using India are the only side which questioning or oppossed DRs SYSTEM .Even though it may not be Full proof as India are concern but they reduce so many umpiring error which is good for the game.For eg in World Cup Sf Sachin seems to be Plumb against Ajmal and umpire too him given out while DRS shown the ball drifting down the leg side and Tendulkar survived and plays the crucial knock to help India to beat Pakistan.In last series against Australia in 2007-08 so many Errors by steve bucknor and benson against India cost them the Sydney Test..Now its mandatory that there should be compulsion use of DRS Fromm ICC

  • kiranphy on December 26, 2011, 14:59 GMT

    what about siddles lbw decesion he servied because of there is no drs. Cowan seems lying he just supprting the drs in order to hide the one more batting colapse of aus. and about his own dismissal he was clearly out hot spot is useless it proveed several time and also accepted by the company

  • on December 26, 2011, 14:47 GMT

    Being a Bangladeshi fan I see bad descisions do go against Heavyweights...:)

  • kingcobra85 on December 26, 2011, 14:46 GMT

    Stop talking and start playing well..

  • John_Raj_Mohammad_Singh on December 26, 2011, 14:32 GMT

    I bet I can find multiple replicas of this article on Cricinfo. The only thing consistent about DRS is the batsmen making a comment about it during every series, regardless of it being used or not.

  • sportz247 on December 26, 2011, 14:23 GMT

    without DRS india is going to win this series easily. england and srilanka are the only teams has beaten(With DRS) team india in last 3 years.. oh poor aussie..same kind of match are happen in this series..i.e.,india wins a thriller or going to chase above 200odd runs easily...

  • Alexk400 on December 26, 2011, 14:22 GMT

    I think best way is make Batting team decide whether they want DRS when they bat. This way we can satisfy both BCCI need for not to use DRS when they bat and aussie can have drs when they bat. I think it is fair decision. Please call on ICC to implement it.

  • imi2839 on December 26, 2011, 14:11 GMT

    as far as i am concerned, ICC should sponsor DRS for every series rather than leave it to boards, because not all boards can afford DRS.

  • on December 26, 2011, 14:01 GMT

    Hot Spot is not conclusive. Rahul Dravid was given out twice even when Hot Spot showed no edge.

  • yuvirulz99 on December 26, 2011, 14:01 GMT

    Snicko seemed quite sure Cowan edged, along with all the players on the field and the umpire. Just because hotspot seemed uncertain you can't scrutinise the bureaucrats of the game for lack of DRS. Hussey was definately not out, poor decision, however later in the game Zaheer had Haddin plumb in front. Have faith in the umpires and the game.

  • spinkingKK on December 26, 2011, 13:58 GMT

    It is interesting to debate about which one of the following are more serious: a) a batsman given out when he is not. b) A batsman given not out when is very much out. The immediate reaction would be the first one is the worse and the more serious one. Because, the batsmen usually gets the benefit of the doubt and therefore, they should never be given out wrongly. However, a very valid arguement about the second one being the most serious one is, if a batsman was given out when he played an awkward shot or looked awkward in his technique, it doesn't mean that he may not have been out on the very next ball. But, when a batsman is given not out when he clearly OUT, then it is a life which is saved from dead. That is a big injustice to the fielding team. True, they can still try to get him out straight away. But, one has to remember that the bowlers struggle many sessions to take 10 wickets. But, the batsmen score over 400 runs during those sessions. So, wickets are harder to come by.

  • on December 26, 2011, 13:57 GMT

    Chalk me up as one in the chorus of Australians that thinks DRS should absolutely be used consistently. It's also mindboggling that it is not consistent, after two or three seasons of use in which nearly everybody (globally) has been happy with the added innate sense of justice. The decision for Hussey may well be the straw that broke the camel's back, and that is patently unfair. But one has to wonder whether the BCCI has a point when Channel 9's Eagle Eye failed on the Cowan dismissal ball. I'm also sceptical about how it handles swing - I perceive that it doesn't extrapolate swing after the ball has bounced - this might just be me though. If a ball starts to move, chances are, it's about to move further in an arc. Instead, the technology seems to show it going straight on from the last known tracked point?

  • manav599 on December 26, 2011, 13:53 GMT

    This is high time now for ICC to come up with authority. It has been created for this. Nobody has problems with wrong descisions-It happens. However when you now that in some series you can get errors undone and in some cant, it really frustrates everyone. Just to say-some people say Haddin was given not out on a plum lbw descision to even out things. Commmmoooon,look at the situations-that is not even.

  • manav599 on December 26, 2011, 13:53 GMT

    This is high time now for ICC to come up with authority. It has been created for this. Nobody has problems with wrong descisions-It happens. However when you now that in some series you can get errors undone and in some cant, it really frustrates everyone. Just to say-some people say Haddin was given not out on a plum lbw descision to even out things. Commmmoooon,look at the situations-that is not even.

  • Karthikeyan007 on December 26, 2011, 13:51 GMT

    Why one lopsidedness in the article? Haddin was plumb LBW in the 85th over and was reprieved due to the lack of DRS. But there is no mention of that in the article! "84.5 Khan to Haddin, no run, pitched up on the stumps, appeal for lbw and it is turned down. First impression - pitched outside leg. Good length, drew Haddin forward and rapped the pad as he fell over. Ok, I was wrong - that pitched in line according to HawkEye. DRS would have given Zaheer the wicket. Deal with it, India."

  • on December 26, 2011, 13:34 GMT

    I'm a big fan of Indian cricket, but by refusing the DRS system, BCCI is indirectly ending some of the players careers. Michael Hussey is under tremendous pressure to either score runs or hang his boots, in such circumstanes, the DRS system would have given him the life to score runs and revive his career. A first ball duck is not only a personal shame, but also decisive blow to the affected team. 2 out 6 wrong decisions on the opening day, is totally unacceptable. It's interesting to see how the BCCI, the players and the public back in India, react if they get such harsh decisions to their key batsmen.

