Decision Review System July 15, 2011

Harper says technology 'not the aid it is claimed'

71

Technology is "not the aid it is claimed to be" in reviewing on-field decisions, the former international umpire Daryl Harper has said.

Having been at the centre of a decision-making storm that hastened his departure from Test cricket, Harper highlighted the problem of broadcast camera frame-rates as a central issue to the use of technology and the success or failure of the DRS.

In the series between West Indies and India, which did not employ the DRS, Harper said television cameras shot at 25 frames per second, while during the World Cup on the subcontinent, they were ratcheted up to 50 frames per second.

In each case, Harper believed, there was a high probability that the camera would not capture the ball landing or making contact with bat, pads or gloves, calling into question the veracity of replays and ball-tracking technology.

"When a batsman plays a shot well away from his body, and you as an umpire see the ball strike a glove, go through to the keeper, and you hear the sound, you can draw no other conclusion than it has been gloved to the keeper and the batsman is out," Harper told ESPNcricinfo.

"That it can't be confirmed by a camera at 25 frames per second, that's technology's problem. If they were filming at 1800 frames per second, like those super slow-mos, you'd see the glove depressed with the contact from the ball."

Even at the improved rate of frames utilised during the World Cup, Harper argued the evidence could remain sketchy, particularly for ball-tracking. This issue, raised consistently by the Indian board, had seen a revised version of the DRS introduced at the ICC's annual conference in Hong Kong.

The mandatory terms and conditions for the DRS that were approved consisted of infra-red cameras and audio-tracking devices. The ball-tracking technology has been removed from the ICC's original compulsory list of DRS technologies. This means that countries may still choose to use it, but can also use the system without ball-tracking, as will be the case in the upcoming England v India Test series.

"At 50 frames per second there is a very slim chance of the ball ever being captured making contact with the pitch when it actually lands, because there is a minimum of 60cm [of the ball travelling] between frames," Harper said. "If the cameras cannot capture the ball touching the pitch, I'm not quite sure how they can claim the degree of accuracy they do claim.

"So the more advanced technology becomes - unfortunately it is more expensive - the more likely the technology will be of a positive assistance to the game. At the moment it is not the aid that I believe it is claimed to be."

Harper's scepticism bears resemblance to that of India's players and board, as best articulated by N Srinivasan, the BCCI secretary. Before the ICC annual conference decided on a revised version of the DRS that eliminated ball-tracking technology, Srinivasan said the hardware had to be beyond suspicion if it was to be used.

"Nothing much has changed since we first opposed it. We welcome technology when it is 100% error-free," Srinivasan told the Indian Express in June. "In this case it is not, so we would continue to oppose the implementation of the DRS.

"The Hawk-Eye is yet to convince us. This is a technology that deals with the projection, trajectory and angle of the ball. And from where the cameras are placed, it cannot give a foolproof solution. We raised these issues when the company had made a presentation in Chennai and no-one was completely certain about its accuracy."

Daniel Brettig is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • on July 18, 2011, 21:48 GMT

    @Cricket_Analyst. You are right. It is difficult for us. But some like me don't want to give up. T have not missed a test match at the Queens Park Oval since India beat us by scoring 400+ to win the game way back in the 70's with Gavaskar and Vishwanth getting big scores. So you know how frustrated I am now. But I will continue to go to games in hope. What we need is the rest of the cricket world to support us and rally for our return to our best. When you bring us down our frustrations make us post irrational comments out of jealously I guess.

  • Cricket_Analyst on July 18, 2011, 2:06 GMT

    @John Duch : I don't need to speak on behalf of my team as their performance on field is sufficient enough to answer all their critics. I can understand mate, its been a LOOOOOOOOONG time since West Indies won a Test Match against India, a side which it used to brush away easily prior to 90's. Its difficult to come to terms with that for lots of West Indies Fans.

  • on July 17, 2011, 20:58 GMT

    Cricket_Analyst I am going to speak out on behalf of the West Indies and WI players. You can speak on behalf of Indian players if you so wish. I have been supporting my team since the days of Clive Lloyd LOOOOOOOOONG before India started winning test matches. I was there when Bedi declared the fourth innings of a Test Match.

