ICC news

DRS won't be forced on India - Richardson

ESPNcricinfo staff

June 28, 2012

Comments: 82 | Text size: A | A

ICC chief executive David Richardson, Haroon Lorgat and ICC president Alan Isaac, Kuala Lumpur, June 28, 2012
Dave Richardson: "The introduction of technology has always been controversial" © Getty Images

Dave Richardson, the ICC's new chief executive, has said that India would not be forced into accepting the universal application of the Decision Review System (DRS). The BCCI has been the sole objector to making DRS mandatory in international cricket and the ICC's Executive Board decided not to put the issue to a vote on Tuesday.

In his first day on the job, as the successor to Haroon Lorgat, Richardson said that while the majority of players and umpires back the DRS to rule on marginal or controversial decisions, India could not be dragged "kicking and screaming" to comply. The ICC's failure to enforce the universal application of DRS means it will only be used in bilateral series when both national boards agree to it.

"The point is that the BCCI need to make that decision for themselves," Richardson said at the close of the ICC's annual conference in Malaysia. "It's never good to take anyone kicking and screaming to do anything.

"The introduction of technology has always been controversial ... but, slowly but surely, that's changed and I think we're pretty much at that point where everyone is accepting, certainly at international level.

"I don't think [the Executive Board's decision is] negative at all. We'll be seeing DRS used in the majority of series going forward and there would be no sense in forcing anything upon anybody."

India's resistance to DRS stems from their 2008 Test series with Sri Lanka, when the technology was on trial. N Srinivasan, the BCCI president, has said that the system would only be supported when it was "100 percent error free".

Richardson said: "The bottom line is, the ICC board determines policy for the ICC going forward. I don't think my job will involve any special negotiations with India. A lot is made of that but there are ten full members and I think our task is a lot more simple and a lot more practical than these high-level talks you might imagine."

As well as Richardson succeeding Lorgat, Alan Isaac, the former chairman of New Zealand Cricket, has taken over as ICC president for a two-year term, succeeding Sharad Pawar. The ICC has voted to make the presidency a ceremonial position from 2014, with power passed to the new position of chairman.

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by   on (June 30, 2012, 15:17 GMT)

Icc should force india for the betterment of cricket

Posted by   on (June 30, 2012, 10:50 GMT)

kingcobra85, SL vs PAK series do not available DRS.Because host SL has lack of funds.Already both teams captains has insisted on DRS. I think U may remember when Pak n SL series was in UAE where DRS was available. Therefore, now only India is against it

Posted by kingcobra85 on (June 30, 2012, 7:34 GMT)

If India is the sole protester against DRS why didnt SL Vs PAK series have DRS ?

Posted by kumarcoolbuddy on (June 29, 2012, 15:36 GMT)

When all the countries except India are readily accepting DRS why are they not using in their series? If India is not accepting what is stopping other nations to use in their series? What is the reason for making DRS as mandatory?

Posted by KarmatBaig on (June 29, 2012, 15:17 GMT)

BCCI does not want DRS in Indian home series then it will have to play with DRS whenever touring other countries. Home condition and rules as laid by ICC should be followed by the host country. BCCI will one day accept DRS if they are made to use on their foreign tours, if they don't accept this then they can stay satisfied with organizing IPL.

Posted by g.narsimha on (June 29, 2012, 15:02 GMT)

SIMPLEGUY 2008 Before asking cricket community to bycott INDIAN team , pl ask u r board why it has not asked for voting in the just concluded ICC MEETING IN KULALAMPUR , al board had achance to go for voting , why they have not done ,

Posted by simpleguy2008 on (June 29, 2012, 13:46 GMT)

ok if ICC not forcing BCCI then why is ICC the cricketing body then it should be BCCI to rule the international cricket rather than ICC i want ICC to mandate the DRS system i can say that all the cricketing board should refuse to play with india until BCCI agree to go with DRS. As a Cricket fan i want the drs should be mandate.

Posted by g.narsimha on (June 29, 2012, 13:04 GMT)

ALEX400-BUT Mjority of INDIAN dont think that SACHIN is selfish he is once in a a century player We INDIANS are PROUD of him ,

Posted by acricket123 on (June 29, 2012, 10:53 GMT)

Mr. Richardson - You can't force anything with India.