  • ssenthil on December 26, 2011, 13:19 GMT

    Pathetic typical reply from an Aussie who even claims Pump catch and pretend that they cleanly taken. IF you are Honest, you should be honest enough to answer that did u nick it or not. We seen how vulnerable is Hotspot in England. Be honest Aussies, don't try to get sympathy.

  • on December 26, 2011, 13:15 GMT

    BCCI coughs and ICC gets scared they will catch the plague. CA also should have NEVER agreed to this. By the top Indian players telling BCCI what they want and not, TEST cricket has become farcical. Please save the game and with the technology avaible, I say use it .

  • muthuthewaves on December 26, 2011, 13:15 GMT

    technology should be 100% accurate. With the presence of drs india got three wrong decisions in england. Hot spots have 90-95% accuracy. We cant rely completely on snicko's as well. In hawk eye we have prob with 2.5 meters rule and on field calls. When u apply a technology to reduce human error it should be 100% accurate. India never says that they dont need drs but they need with 100% accuracy.

  • cricket_ch on December 26, 2011, 13:03 GMT

    Inspite of being an Indian, I hope Tendulkar is given out lbw inspite of an inside edge on 99. That might force BCCI to reconsider their stand on DRS. I do agree that it cannot be forced upon all countries and all series where it might not be affordable but for such a big series there is no excuse for not using it.

  • on December 26, 2011, 12:57 GMT

    Well played, Ed. Good start to your career. May you go a long way.

  • ajmal1988 on December 26, 2011, 12:38 GMT

    BCCI paying Gavaskar and Ravi Shastri to travel the world and spread anti-DRS propaganda. Why isn't everyone else seeing what BCCI sees? is everyone else stupid? even the umpires agrees that DRS should be in place. Before the umpires used to be against it, but now most of them has turned. The game must move, who cares about shastri and gavaskar?

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • ajmal1988 on December 26, 2011, 12:38 GMT

    BCCI paying Gavaskar and Ravi Shastri to travel the world and spread anti-DRS propaganda. Why isn't everyone else seeing what BCCI sees? is everyone else stupid? even the umpires agrees that DRS should be in place. Before the umpires used to be against it, but now most of them has turned. The game must move, who cares about shastri and gavaskar?

  • on December 26, 2011, 12:57 GMT

    Well played, Ed. Good start to your career. May you go a long way.

  • cricket_ch on December 26, 2011, 13:03 GMT

    Inspite of being an Indian, I hope Tendulkar is given out lbw inspite of an inside edge on 99. That might force BCCI to reconsider their stand on DRS. I do agree that it cannot be forced upon all countries and all series where it might not be affordable but for such a big series there is no excuse for not using it.

  • muthuthewaves on December 26, 2011, 13:15 GMT

    technology should be 100% accurate. With the presence of drs india got three wrong decisions in england. Hot spots have 90-95% accuracy. We cant rely completely on snicko's as well. In hawk eye we have prob with 2.5 meters rule and on field calls. When u apply a technology to reduce human error it should be 100% accurate. India never says that they dont need drs but they need with 100% accuracy.

  • on December 26, 2011, 13:15 GMT

    BCCI coughs and ICC gets scared they will catch the plague. CA also should have NEVER agreed to this. By the top Indian players telling BCCI what they want and not, TEST cricket has become farcical. Please save the game and with the technology avaible, I say use it .

  • ssenthil on December 26, 2011, 13:19 GMT

    Pathetic typical reply from an Aussie who even claims Pump catch and pretend that they cleanly taken. IF you are Honest, you should be honest enough to answer that did u nick it or not. We seen how vulnerable is Hotspot in England. Be honest Aussies, don't try to get sympathy.

  • on December 26, 2011, 13:34 GMT

    I'm a big fan of Indian cricket, but by refusing the DRS system, BCCI is indirectly ending some of the players careers. Michael Hussey is under tremendous pressure to either score runs or hang his boots, in such circumstanes, the DRS system would have given him the life to score runs and revive his career. A first ball duck is not only a personal shame, but also decisive blow to the affected team. 2 out 6 wrong decisions on the opening day, is totally unacceptable. It's interesting to see how the BCCI, the players and the public back in India, react if they get such harsh decisions to their key batsmen.

  • Karthikeyan007 on December 26, 2011, 13:51 GMT

    Why one lopsidedness in the article? Haddin was plumb LBW in the 85th over and was reprieved due to the lack of DRS. But there is no mention of that in the article! "84.5 Khan to Haddin, no run, pitched up on the stumps, appeal for lbw and it is turned down. First impression - pitched outside leg. Good length, drew Haddin forward and rapped the pad as he fell over. Ok, I was wrong - that pitched in line according to HawkEye. DRS would have given Zaheer the wicket. Deal with it, India."

  • manav599 on December 26, 2011, 13:53 GMT

    This is high time now for ICC to come up with authority. It has been created for this. Nobody has problems with wrong descisions-It happens. However when you now that in some series you can get errors undone and in some cant, it really frustrates everyone. Just to say-some people say Haddin was given not out on a plum lbw descision to even out things. Commmmoooon,look at the situations-that is not even.

  • manav599 on December 26, 2011, 13:53 GMT

    This is high time now for ICC to come up with authority. It has been created for this. Nobody has problems with wrong descisions-It happens. However when you now that in some series you can get errors undone and in some cant, it really frustrates everyone. Just to say-some people say Haddin was given not out on a plum lbw descision to even out things. Commmmoooon,look at the situations-that is not even.