  • mohsin9975 on July 17, 2011, 6:07 GMT

    There seems great hue and cry over sachin been given shoulder before wicket. Whats wrong in it?Sachin is a short man. When he crouches his shoulders come in line with stump height. It doesnt matter even if he or any batsman is given helmet b4 wicket or even elbow,thigh,back,deliberate gloving or any part of the body other than using his bat. People wudnt hav hyped this issue if it was anyother short batsman say an ashraful or other lowprofile batter say strauss,sarwan or even dravid. An lbw is any part of body of batsman obstructing the ball from hitting the stumps. Do not blame any umpire for adjudicating any batsman out in this fashion. Even if the batsman is sachin and the umpire is harper. This comes frm a sachin fan

  • Cricket_Analyst on July 17, 2011, 2:59 GMT

    @ John Duch : You are only cribbing about wrong decisions received by your team. Why Don't You look at the replays of 1st test before commenting. Whether it's Suresh Raina, or Virat Kohli while batting or Chanders & Bravo while bowling, India was suffering at the hands of Umpires.As far as dig regarding DRS is concerned, i am sure the margin of victory of India would have been much larger. Unless the replays are doctored, as happened in the case of DHONI.Well we had a problem with WI & WI Umpires LOOOOOOOOOOOOG before DRS

  • Cricket_Analyst on July 17, 2011, 2:53 GMT

    I am looking that the most of the comments are being centered around how BCCI is right / wrong. But the the motive of the interview by Harper in this case needs to be understood. His first reaction to all the wrong decisions given in the test was that he had just given 2 wrong decisions(actually 5, all against India) & that could have been overturned if DRS was being used, which was indirectly blaming BCCI/ Team India. Then he makes comments on India Players which were never captured on any stump microphones. My Guess is,he is frustrated of having lost his Job with ICC, he has carefully studied the Jamaica Test Match and realized his blunders. Hence he is stating that technology which highlighted his wrong decisions is not perfect. By giving this interview, he is contradicting himself and has put his foot in his Mouth. Point 2 ICC : How come it produces bizzare statistics to support a failing an Aus / Eng/ SA umpire whereas any subcon umpire is dumped unceremoniously?

  • Jim1207 on July 17, 2011, 2:09 GMT

    DVC, the problem here is how much hawk-eye is reliable as you explain. We never heard good arguments from BCCI, very true. but we never heard such a technical argument from hawk-eye as well, may be if people like you or any independent organization could test it properly and approve, we can say that hawk-eye is reliable. John Duch, can you also re-check with how west indians appealed during the series, it would help us a lot to have a balanced conversation.

  • on July 17, 2011, 1:05 GMT

    @DocBindra. Indian players and BCCI had problems with DRS loooooooong before Harper gave his opinion. WE know that but who is going to speak on behalf of players like Chanderpaul who was struck on the pad almost a foot (12 inches) outside the offstump and after a loud appeals by Indian players including Dhoni who was behind the stumps was given out by Mr Gould. With no DRS he just had to trundle off. Well we had a problem with India players appealing LOOOOOOOOOOOOG before DRS.

  • D.V.C. on July 16, 2011, 21:41 GMT

    @Biso: If you have enough frames after the ball bounces then you don't need the CoR. Spin and drag are trickier, yes, and I did simplify my comment somewhat. However, the ball spins less vigorously after it pitches, and it too may be calculated given enough frames (seam position) - the computer should be able to do as good a job as a human in that respect. Of course there will be multiple solutions because of the sampling frequency, but knowing an expected range will help (the spin the ball has before it pitches can help with that). The deviation from a parabolic path is a result the combination of drag and spin. If you determine spin, then what you are left with is drag. So, that's all the unknowns taken care of pretty much. You can also use previous balls to help calibrate the coefficient of drag. The condition of the ball shouldn't change a lot between the start of the over and the end, nor will the atmospherics, so the drag should be pretty similar.

  • on July 16, 2011, 12:17 GMT

    No sour grapes please Mr Harper! You are human so you must make mistakes - just admit them. Don't make any scapegoat out of something else for your human nature to make mistakes. You should understand that the technology would always be more accurate than human, once it is accurately programmed to do a job. Only one time in millions something will go wrong. You umpires make too many mistakes. I also think umpires are put in their positions to 'SEE' first and any other sense such as hearing should be a last resort. Physics prove that two objects moving in opposite directions usually create a sound at their immediate point of impact - wheter they touch when the sound would be loud and clear; or if 'even though they do not touch 'when the sound could still be heard', but much more muted; or not heard at all. So ICC, please let the umpires see and 'NOT HEAR' when decisions for catches are involved.

  • on July 18, 2011, 21:48 GMT

    @Cricket_Analyst. You are right. It is difficult for us. But some like me don't want to give up. T have not missed a test match at the Queens Park Oval since India beat us by scoring 400+ to win the game way back in the 70's with Gavaskar and Vishwanth getting big scores. So you know how frustrated I am now. But I will continue to go to games in hope. What we need is the rest of the cricket world to support us and rally for our return to our best. When you bring us down our frustrations make us post irrational comments out of jealously I guess.

  • Cricket_Analyst on July 18, 2011, 2:06 GMT

    @John Duch : I don't need to speak on behalf of my team as their performance on field is sufficient enough to answer all their critics. I can understand mate, its been a LOOOOOOOOONG time since West Indies won a Test Match against India, a side which it used to brush away easily prior to 90's. Its difficult to come to terms with that for lots of West Indies Fans.

