ICC news

ICC pushes again for DRS, BCCI says no

Sharda Ugra

June 25, 2012

Comments: 241 | Text size: A | A

Ross Taylor calls for a review after being given out against Peter Siddle, Australia v New Zealand, 2nd Test, Hobart, 1st day, December 9, 2011
The ICC's CEC said it was "satisfied" with the improvements in DRS technology © AFP
Enlarge

The ICC's Chief Executives Committee (CEC) has reiterated its commitment to the Decision Review System becoming mandatory in international cricket, recommending it to the Executive Board following fresh and successful testing of DRS technology. However, the BCCI - which has long opposed DRS - immediately responded by saying its stand remained unchanged, putting the proposal into serious doubt.

For the record, the ICC also decided to include Hot Spot cameras as part of the mandatory requirements for the DRS; they had been made mandatory following the 2011 ICC conference in June, but were taken off the list in October.

The recommendation to the ICC Board came with one rider: the application will be "subject to the Members' ability to finance and obtain the required technology."

The CEC stated it was "satisfied" with the improvements made over the two key components of DRS technology. These include the new Hot Spot cameras as well as the independent ball-tracking research conducted by Dr Ed Rosten, a Cambridge University department of engineering expert in computer-vision technology. Rosten, the ICC said, had "tested the accuracy and reliability of ball-tracking in a recent Test series and concluded that the results were 100% in agreement with the outcomes produced from his assessments."

All of this was undermined by the BCCI's statement, which came within a couple of hours of the ICC's decision. "The BCCI continues to believe that the system is not foolproof," it said. "It also sticks to its view that the decision on whether or not to use the DRS for a particular series should be left to the boards involved in that series."

The reaction contradicted the wording of the ICC's release, which said recommendations by the CEC were said to be "unanimous". Yet it is understood that the CEC had been explained India's "unreadiness" to use the technology as a whole, and the matter would rest with the ICC Board when it meets on Tuesday and Wednesday.

The BCCI have been the strongest opponents of the DRS, its president N Srinivasan saying that the system would only be supported when it was "100 percent error free." Srinivasan, who arrived in Kuala Lumpur by chartered flight, was not required to be present at the CEC meetings - the BCCI was represented by secretary Sanjay Jagdale - but will be sitting in on the ICC Board when the CEC's recommendations are discussed.

The member nations supporting the DRS are also believed to have told the ICC that they would like it to sort out the grey areas - over the nature, quantity and costs of the DRS - through the selling of centralised global DRS rights to a single sponsor. Most full member nations have indicated that they would like the ICC to take ownership of the DRS, as it has of neutral umpiring.

It is a suggestion that will give the technology providers of DRS technology some solace, as the technology upgrade required to become part of the game's rule book is far more expensive and sophisticated than the original aim with which the technology was provided to cricket broadcasters: to merely be part of the television-watching experience.

The ICC cricket committee's suggestion pertaining to the lbw regulation under DRS has also been approved. Under the LBW rule, the 'margin of uncertainty' regarding the point of impact with the batsman will be the same as that provided for the point of impact with the stumps.

The CEC has also endorsed recommendations regarding the Powerplays and passed them on to the executive board for its approval. These involve bowling Powerplays to be restricted to the first 10 overs and a batting Powerplay of five overs chosen and completed before the start of the 41st over. Similarly, a maximum of four fielders are to be allowed outside the 30-yard circle in the non-Powerplay overs and the number of permitted short-pitched balls should increase from one per over to two.

The CEC supported the promotion of day-night Test cricket, "with the approval of both participating teams" and with the usage of a "suitable ball" as recommended by the cricket committee. The CEC stated that both Test and ODI cricket should push for "extra context" through the promotion of the ICC's World Test Championship, which is currently struggling to find support in the broadcast industry, and a full qualification process for the 2015 ICC Cricket World Cup, which must tackle opposition to lower-ranked Full Member nations looking for automatic entry into a 10-team World Cup.

The ICC CEC is made up of chief executives of the 10 Full Member nations, and three associate member representatives. The CEC meetings are chaired by the ICC Chief Executive and can include the ICC president and the chairman of the ICC cricket committee, in this case Clive Lloyd.

The ICC's Executive Board, which will study these recommendations, comprises the chairman or president of each of the 10 Full Member nations, plus three elected Associate Member representatives, the ICC President who chairs proceedings, the ICC Vice-President, the chief executive and then by invitation, the ICC principal advisor.

QUICK COMMENT

Time to sort it out

Over the next few days, the ICC's executive board - made up of the heads of every Full Member board - will once again jockey over the DRS issue as if it were as complex as finding the God particle in the Hadron Collider. It is not. The DRS is actually an arm-wrestling contest with three contestants: the Full Members who want it, the Indians who don't and the ICC's bean-counters, who would love it used but at someone else's expense. It is an annual, repetitive - and unedifying - skirmish.