Posted by RyanHarrisGreatCricketer on (June 29, 2012, 10:23 GMT)

Actually nothing can be forced on the bcci

Posted by AlbertEinstein on (June 29, 2012, 10:01 GMT)

I've seen MANY run outs where the replays are inconclusive and the batsmen are given the benefit of the doubt. If everyone can accept that, why not DRS ?........those hotspot cameras and hawkeye give such exotic angles to an otherwise monotonic match that even if they weren't improving the game they should have been considered.

Posted by g.narsimha on (June 29, 2012, 9:59 GMT)

We can criticise umpiring just to demean opponents great performance .

Posted by satish619chandar on (June 29, 2012, 9:29 GMT)

@jmcilhinney : Let us be fair.. BCCI's opinion says - No to DRS in current form.. It is BCCI who are going to provide the fund from their pocket and it IS mandatory for them to approve what they need to spend.. Do you think the close decisions taken with the hotspot or the hawkeye go without any controversy? Or for the matter of fact, DRS is to eliminate howlers.. The close decisions should not be labeled as HOWLERS.. Slowmo and pitch map WILL eliminate the howlers.. Can't the ICC propose that idea to eradicate the howlers? Wont that be sensible, cost effective, unanimously accepted decision? Even in DRS, most of the close decision says - Go with umpire.. So we can just leave it the same for inconclusive reviews..

Posted by testcricfan24 on (June 29, 2012, 9:14 GMT)

OK, BCCI doesn't want it, but why did the other boards decided to abstain from the vote?

Posted by Gillyyyy on (June 29, 2012, 8:57 GMT)


Posted by Sandeep.M.J.D on (June 29, 2012, 8:53 GMT)

DRS is not good guys when you have limitations over it. For example the three appeals you get. What if two of them are wrong, and the one left is upheld (Umpires decision stands as no clear evidence) and still counted? It's a game changer, don't need these complications on top of DRS. Another such thing is the distance to travel to hit the stumps, man, ridiculous.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (June 29, 2012, 7:45 GMT)

I think that this is a crock. The ICC needs to do what is best for international cricket. If DRS is best for international cricket, and I think it is, then it should be mandated. It was mandatory previously and we have more evidence that it works now than we did then. People said that independent testing needed to be done. It's been done and DRS passed with flying colours. That should be the end of it. What was the point of the independent testing if the end result of a successful outcome was going to be maintaining the status quo? How about they introduce huge fines for any team who doesn't agree to use DRS in a series and then shows any discord at an umpiring decision in that series? As far as I'm concerned India has forfeited the right to complain about any umpiring decision, especially the howlers.

Posted by khurramsch on (June 29, 2012, 7:39 GMT)

1 thing onfield umpires are not also 100% correct. recent example SL vs PAk 2 elite pannel experienced umpires 16 errors in 4 days. 100% ??? if some poor boards are reluctant to use DRS in biletral series than ICC should do something to finance it for them. and also icc DRS can be used with whatever technology available there. few decisions can be overturned by simple footage. Or give 3rd umpire more powers & more referals to 3rd umpires.

Posted by klempie on (June 29, 2012, 7:37 GMT)

Question: What happens in multilateral events involving India? Are we going to see most World Cup games with DRS with it being switched off for games involving India? Ridiculous.

Posted by satish619chandar on (June 29, 2012, 6:12 GMT)

ICC should better concentrate on the DRS without the heavily expensive half baked technology and try to frame out a DRS which is affordable to all the nations on their own and not dependent on BCCI money to pay for it.. It had been the same for last couple of years - BCCI opposing the current DRS and ICC trying to force it on BCCI without any change in it.. Why not ICC come up with something which will cheer all the boards and the fans from all the nations - may be the technology company won't smile but the job of ICC is not to make them smile but we!

Posted by Joji_ on (June 29, 2012, 2:54 GMT)

This is pathetic news. This will go down as one of the darkest hours of cricket in history! Mark it !