  • on July 17, 2011, 20:58 GMT

    Cricket_Analyst I am going to speak out on behalf of the West Indies and WI players. You can speak on behalf of Indian players if you so wish. I have been supporting my team since the days of Clive Lloyd LOOOOOOOOONG before India started winning test matches. I was there when Bedi declared the fourth innings of a Test Match.

  • mohsin9975 on July 17, 2011, 6:07 GMT

    There seems great hue and cry over sachin been given shoulder before wicket. Whats wrong in it?Sachin is a short man. When he crouches his shoulders come in line with stump height. It doesnt matter even if he or any batsman is given helmet b4 wicket or even elbow,thigh,back,deliberate gloving or any part of the body other than using his bat. People wudnt hav hyped this issue if it was anyother short batsman say an ashraful or other lowprofile batter say strauss,sarwan or even dravid. An lbw is any part of body of batsman obstructing the ball from hitting the stumps. Do not blame any umpire for adjudicating any batsman out in this fashion. Even if the batsman is sachin and the umpire is harper. This comes frm a sachin fan

  • Cricket_Analyst on July 17, 2011, 2:59 GMT

    @ John Duch : You are only cribbing about wrong decisions received by your team. Why Don't You look at the replays of 1st test before commenting. Whether it's Suresh Raina, or Virat Kohli while batting or Chanders & Bravo while bowling, India was suffering at the hands of Umpires.As far as dig regarding DRS is concerned, i am sure the margin of victory of India would have been much larger. Unless the replays are doctored, as happened in the case of DHONI.Well we had a problem with WI & WI Umpires LOOOOOOOOOOOOG before DRS

  • Cricket_Analyst on July 17, 2011, 2:53 GMT

    I am looking that the most of the comments are being centered around how BCCI is right / wrong. But the the motive of the interview by Harper in this case needs to be understood. His first reaction to all the wrong decisions given in the test was that he had just given 2 wrong decisions(actually 5, all against India) & that could have been overturned if DRS was being used, which was indirectly blaming BCCI/ Team India. Then he makes comments on India Players which were never captured on any stump microphones. My Guess is,he is frustrated of having lost his Job with ICC, he has carefully studied the Jamaica Test Match and realized his blunders. Hence he is stating that technology which highlighted his wrong decisions is not perfect. By giving this interview, he is contradicting himself and has put his foot in his Mouth. Point 2 ICC : How come it produces bizzare statistics to support a failing an Aus / Eng/ SA umpire whereas any subcon umpire is dumped unceremoniously?

  • Jim1207 on July 17, 2011, 2:09 GMT

    DVC, the problem here is how much hawk-eye is reliable as you explain. We never heard good arguments from BCCI, very true. but we never heard such a technical argument from hawk-eye as well, may be if people like you or any independent organization could test it properly and approve, we can say that hawk-eye is reliable. John Duch, can you also re-check with how west indians appealed during the series, it would help us a lot to have a balanced conversation.

  • on July 17, 2011, 1:05 GMT

    @DocBindra. Indian players and BCCI had problems with DRS loooooooong before Harper gave his opinion. WE know that but who is going to speak on behalf of players like Chanderpaul who was struck on the pad almost a foot (12 inches) outside the offstump and after a loud appeals by Indian players including Dhoni who was behind the stumps was given out by Mr Gould. With no DRS he just had to trundle off. Well we had a problem with India players appealing LOOOOOOOOOOOOG before DRS.

  • D.V.C. on July 16, 2011, 21:41 GMT

    @Biso: If you have enough frames after the ball bounces then you don't need the CoR. Spin and drag are trickier, yes, and I did simplify my comment somewhat. However, the ball spins less vigorously after it pitches, and it too may be calculated given enough frames (seam position) - the computer should be able to do as good a job as a human in that respect. Of course there will be multiple solutions because of the sampling frequency, but knowing an expected range will help (the spin the ball has before it pitches can help with that). The deviation from a parabolic path is a result the combination of drag and spin. If you determine spin, then what you are left with is drag. So, that's all the unknowns taken care of pretty much. You can also use previous balls to help calibrate the coefficient of drag. The condition of the ball shouldn't change a lot between the start of the over and the end, nor will the atmospherics, so the drag should be pretty similar.

  • on July 16, 2011, 12:17 GMT

    No sour grapes please Mr Harper! You are human so you must make mistakes - just admit them. Don't make any scapegoat out of something else for your human nature to make mistakes. You should understand that the technology would always be more accurate than human, once it is accurately programmed to do a job. Only one time in millions something will go wrong. You umpires make too many mistakes. I also think umpires are put in their positions to 'SEE' first and any other sense such as hearing should be a last resort. Physics prove that two objects moving in opposite directions usually create a sound at their immediate point of impact - wheter they touch when the sound would be loud and clear; or if 'even though they do not touch 'when the sound could still be heard', but much more muted; or not heard at all. So ICC, please let the umpires see and 'NOT HEAR' when decisions for catches are involved.