The BCCI will hold its ground because it is the game's cash machine. It will now seek the favour of its Asian brethren; in exchange there will be a one-day series, a tour to India, support on other ICC issues. The Full Members who want the DRS have until now neither stood up to the BCCI's bullying nor played the political card smartly themselves. The ICC has not taken ownership or control of an idea that came to them originally from Duncan Fletcher, who now ironically coaches the Indians. The moment the DRS enters any set of playing conditions, it becomes the ruling body's responsibility. To turn away, mumbling about costs and bilateral relations, or to quibble about its finer points, is downright disingenuous.

Were the DRS easily available to all nations, it would make the case for universal application stronger. Were it made universally mandatory, what would the BCCI do? Stop playing international cricket? Secede from the ICC? Cut off ties with England, South Africa and Australia? It's time to sort it out, once and for all.

Sharda Ugra is senior editor at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Sharda Ugra

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by Ranjan2012 on (June 28, 2012, 10:41 GMT)

To The ICC

Sir, As an ardent cricket lover/ follower , I have following queries before you about this " CONTROVERSIAL DRS" system.

Query no 1: When a " LBW" decision goes to " DRS" , who plots the last leg of the final parabola of the delivery?What is the nationality , cricket credential of that plotter ? Who keep a tab on his integrity?

Query no 2 : In many cases " HOT EYE " has failed to give a proper decision ? What is the reason behind those failures? Is it true that by using " Gel" , "Waxes" ," Cream" one can camouflage / escape the "hot spot" ?

Query no 3 : Which FIRM is doing the business of "DRS" with you ?Why that firm is not coming clear on various issues raised by BCCI on " DRS" ?Why the english / aussie , & some personnel in ICC are used as their mouth piece?

Query no 3 : Why DRS is so costly ?Is it a monopoly bid ?

Query no 4 : Why are you sticking to a worthless, useless " Duck Worth - Lewis " rule for "rain interrupted" matches ?

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 9:50 GMT)

Whether you like it or not ,you cannot put BCCI out of ICC. Because you need our money to run cricket.

Posted by TissaPerera on (June 28, 2012, 0:41 GMT)

BCCI says DRS system is not 100% accurate so don't implement. I would advice them to suggest to take out Umpires too because they are not 100% accurate either. :)

Posted by yoohoo on (June 27, 2012, 19:23 GMT)

Saw a couple of comments here that india should be kicked out of icc for not accepting DRS. Irony is, the rest of the countries probably cant afford the DRS for one full series without the bcci's money.

DRS is just an expensive trinket. Bcci has realized that, wonder how long the rest of them will take to realize that. Bcci would have supported it if it was either inexpensive or useful. Unfortunately it isnt.

Posted by aptie on (June 27, 2012, 18:53 GMT)

We should just forget India. The ICC does not mean Indian Cricket Council. DRS must be used at all times just like all the other major sports.

Posted by cric_fan_ on (June 27, 2012, 16:47 GMT)

cont. but the boards didn't come up with such a no cost system, reason? because it requires common sense.

Posted by cric_fan_ on (June 27, 2012, 16:46 GMT)

In the current series between SL and Pakistan, there is no UDRS because Sri Lankan board can't afford it but they could have used 3rd umpire in place of UDRS by giving each team 3 reviews per innings and 3rd umpire the authority to judge catches if a team decides to refer. Agreed system can't be applied to LBWs and it might not have been as effective as hot spot but it would have been a ZERO dollar solution for howlers related to catching.

Posted by Naveed4u on (June 27, 2012, 16:41 GMT)

Difference between ICC and FIFA

FIFA is the association where No Country or personality Is bigger than the game Countries have been banned for either trying to involve politics in the game or trying to intervene in its country games or trying to impose own interests in FIFA policies. That is why you do not see any league privately run by the country associations where they implement their own rules and regulation, n Italy and Greece are the current examples On the other hand ICC has completely overrun by one Board. Sometimes I think that Why should Cricket need ICC to run the cricket BCCI already doing the same thing BCCI decides when and where the tournaments even -WORLD CUP- to be scheduled not colliding his private leagues and when and where Indian players have to take part in the tournaments when they have a mood to play Because of busy schedules of their private league games. even venues decided by ICC with permission of BCCI

FIFA RULES AND ICC Should be Closed

Posted by amitgarg78 on (June 27, 2012, 13:46 GMT)

Cricket boards are struggling to put bums on seats for test matches. Yes, there are countries where tests see big crowds, but how fair is it to expect boards like SL to incur additional expenses when they couldn't even pay their cricketers for months last year? Unaffordable tech will never be successful! ICC wants to take a stand and make it mandatory, then these issues need to be sorted. Oh and, the "strategic" use needs to stop coz that's not why this was devised. Howlers were the focus and not marginal calls.

Posted by   on (June 27, 2012, 13:04 GMT)

If BCCI says no to DRS, put India out of ICC

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