Posted by mar2000 on (June 28, 2012, 23:37 GMT)

WHY NOT ?, who run world Cricket ? Why should it be for some and not ALL . DRS is for the betterment of the game , No one Country should be able to say WHEN, IF and WHERE it should work . Come on ICC ,let get thing right across the board once and for all .

Posted by cricfan65 on (June 28, 2012, 22:07 GMT)

I'm pretty sure that the technology used by NASA, the Military and healthcare institutions is not 100% error free either. Ths stakes there are MUCH higher, don't you think. Just saying y'all.

Posted by sysubrceq0 on (June 28, 2012, 20:46 GMT)

@all - If someone is paying $50,000 per day then one should expect it is 100% error free statement from atleast manufacturer. But manufacture only gives 90% guarantee on ball tracking

Posted by sysubrceq0 on (June 28, 2012, 20:37 GMT)

India is not against DRS, India is only aginst those expensive features which does not require to check the howlers like inside edge LBW, ball pitching outside leg stump, inside edge keeper catches. A simple replay to thrid umpire can avoid these howlers and 3rd umpire need to check every ball is a no-ball or not, if it is then he should get the authority to inform umpire on field. This will be sufficient to avoid howlers. Marginal calls are always controversy even with DRS without DRS those should be left to on field Umpire. Boards like ZIM pays an avg package of $150 for a ODI to the players can they accomodate $5000 for a DRS? Current SL-PAK series is another example, SL cannot afford it but still they support DRS to be implemented, simply ridiculous.

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 19:31 GMT)

@getsetgopk BCCI had NOTHING to do with lack of DRS in SL v PAK test. Do away with the hawkeye which India opposes, I DARE these drs Supporters, it is not required in most of the 'howlers'.

Posted by ToeCruncher on (June 28, 2012, 19:30 GMT)

I find it interesting that India will not accept a system that is not 100% correct. The current system (on field umpires only) is not 100% correct, is it? Batsman do not play 100% correct, bowlers do not bowl 100% correct, and fielders do not field 100% correct. should we not allow any of these to the game? I understand that any board should be allowed to make their own decisions based on what technology is allowed, but if used with common sense, like current TV umpire run-out decisions are made, 100% correctness should not be a criteria for implementation.

Posted by mikeindex on (June 28, 2012, 19:08 GMT)

Subtext (one of the more readable ones): 'You guys have way too much clout for us to tell you what to do, whatever our theoretical powers'. BCCI → ICC = US → UN

Posted by Lord_Dravid on (June 28, 2012, 18:57 GMT)

Why are people moaning about india not accepting DRS? Other boards can still use it between themselves just not when india is involved. DRS will always be controversial like it has been in indias 2008 series vs sri lanka..the ind v eng series last year. ian bell incident in world cup last year etc etc. Its rather expensive and with that money boards should instead help promising countries like afghanistan and ireland to develop. Agree with @coolmask.

Posted by Alexk400 on (June 28, 2012, 18:52 GMT)

It is like belief argument. God exist one side , God do not exist another side. 100% error free , srinivasan argument is of that type. Nothing absolute in the world. Everything context based. Context changes by a minute. Everything evolving as time goes. N srinivasan has no argument so he is saying show me god then only i believe in god exists. Other side say , that is not god. It chicken and egg argument. Main guy objecting DRS is selfish dude called sachin , once sachin gone , india will agree to DRS. There is no other player has influence like sachin.

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 18:49 GMT)

India do not want DRS - that much is certain. I would go one step further and say India do not want to play test cricket anymore. Why force them kicking and screaming to play a format they are averse to? Simply omit them from the test schedule so they can spend all their time playing 20/20 and one day cricket. Everyone is happy.

I'm sure most teams would quite be quite happy to avoid yet another foreign tour, especially to India where playing conditions are hard and players are likely to take ill.

Posted by satspeare on (June 28, 2012, 18:45 GMT)

So ramdin should appeal to BCCI against the fine he received from ICC for disrespecting a retired player - a legend. So to whom should Ireland make their case for test status? No wonder WICB takes this strong stand against guyana and ICC condemns Guyana. The ICC (Incompitance Compensated with Cash) is toothless against any country in good financial standing. SHAME ON YOU ICC AND ESPECIALLY ITS NEW CHIEF EXECUTIVE. I guess he really laid down the law. First test - failed.