  • on July 16, 2011, 11:37 GMT

    The DRS is very useful if used properly. It is there to review decisions and overturn clearly wrong decisions. The assumption must be that the umpire on the field is correct unless shown clearly otherwise.

    The tracking generally does this. The snicko and hot-spot technology looks questionable. To my mind the DRS works best when shocking LBW decisions are overturned. It is sometimes clear that the ball pitched outside leg, and/or did not strike the batsman in line, and/or was missing the stumps. Where that is so then the decision should be overturned, otherwise the decision should stand.

    By contrast the snicko sounds and hot-spot sometimes produce confusing or unclear signals that the TV umpire can interpret loosely - also not a good plan.

    I say use the available technology but scale its application according to its sophistication. For now that means use all the tech but only override the on-field umpire when the decision is clearly wrong.

  • VisBal on July 16, 2011, 8:11 GMT

    Most people here are missing the point. The DRS is designed to negate the OBVIOUSLY WRONG decisions. To deal with catches, 50 fps is definitely less than adequate. However, since ball-tracking is only used for LBWs, the obviousness only comes into play to determine the point of impact of the ball (on the pitch or on the pad/body). As the physicist DVC mentioned, even if these are not captured as the points caught by camera, they can reliably be interpolated from the (multiple) measurement points immediately before and after impact by a combination of physics and statistics. But then, Hawk-eye is reduced to determining whether the ball pitched in line and whether the batsman was hit in line. That much information is sufficient for the umpire to determine if the initial call was OBVIOUSLY WRONG, rather than trying to determine if the call was undeniably correct. We are currently trying to do the second, when the first is all that is required as per the terms of reference of DRS.

  • Biso on July 16, 2011, 7:07 GMT

    Well guys, technology has certainly helped umpires by improving their judgement. About this fact there can be no disputes. But, the point is that BCCI was unwilling to provide patronage to half baked technologies from an Australian and an English firm. Those firms have abviously lobbied hard to push their product through and must have promised to plough back some returns into R&D to improve the technology further in future, if they are provided a window by ICC. Most of us are missing the point. What is happening behind the lines is lot different from what we are arguing about. I hope cric-info has the courage to let this comment through. A similar comment earlier was censored. LOL

  • Biso on July 16, 2011, 6:46 GMT

    @ DVC . You are a physicist. So you are aware of " coefficient of restitution". And when we add as pects like spin and drag on the ball, how accurate do you think the extrapolation becomes. How do you calibrate these syatems. I am surprised you have not applied yourself enough.

  • Trapdaar on July 16, 2011, 5:39 GMT

    @Philip Felton: Hawk Eye company has stated that the margin of error is 3.6 mm with cameras operating at 250FPS. I wonder how MCC managed a superior margin with inferior cameras!

  • sajni on July 16, 2011, 5:24 GMT

    I cant understand why people react even before they understand what the other has said. Look at what Harper said without bias. What he says is super motion camera with over 1800 frames per second are far far better than Hawk eye or any ball tracking technology available now in determining where ball pitched and whether there has been any contact with bat or pad. Why depend on assumptions when real track is available if super slow motion cameras are used.Lets stop discussing BCCI stance and other boards stance. Instead lets discuss about suggestions to improve DRS using available technology.

  • Saxo on July 16, 2011, 2:01 GMT

    for people making stupid arguments that DRS improves the decisions, no one doubts that having technology is helpful. the question is does the benefit outweigh the cost? if we are spending thousands of dollars per day, do the improvements justify the added cost? after a captain challenges twice in the first few minutes (and loses because the replay is not conclusive) what does he do the rest of the innings?

  • DocBindra on July 16, 2011, 2:00 GMT

    @John Duch, was India and BCCI not against the DRS system LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG before Harper ever gave his opinion? Yeah, that is what I thought. Maybe, just maybe the Indian players who have been so vilified for their stance for so long were right all along. People hate just because the opinion is Indian. Well, GET OVER IT.

  • on July 15, 2011, 22:42 GMT

    If Hawkeye were operating at 25 fps or 50 fps the comments would have some validity, however it actually uses 106 fps and is capable of locating the pitch of the ball within 2.6 mm according to tests carried out by MCC.

  • D.V.C. on July 15, 2011, 22:18 GMT

    For goodness sake. Newton, who lived 400 years ago, could have told you that you don't need a picture of the ball striking the ground for the technology to be accurate, what you do need for accuracy is multiple frames between the ball pitching, and the ball striking the batsman. Where the ball pitched, and where its going can be easily extrapolated from there. I am a physicist, but I'm having a hard time understanding why people don't understand this technology, as the problem being solved, once you've mapped your 2D image to 3D space, is exactly the type of problem given to high school students. It's not hard.

