ICC annual conference

ICC moots sponsors to fund revamped DRS

Sharda Ugra in Hong Kong

June 30, 2011

Comments: 23 | Text size: A | A

Haroon Lorgat addresses the media regarding security issues, Chennai, March 5, 2011
The ICC may seek a sponsor to fund DRS, Haroon Lorgat has said © AFP
Enlarge

The ICC will look for sponsors for the DRS to overcome the financial hurdles that less wealthy cricket boards will face in implementing the cost-intensive referral system now mandatory in international cricket.

"There is the possibility that we could raise a sponsor to cover the cost of the DRS," ICC CEO, Haroon Lorgat, told ESPNcricinfo. The chief executives' committee agreed on Monday to make a modified version of DRS mandatory in all internationals, with the use of the ball-tracking technology made optional, and Lorgat said he could see a situation "where we may well cover all costs of the technology".

The cost of the DRS is currently estimated at $5000 per day, with broadcasters, technology providers and home boards in a constant debate about who should bear the cost.

The minimum requirements for the tweaked DRS are the expensive infra-red cameras and the audio tracking devices, and Lorgat said the resulting uniformity - which doesn't exist in ball-tracking technology - was adequate to seek commercial support for the system. "It is still sufficient to be able to commercialise it and find a sponsor that would be interested."

The uneven acceptance of the DRS in the past, with the BCCI resisting its implementation in bilateral series involving India, had made financial backing for the system difficult, Lorgat said. "You cannot sell a product if there's uncertainty around its use and that was a stumbling block in the past."

Lorgat said he did not believe that the new ruling, which omitted the ball-tracker technology from the list of mandatory requirements, would make the system inconsistent. The ICC, he said, had worked its way through a process that had begun with differences over an aspect of the review system and was keen to address the concerns of its doubters, in this case the BCCI. "It is incumbent on all of us who are trying to implement (it) and trying to find agreement to work towards getting there ... if that means we have to convince certain people who are unconvinced about the accuracy and the reliability of the ball-tracking technology, that's what we have agreed to do. But where we have got absolute agreement, we've all agreed to install that."

The question of using only one part of the ball-tracker technology, like the pitch mat to check where the ball had landed, was not raised, Lorgat said, "There wasn't complete satisfaction with the use of the ball-tracking technology and we've just left that out."

The use of the ball-tracker based on bilateral agreements between boards, Lorgat said, would let those who believed in its veracity use the system. Over the next few months, he said the ICC would carry out an independent assessment to provide the back-up of the ball tracker's accuracy and reliability. "I think we must just be patient for the next few months until we've done that exercise and hopefully we come to a point where everybody is satisfied with its accuracy."

The assessment, he said, would be thorough, because "if there are people who are happy or unhappy about the technology, we have got to disprove that and so I'm not keen to take (only) elements of it (the ball tracker) before we come up with a scientific evaluation." He said there was no time-frame for this assessment of the ball tracker.

Sharda Ugra is senior editor at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Sharda Ugra

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by   on (July 2, 2011, 17:36 GMT)

I wonder how the percentage of right decisions is made.. We keep saying humans get 92% right and with the aid of drs we get 97% right.. So how come we do not know what is one hundred percent right anyway?? What are the decisions calibrated against, be it drs or umpires?? Or is it just a number thrown to our faces for us to be impressed by drs??? Legitimate questions.. Anyone care to answer?

Posted by   on (July 2, 2011, 13:44 GMT)

good decision by ICC. they should implment drs in all international matches

Posted by   on (July 2, 2011, 13:40 GMT)

first steve bucknor, now darrel harper who is next ?

In times to come there will be no umpires to officiate matches that involves indians

Posted by satanswish on (July 1, 2011, 10:30 GMT)

When money can rain in IPL, why so much fuzz about sponsoring for HotSpot??

Posted by   on (July 1, 2011, 9:26 GMT)

I personally dont trust DRS, since this technology can be altered before we (audience) see the decision. Plus its not 100% reliable. Example: sachin tendulkar LBW in semifinal of WC 2011... DRS failed to even locate the correct impact, hence showed faulty result. I guess Umpires decision should be followed since that iss the beauty of the game.....

Posted by   on (July 1, 2011, 9:21 GMT)

DRS sponsorers - Blah blah *random tag line* can already imagine it happening !!! DLF maximum....max mobile time out...y not bla blah DRS ???? :D

Posted by   on (July 1, 2011, 5:55 GMT)

@Venkataraman Ramaprasad : when a ball has been called a no ball by an on field umpire, den even if it is caught anywhere, the fielding captain cannot refer the decision via DRS as it has already been declared a no ball......

Posted by pradeep_dealwis on (July 1, 2011, 5:40 GMT)

@ Venkataraman Ramaprasad : Umpires don't call no-balls immediately like they used to. They only call after the play is completed. That's a part of the reason for the Free Hit to be brought up. Hence players do not take undue risks except on the Free Hit, and by that time any review of the previous ball will be completed.

Posted by   on (July 1, 2011, 2:36 GMT)

Consider this. When a no ball is declared the batsman takes a chance to score as many runs as possible by taking risk as he cannot be out except run out or handling the ball. Supposing he is caught on the boundary line and on replay by DRS the ball is found to be legitimate, can the bats man be given out? This is impossibly and not fair. Any amendments to this?

Posted by SRT_GENIUS on (July 1, 2011, 0:51 GMT)

@Caveman: sponsor would be offered a blanket deal across all countires for a period of time (they don't get to pick and chose matches).

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Sharda UgraClose
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days