ICC news

ICC cricket committee calls for DRS in all Tests

ESPNcricinfo staff

May 11, 2011

Comments: 79 | Text size: A | A

Steve Smith saved himself with a review after being given out, Australia v England, 3rd Test, Perth, 3rd day, December 18, 2010
The ICC's Cricket Commitee has called for DRS to be used in all Tests © Getty Images
Enlarge

The ICC's Cricket Committee unanimously recommended the use of the Decision Review System (DRS) in all Tests and also said it should be used in one-day internationals and Twenty20, but with just one failed review rather than two. It also encouraged cricket boards to use the pink ball in day-night first-class cricket to test its durability for the five-day game under lights and called for its trial in the Intercontinental Cup, involving Associate and Affiliate teams, later in the year.

The committee also proposed tweaks to enhance the ODI format, stricter penalties for over-rate offences and time wasting and even amending the law pertaining runners, suggesting they be done away with in international cricket, which an ICC spokesman confirmed to ESPNcricinfo was "under any circumstances".

These are, for the time being, just recommendations that will be tabled during the ICC's Chief Executives' Meeting in Hong Kong in June, where a decision will be taken on whether or not to ratify them.

The DRS system, a source of disagreement between several boards with its moments of controversy as well, was used for the entire duration of the 2011 World Cup where the committee agreed its application had been "successful". However, it still isn't used in all Test series with India continuing to argue against the system.

"The committee's recommendation that the DRS should be used in all formats of the game confirms two key conclusions that came from our discussions," Clive Lloyd, the committee's chairman, said. It shows the group's confidence in the system and it also highlights the committee's view that it does aid the umpires in making correct decisions."

Dave Richardson, the ICC's general manager of cricket, added that there was now even greater certainty over the accuracy of ball-tracking technology. "The level of believability in ball-tracking systems has improved," he said. "We are hoping the member boards, and we'll be frank the Indian cricket board, will follow suit and take cogniscance of that. We need consistency. It confuses the players and viewers if one series has DRS and the other not. Let us use it in every series possible."

Funding has been a major issue with the DRS with host boards and broadcasters left to pay bills but Richardson said that could change if it was used in all Tests. "I think if we get to a stage where all Full Members are happy to adopt the system for all Test series there would be the increased possibility that ICC could help fund the technology."

He added that the reduction to one failed review in ODIs and T20s would eliminate the 'hunch' that captains often use if they have spare reviews. If it proved successful Richardson said it could be considered for Test cricket, although the length of many innings means it's likely the system will remain at two failed requests.

The pink ball was trialled in Pakistan's first-class season earlier in the year, a practice the committee said should be embraced by other boards in at least one round of their respective four-day tournaments to go alongside the work done by MCC who have staged two matches in Abu Dhabi.

"The ICC remains determined to explore the possibility of day-night Test cricket but at the same time we have to ensure the integrity of that format is also protected," Richardson said. "The further trials proposed by the committee are a reflection of the fact we want to make sure that the pink ball is sufficiently durable to stand up to the rigours of first-class cricket."

There were a series of proposals made to make ODI cricket more appealing although the committee was "delighted" at the recent World Cup. They have suggested two balls be used in an innings, one from each end, as opposed to the current one which is changed at 34 overs for one of similar condition.

It also proposed that teams take the batting and bowling Powerplay between overs 16-40, and not after the 10th over, or following the 40th, as is usually the practice now to create more interest in the middle overs. Further to those, the committee called for experiments with newer ideas in domestic cricket, including removing restrictions for the maximum number of overs for a bowler, no compulsory close-catchers, number of bouncers allowed per over increased from one to two and a maximum of four fielders outside the 30-yard circles during the non-Powerplay overs.

Given the concern with poor over-rates, the committee proposed a captain in international cricket be suspended for one game if found guilty of two minor over-rate offences in the same format in a 12-month period, a harsher penalty than the one that currently exists where a captain is allowed three warnings.

Apart from doing away with runners, the committee, in a proposal that would prevent non-strikers from backing up too far, said bowlers be allowed to run them out provided they haven't completed their delivery swing. It also recommended an end to the practice of batsmen changing their direction while running between the wickets to obstruct the bowler or fielder's view while attempting a run-out which is often seen in one-day internationals.