  • on_the_level on July 15, 2011, 22:02 GMT

    @John Duch: You're obviously the smart one of your tribe. The Indians had a problem with the poor quality of Harper's umpiring, which was also felt by the ICC, which had demoted him from the Elite panel. Agreeing with a sensible statement from someone you otherwise have differences with shows openness and maturity - but then you wouldn't know too much about that!

  • Cric_Clan on July 15, 2011, 21:52 GMT

    Take the cricket ball and go to any cricket pitch/practice pitch in the world. Then with the same force pitch the cricket ball any number of times any where in the pitch or in the same area..

    If the ball behaves the same way "even once", then BCCI needs to rethink... Else "Rest of the world" needs to rethink..

    It is this simple...

    You use this technology in Tennis for balls that are going out of the play area. Let us use our common senses and not compare Tennis with Cricket w.r.t this Technology. Give me some technology that accurately shows the trajectory after the ball pitches on this EARTH and reaches a target!!!

  • inswing on July 15, 2011, 19:09 GMT

    You need a high frame for for hawk eye to be very accurate. The CEO of the company said you need 230-250 (IIRC) frames per second to reach very high accuracy. You only need black and white cameras. One can have these cameras, do systematic testing with various bowlers and conditions, and deliver the verdict. If the accuracy is much better than human (does no have to be 100% like the misguided BCCI thinks). Accuracy of ball tracking is testable and should not be a matter of how some individual feels on a given day.

  • KTiwari on July 15, 2011, 18:56 GMT

    @nurdleoffpads , in tennis there is no prediction. It shows the actual impact. Here hawkeye will predict how ball will go straight/left/right/up/down......

  • on July 15, 2011, 18:40 GMT

    Cricket experts from everywhere still think that the DRS is to be used to determine if a batsman is out or not out and that is not correct. That decision has already been made by the on field umpire. DRS is used to show a television umpire if there is IRREFUTABLE evidence to make the on field umpire CHANGE his decision.

  • SangakaraFan on July 15, 2011, 18:18 GMT

    Now I get more in detail of DRS, I feel that India's stand against DRS was right. If the technology is not accurate and expensive then why the hell was ICC going for it. Smaller countries like SL, Pkaistan,B'desh & Zim cannot afford it.

  • on July 15, 2011, 17:26 GMT

    It's understandable if the BCCI is not trusted/hated/whatever, but people should start giving credence to opinions expressed by the Indian players at least...most of whom are very respectable and competent! The blind opposition to BCCI's stance on DRS sounds immature, at best, now

  • ARad on July 15, 2011, 17:17 GMT

    Every system can be imperfect including humans. We can always be smart to use the right tools to IMPROVE reliability. The use of technology in sports will only enhance reliability as long as the human operators know how and when to use the technology. DRS is here and it will stay and it will improve. What we need is CONSTRUCTIVE criticism so that the process can improve, not NEGATIVITY.

  • on July 15, 2011, 17:10 GMT

    So now Indians are agreeing with Mr Harper because he is saying something that they want to hear. So hypocritical. Indians were so happy to see the back of him when he retired.

  • saichander on July 15, 2011, 16:50 GMT

    Ah!no! Was it a war of words. Harper can find with the technology so many suggestions which he ought to have thought before the India-WI series. Can anyone cover an elephant with a a small blanket?

  • mumbojumbo on July 15, 2011, 15:46 GMT

    BCCI was the villain in the piece so far and it was being bashed by every TD and Harry for not supporting DRS. Now that SL has decided to not support it as well as Harper speaking against it, maybe the critics were wrong. Go eat a humble pie - All you BCCI bashers! Stop being swayed by marketing tactics of the companies providing tracking technology

  • Redbacks_Bite on July 15, 2011, 15:00 GMT

    Some of his arguments on DRS are valid. I hate to say it but Indians were right with their view on DRS

  • batnpad on July 15, 2011, 14:16 GMT

    @ssenthil: The incident happened in Windies. The 3rd umpire had forgotten to turn up the volume when he adjudicating a caught-behind !. No prices for guessing who that umpire was. Anyway, another reason why BCCI might object to DRS is - if I am not wrong- Hawkeye and the other ball tracking Co. are Australia and England based. When approved from ICC they will rule the roast and would become a monopoly.

  • Praxis on July 15, 2011, 14:12 GMT

    I think many Indian fans will jump in celebration seeing that someone else has apparently backed their board's view. However, most of us who opposed BCCI's view didn't do it without knowing the issue concerning frame rates of the cameras. All the explanation given by BCCI was 'they weren't convinced by ball tracking' but nothing in detail publicly. So BCCI is the most powerful & the richest board among all, yet they can't invest in improving this technology? Or can't they get any global sponsors for these cameras? Sri Lankans can't use DRS for the upcoming series against Australia because of financial reasons & they are looking for sponsors. With a collective effort & support from all the boards ICC can easily improve DRS and implement in every series. For we all know proper use of technology can only make the game better.