Posted by IndiaRulesEverybody on (June 28, 2012, 18:43 GMT)

The heading should have said "DRS can't be forced on India" rather than "DRS won't be forced on India". LOL :))

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 18:16 GMT)

Terrible start to his tenure by Richardson, what a stupid thing to say. You think if FIFA introduces goal-line technology tomorrow that FIFA won't be forcing everyone to do it, Mr Richardson??

You at the ICC - cricketS governing body for heavens sake, START ACTING LIKE IT AND STOP BEING BULLIED BY THE BCCI!

Posted by bobmartin on (June 28, 2012, 17:44 GMT)

You know the more comments I read which are anti-DRS, the more convinced I am of the lack anything new to say against it... Same old excuses.. Not 100% reliable... can't afford it... howlers will still occur.... and that just about sums up the case for the opposition..And as for those citing Gayle's case.. as an example of why not to use the DRS.. well I ask you.. Gayle was given out by the on-field umpire.. If there had been no DRS.. he'd have been out anyway... so how does that support the case for not using DRS...

Posted by sk12 on (June 28, 2012, 17:42 GMT)

Pretty sure this DRS resistance fom India is due to the inability of our players to grasp it fully. Lame reasons given as excuses though, wanting it to be 100% perfect. On the flip side, the concept of DRS is to eliminate howlers, but with teams taking the DRS review even for the slightest doubts or opting it just coz they have reviews left has diluted the effectives of DRS a bit. We need a something like a rule whereby teams opting for DRS will be penalised 5 runs if the review was unsuccessful. This or a similar punishment will ensure teams opt for review only if they are 100% confident of overturning (read howlers).

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 17:32 GMT)

In simple words Mr Richardon you must say " I do NOT have the balls to implement something which majority wants, makes sense and will help to make the game fair"

Posted by Crazy4cricket40 on (June 28, 2012, 17:24 GMT)

its just stupidity of bcci not to accept drs. Actually, bcci just being stuborn now and its their ego stopping them now to accept it. they just want to prove how much ifluence they have over icc. ICC on the other hand, why are u there if can not take accept reommendation from most of the countries. is that icc saying they have never imposed any rule if a particular is not agree on. 110% sure that icc would have force drs if it was any other small country like srilnka, pak, bangladesh or NZ. ICC is only concern aout India, aus, eng and SA, mainly india.

Posted by applethief on (June 28, 2012, 17:13 GMT)

@coolmask Actually, Pakistan CAN afford it. They are the only board that has been enterprising enough to secure a sponsor for DRS, knowing how popular it is. Ironic, considering they're the one board that can't host any international cricket, and consequently make no money (in fact, incur losses) from tours and tournaments.

Posted by Philip_Gnana on (June 28, 2012, 16:44 GMT)

It is the case of the tail wagging the dog.

Posted by Tusker17 on (June 28, 2012, 16:19 GMT)

Nothing on earth is a 100% ! Hoping for this is idiocy of the highest order ! If the technology is there, might as bloody well use it! If it helps umpires make 5 bad decissions vs. 10 bad ones, by all means then..... The process of shooting themselves in the foot has already begun for India, infact it began 6 years ago.....! This is what happens when certain people do not know their place. BCCI may have tonnes of money to throw around and get their way all the time but that does'nt mean the BCCI and its business partners know whats best for the betterment of the game! ICC is nothing but a big fat JOKE !!!!

Posted by Mahtab_Alam on (June 28, 2012, 16:15 GMT)

I think at least some of the decisions which can be easily reversed/corrected should be implemented if not complete DRS. For example if batsman has give out (inside edge, not edged etc.) --- It is only LBW decision which is bit controversial --- Hot spot should also be used.

Posted by StatisticsRocks on (June 28, 2012, 16:12 GMT)

@coolmask: very well said.

Posted by StatisticsRocks on (June 28, 2012, 16:11 GMT)

OK, decision made...get over it and move on. looks liek we are the only one to stand up to ICC. For crying out loud ICC is trying to impose DRS when countries cannot even afford it. Ask PAK and SL.