Committee members Clive Lloyd, Sharad Pawar, Haroon Lorgat, Ian Bishop, Mark Taylor, Kumar Sangakkara, Tim May, Gary Kirsten, Clare Connor, Justin Vaughan, Trent Johnston, Ravi Shastri, Steve Davis, Ranjan Madugalle, David Kendix

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by riverlime on (May 14, 2011, 6:46 GMT)

I agree fully with the lifting of the 10 over restriction for bowlers. No one would expect that a team's best batsman would retire after 1 hour or 50 runs, so why demand that a team's best (and sometimes talismanic) bowler stop after a certain number of overs? As for injured players, they should either retire, or if they choose to have a runner then they are not allowed to play the next game. Colliding with, or blocking, another player should be HARSHLY penalised, and not taken as a joke. Dock the offending team 5 runs and you will soon see how rare it will become .

Posted by mightymf2000 on (May 13, 2011, 8:05 GMT)

Great job ICC comitte it's crazy India votes for it but they don't use it. What will the BCCI do next?

Posted by Psychopathetikka on (May 13, 2011, 3:48 GMT)

@Gerontius - I agree. Very good point. But what I'm saying is that in these times, when cricketers get paid rather well, fining them is pointless. A ban for a repeat offence does make sense, but it does not have any consequence on the match currently being played. There should be some method implemented where there will be some form of penalty on the bowling side, during the match itself, if the over rate slow.

Posted by cris89 on (May 12, 2011, 20:59 GMT)

ICC should think about the runners decision..Saeed Anwar scored the bulk of his 194 runs with a runner..and what about Laxman's superb 76 against Aus in Mohali..we wouldn't have had such a memorable test match without the runner..

Posted by Gerontius on (May 12, 2011, 15:21 GMT)

@Psychopathetikka: The problem with the run penalty for over rates was that it only affects the team bowling first.

@Test_Cricket_Best_Cricket: "Let the captions decide and strategize the powerplays?" Captains are reluctant to innovate. Bowling powerplay is inevitably taken at the 11th over and Batting powerplay in the last 10.

@D.V.C. : Pink ball may be hard to sight with coloured kits.

@me54321: Run penalties would either be too harsh or not enough of a deterrent if a team has enough runs on the board.

@Meety: Haha, yeah, really.

Posted by tahalateef on (May 12, 2011, 14:09 GMT)

Guys, who cares about the slow over rates? The broadcasters because they can't show enough ads to generate the revenue that they want !!! Where is cricket in all this. Perhaps the broadcasters should factor slow over rates in their bids to the ICC and the boards and the let captains and teams have that extra moment or two to think and strategize the game.

Posted by spinkingKK on (May 12, 2011, 13:40 GMT)

My suggestions: 1) A captain should be banned for life if the team's over rate is slow because all his bowlers were giving boundaries after boundaries and lost balls beacuse the batsmen hits the the ball out of the ground. 2) A non-striker should stay at the crease until the fielder throws the ball back to the wicket keeper or until when umpire calls "over". 3) The players should take care of themselves and therefore, injuries during the game is unacceptable. Therefore, they are not allowed runners and they are deemed to have made one run when they make two runs. 4) Also, to assist the captains who had no answers to an injured batsman's skill, any matches won with a significant contribution from an injured batsman is deemed to have been drawn. 5) DRS should be used in all the matches even if there is only one old camcoder available as assistance, because the system can eliminate bad umpires one by one and have just one umpire called Simon Taufel to do the job on all the matches.

Posted by thebeaker on (May 12, 2011, 13:02 GMT)

Rather than do away with runners (who are only used when a player is actually injured) why not clamp down on the substitute fielder rule that seems to be being abused these days, before anyone mentions the Ricky Ponting incident, I am english not Australian. When was the last time 'God' Sachin fielded for the whole 50 overs in a one day international, he bats then gets little Suresh Raina to go on and field for him. If your not fit enough to field you shouldn't be batting!

Posted by   on (May 12, 2011, 12:11 GMT)

It last they are going in the right direction and getting rid of the burden bowler have had. test one needs testing.

Posted by Flairboy80 on (May 12, 2011, 12:04 GMT)

Something outside cricket, ICC must consider some "Green" initiatives. Amount of energy required to light up the stadium for a 5-day game is enormous! Though the day-night games would be a great change, For a better tomorrow, ICC must not put the step forward on day-night test matches. Some food for thought folks...for our own better future

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
ESPNcricinfo staffClose
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days
Sponsored Links

Why not you? Read and learn how!