  • cric-procrastinator on July 15, 2011, 14:08 GMT

    BCCI went to ICC and made a case that umpires are giving wrong decisions against India, the most notoriois being deryl harper(his sholder before wicket against sachin tendulkar among other decisions cost india the test seris victory against aus in australia, the decision was so bad harper himself admitted that was a decision he would like to forget. another empire who had a grudge against india was Steve Bucknor. SO ICC proposed DRS. BCCI responded by saying they wanted to remidy the situation by making the empires better and developing better technologuy but not to make a bad situation worse by replacing bad empires with equally bad technology.The whole world ganged up against India, now BCCI stand is being vendicated every day. Daryl happer is making the same comments against DRS that BCCI made.No one can accuse harper of promoting BCCI and indian players views. When unpires make a bad decision everybody sees it but when DRS makes bad decisions nobody would ever know. Dangerous!!!!

  • PlanetCity on July 15, 2011, 14:01 GMT

    So where are all the BCCI bashers?? Now that an Aussie says the same thing, I think you all hypocrites will start accepting it because it is said by an Australian and not Indian, right?? I know I am right.

  • midwicket5 on July 15, 2011, 13:41 GMT

    Ok, lets get the story straight. I work on cricket coverages around the world, so I know a bit about this. Daryl Harper has got a lot wrong. Yes, most of the cameras are shooting at 25 frames per second. Yes, it is impossible to see a fine edge from those cameras, that's why we use Super Motion cameras in several postions that shoot at 75 frames per second. People know these cameras as "spin cam" as it is the replay that is tight on the bowlers hand at release. These are the cameras the director goes to looking for edges. Ultra Motion shoots at between 200 and 2000 frames/sec but are very expensive and only used on big series. Virtual Eye (Hawkeye's competition) use cameras at over 200 frames/sec. Finally, it all comes down to how good the camera operator is. These days, the broadcasters use as many local operators as possible and skimp on quality. It's a very hard job shooting for the DRS, so you only get what the camera op gets. If he is not very good, then DRS is pointless.

  • rkannancrown on July 15, 2011, 13:31 GMT

    In short what Harper says is that whatever he decides is correct and if technology syas otherwise, technology must be wrong!!This is where his 96% correct decisions come from.

  • couchpundit on July 15, 2011, 13:20 GMT

    LOL... why wasnt he talking abou this earlier? Why he chooses to speak truth now? LOL i am amused that cricinfo...super supported Ball Tracking(atleast to take Anti India stand and demoise BCCI) is reporting such a story...definitely something Fishy is happening here.

  • KingOwl on July 15, 2011, 13:06 GMT

    Some people on this site have changed their minds after listening to Harper. Are you guys serious? The ICC stats show clearly that the accuracy of decisions has increased, due to use of technology. That is a fact, not an opinion. Of course we can argue about which technology is 100% and which is not. But the fact is that technology, even in its current stage, helps.

  • Exfactor44 on July 15, 2011, 12:51 GMT

    Hmm, it helps if you turn the volume up ...

  • nurdleoffpads on July 15, 2011, 12:38 GMT

    can anybody substantiate the reasons for not using the full range of DRS? the disputed area is one of the clearest in my mind - hawkeye/balltracking is used in tennis with huge success and it isn't doubted. I've looked at the evidence for it's accuracy and it outstrips human judgement by a huge margin. How can this be argued against, if somebody can provide clear and legitimate arguments against it i'd love to hear them...? This is the one aspect that BBCI are against and yet I see more problems with the other technologies if you're hyper-critical: hot-spot has shown not to be 100% although it's clearly a great help but no questions. Video replays have had the problem of 2D rather than 3D for years but it's widely accepted. Finally Snicko has shown great use but is slow and sometimes inconclusive. So why is hawkeye a problem?

  • mohammad.faizal on July 15, 2011, 12:21 GMT

    So BCCI and Dhoni and Sachin were right after all ? Funny this coming from Harper. On one hand he is clearly against India, but he also hates DRS because it has shown what a bad umpire he is. Tough situation for Harper. I feel bad for him.

  • Champ2000 on July 15, 2011, 12:09 GMT

    good or bad. fullproof or not I liked it. It was fun and added whole new angle to it.

  • agam99 on July 15, 2011, 10:31 GMT

    Even the person against BCCI & Indian is supporting Indian view about DRS but still some people can't stop blaming BCCI for everything wrong in the world...lolz...poor chaps

  • on July 15, 2011, 10:29 GMT

    Heh heh... Last time I checked, when the Indians said DRS wasn't 100% acceptable in its current form, certain quarters expressed disgust with their "bullying" (forgetting that those certain quarters are the ones who have historically bullied the Indians, Sri Lankans etc). Now that Daryl Harper says the same thing, I wonder what their reaction is going to be? Oh wait, is he correct in saying that? That would make the Indians correct. Or is he senile? That would again make the Indians correct. Lose lose senario for those certain quarters isn't it?

  • Ropsh on July 15, 2011, 10:23 GMT

    Perfectly valid arguments from Harper there. This may be the first time I've ever agreed with the guy, but am willing to admit that he's bang on here.

  • TheDoctor394 on July 15, 2011, 9:39 GMT

    India will never welcome the technology, since nothing is ever 100% error-free.

  • Anthony_Proudly_SA on July 15, 2011, 9:35 GMT

    Firstly, the human eye refreshes images at 25 frames per second, so the 50 frames per second doubles the possibility that the frame-by-frame will capture what is being looked for. Secondly, the DRS umpire is not only looking for the frame capturing the ball touching the bat, but also for the evidence of deflection or a change in the rotation of the ball. Thirdly, the DRS is mostly of use in protecting the batsman against an egregiously poor decision (e.g. caught behind off an arm) Fourthly, an ability to review the action in slo-mo must increase the possibility of an erroneous decision being overturned (the commentators do it all the time) Fifthly, if the BCCI only believes in using 100% accurate technology, then they should fire all umpires, groundskeepers, scorers, scoreboard operators and administrators, as humans are never 100% accurate

  • Nuxxy on July 15, 2011, 9:07 GMT

    The problem is that DRS is being used for marginal decisions. Yes, for marginal decisions accuracy and frame rates become extremely important. But when it comes to being given out for a ball pitching outside leg, or from a no ball, even the current level technology will suffice. The problem is the selective use of the tech, not the tech itself. It's the format of challenges that are the real problem. *All* dismissals should be analysed post-dismissal to see the basic legality, and relayed to the field of play before the batsman has left.

  • bumsonseats on July 15, 2011, 9:04 GMT

    i think the revue system more often than not get the decision right. not naming names but some umpires often and got the decision wrong. dpk

  • Baundele on July 15, 2011, 8:49 GMT

    Technology is a blessing, because it helps taking correct decisions, be it 100% correct or not is another question; but it certainly reduces umpiring errors. Any umpire not liking it means, he does not want a fair ruling.

  • Charindra on July 15, 2011, 8:47 GMT

    Oh Daryl.... I never knew he was such a numbers guy... But i know that he was a VERY ordinary umpire and seemed to hate technology. Well, not he's gone. Good riddance I say.

  • Kahande on July 15, 2011, 8:23 GMT

    well I am shocked by this 60 cm thing. if this is the case definitely ball tracking can't be taken in. DRS shall be used to avoid howlers.

  • Pankaj_INDIA on July 15, 2011, 8:13 GMT

    i remember him ruling an english batsman out on review when he was 3rd umpire against SA, despite the bowler had clearly bowled a no ball. it was clearly evident. but of course, harper will say his glares were not clear or that he did not feel its worth to check the no ball properly....so many excuses, this man was never a good umpire, ruined many matches with howlers. glad he will no longer be around.

  • on July 15, 2011, 8:12 GMT

    ahahahha....... Atlast, BCCI is correct...... i am loving it DRS out of Sri Lanka-Australia series....

  • on July 15, 2011, 8:10 GMT

    @Horn.OK.Please...well said brother.... :D

  • ashish514 on July 15, 2011, 8:07 GMT

    Ooooohhh, that might have hurt a lot :)

  • CliffM on July 15, 2011, 8:05 GMT

    Consider some simple arithmetic. Let's say a bowler delivers from way out on the return crease. A ball that would have hit the stumps would have have moved laterally about five feet in a distance of about 20 yards. Therefore in a distance of 60cm it would have moved laterally about five inches - about the diameter of the ball. So if the ball-tracking system shows that it is within this margin of error the decision reverts to the on-field umpire, hence the 'umpire's call' rule.

  • bestbuddy on July 15, 2011, 7:57 GMT

    Seems to me that everyone is asking the wrong questions. Its not a case of "is the technology 100% accurate?", but more a case of "are decisions being made more accurately than they were without it?". Clearly the answer is yes, more correct decisions are being made now than before. And I must point out that the BCCI's argument that all systems without 100% accuracy should be left out means that, with an accuracy several percent below that of hawkeye, the umpires themselves are not fit for duty.

  • khurramsch on July 15, 2011, 7:51 GMT

    wel how about WC2011 match under harpers watch pakistan vs canda in single ODI 5 decisions reversed?

  • kk777 on July 15, 2011, 7:22 GMT

    I just love this man....he has the same attitude as I myself had when I was a child..."No one is right except me....neither the Indians nor the DRS....I am the one and only".....but then there is a saying in hindi which in english loosely translates to " The old age is more often then not a reminder of the childhood (in terms of its logical credibility and attention seeking attitude)"....I think it was the literary genius of Premchand....well said

  • Harvey on July 15, 2011, 7:17 GMT

    It certainly wasn't the aid it was claimed to be when he was third umpire. With him doing the reviews, the number of wrong decisions seemed to actually INCREASE!

  • legstump2009 on July 15, 2011, 7:13 GMT

    Makes all the hoo-ha support for DRS in its full form plain silly. Especially the unequivocal support of the Hawk-Eye by certain quarters, blinded by plain stupidity and sense of revenge.

  • on July 15, 2011, 6:47 GMT

    This is a very persuasive argument from Harper. 60 cm in 1/50th of a second is about 60mph or 100 kph. It sounds like the cricket world is going to be much the poorer for his retirement. I am beginning to veer towards the Indian view on DRS.

  • CaughtAndBowled on July 15, 2011, 6:32 GMT

    Can some one ask this guy to keep quiet. He failed miserably in his as an umpire but he still wants to be in the limelight by talking rubbish.

  • on July 15, 2011, 6:23 GMT

    Since when did harper became so technical.

  • Ajronald on July 15, 2011, 6:15 GMT

    Atlast, BCCI is correct - india is not always on the hire and fire mode - prove it, we adopt it.

  • uglyhunK on July 15, 2011, 6:09 GMT

    Last time I checked, Daryl Harper is from Australia. So where are those who say India bullied its way into not accepting ball tracking ??

  • aahhl on July 15, 2011, 6:00 GMT

    Well, here comes the truth about the DRS---finally. When the same reasons were being given by BCCI for its reluctance to use DRS, everyone, the whole world branded BCCI as arrogant for being financial super power. Well, guys now an Aussie umpire has given such an elaborate reasoning against the DRS. what you all have to say now? I dont say BCCI does not try to be arrogant, they surely do in lot of cases these days. Thank BCCI to have removed the hawn eye and ball tracking from the DRS.

  • ssenthil on July 15, 2011, 5:50 GMT

    Technology will aid Umpire as long as some one using it is not a Dumb. For Ex A Umpire couldn't able to hear the Audible Nick when he used the UDRS becoz he is Deaf. I wonder who is that Umpire ;-) Yeah, I agree that Hawk Eye is not even 70% correct on few occasions and they must convince all people about their concerns.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • ssenthil on July 15, 2011, 5:50 GMT

    Technology will aid Umpire as long as some one using it is not a Dumb. For Ex A Umpire couldn't able to hear the Audible Nick when he used the UDRS becoz he is Deaf. I wonder who is that Umpire ;-) Yeah, I agree that Hawk Eye is not even 70% correct on few occasions and they must convince all people about their concerns.

  • aahhl on July 15, 2011, 6:00 GMT

    Well, here comes the truth about the DRS---finally. When the same reasons were being given by BCCI for its reluctance to use DRS, everyone, the whole world branded BCCI as arrogant for being financial super power. Well, guys now an Aussie umpire has given such an elaborate reasoning against the DRS. what you all have to say now? I dont say BCCI does not try to be arrogant, they surely do in lot of cases these days. Thank BCCI to have removed the hawn eye and ball tracking from the DRS.

  • uglyhunK on July 15, 2011, 6:09 GMT

    Last time I checked, Daryl Harper is from Australia. So where are those who say India bullied its way into not accepting ball tracking ??

  • Ajronald on July 15, 2011, 6:15 GMT

    Atlast, BCCI is correct - india is not always on the hire and fire mode - prove it, we adopt it.

  • on July 15, 2011, 6:23 GMT

    Since when did harper became so technical.

  • CaughtAndBowled on July 15, 2011, 6:32 GMT

    Can some one ask this guy to keep quiet. He failed miserably in his as an umpire but he still wants to be in the limelight by talking rubbish.

  • on July 15, 2011, 6:47 GMT

    This is a very persuasive argument from Harper. 60 cm in 1/50th of a second is about 60mph or 100 kph. It sounds like the cricket world is going to be much the poorer for his retirement. I am beginning to veer towards the Indian view on DRS.

  • legstump2009 on July 15, 2011, 7:13 GMT

    Makes all the hoo-ha support for DRS in its full form plain silly. Especially the unequivocal support of the Hawk-Eye by certain quarters, blinded by plain stupidity and sense of revenge.

  • Harvey on July 15, 2011, 7:17 GMT

    It certainly wasn't the aid it was claimed to be when he was third umpire. With him doing the reviews, the number of wrong decisions seemed to actually INCREASE!

  • kk777 on July 15, 2011, 7:22 GMT

    I just love this man....he has the same attitude as I myself had when I was a child..."No one is right except me....neither the Indians nor the DRS....I am the one and only".....but then there is a saying in hindi which in english loosely translates to " The old age is more often then not a reminder of the childhood (in terms of its logical credibility and attention seeking attitude)"....I think it was the literary genius of Premchand....well said