Posted by umairmlk on (June 28, 2012, 16:10 GMT)

well it looks like that its not a international cricket council ICC but indian cricket council ICC because every time ICC introduce a rule that indian cricket ask for and ICC always listen to wht indian cricket required.

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 15:53 GMT)

The reason ICC wont force the DRS on India, because the ICC is majorly influenced by India as it is run by Indians, they should keep their acronym but change their name to the Indian Cricket Council...

What a farce this ICC is...no backbone!!!

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 15:40 GMT)

How can any system be 100% error free. Is decision taken by umpires 100% error free......... DRS is the third eye which corrects the error which umpire may have missed. There are number of instances when a player is given not out based on bowlers front foot no ball. All these were missed by umpires. Thanks to DRS Many a times, even the commentators do not agree on the decision taken by umpires, and call it PLUM LBW, only to laugh it out when DRS indicated ball missing stamps. All large and small manufacturing have dream to have their process meet six sigma, which is also not 100% error free. India should accept DRS and work on it to improve it.

Posted by ibbani on (June 28, 2012, 15:38 GMT)

If ICC cant pressurise INDIA on DRS, tha itself shows that there is room for improvement and many questions are still unanswered. DRS is very costly to afford for nations like Zimbabwe, Pakistan, Srilanka, WI. India can afford but they dont want to use. so why is the push on DRS? Tecnology is made use for decisions, but if the technology decisions are not worth the amount paid for it, then better use the manual errors and umpire errors.

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 15:31 GMT)

ICC wont or ICC Cant DRS on India?

Posted by Tlotoxl on (June 28, 2012, 15:11 GMT)

Cricfin: DRS has beeen used for years now, the system produces much better decisions, how much more testing do you want?

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 15:05 GMT)

ICC can force a 1-bouncer per over rule on WIndies, when they were battering the Englishmen in the 80s. They can bring that law back once the Englishmen have a formidable pace attack. ICC chooses NOT to recognise ICL because India said so. It chooses and prepares schedules according to IPL. Am I reading backwards to should it be CCI (CRICKET COUNCIL OF INDIA), rather than ICC. I wonder what's next.... any bowler taking 5 wickets against India will be banned for lifetime????.. I Just Wonder!!!!

Posted by Tlotoxl on (June 28, 2012, 15:04 GMT)

"the system would only be supported when it was '100 percent error free'." No system is ever going to be 100% error free but thee simple question is do you want Umpires running at 91% correct or Umpires and DRS running at 99.5% correct? Surely no one could argure the former is the better option? What about when India finally do accept DRS? they are going to be several years behind the other countries in getting used to how the system works and how it effectively...

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 15:01 GMT)

Simple idea - Fine India for each time they refuse DRS.

Posted by Roger_Allott on (June 28, 2012, 15:01 GMT)

The opinions of the BCCI executives should be given utmost respect ..... as soon as they are proven to be 100% error-free.

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 14:56 GMT)

"ICC won't *force* DRS on India". The BCCI must be rolling on the floor laughing at that stupid statement. It is like saying the Earth won't force the Sun to stop rising. :P

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 14:54 GMT)

David just answer one question. Would you have not forced the DRS had it been someone like Pakistan, Zim or BD?

Posted by Zahidsaltin on (June 28, 2012, 14:51 GMT)

SHAMEFULL START TO YOUR OFFICE. Why this submission to a single nation. Would they do the same if a single country like Bangladesh opposes something. When the majority of the nations, players, officials support DRS then how can only India block this unless are ICC officials are just dummies and the real power stays with Mumbai. I hate this staement and the way cricket is run today.

Posted by cric_fan_ on (June 28, 2012, 14:49 GMT)

the simplest solution to the wrong decisions regarding catches will be if a batsman stands his ground after nicking the ball fine him monetarily and ban him for 2-3 matches and within a year you'll see batsmen walking themselves, no need for replays or hot spot and things like that BUT the ICC won't don't do it.

Posted by KBCA on (June 28, 2012, 14:44 GMT)

BCCI are acting like spoilt children and being stubborn against this for no reason. Any rational person can see the game is clearly better for the use of DRS, BCCI are throwing around this new found weight in the cricket world simply because it makes them feel powerful, which they have never had before. they will end up ruining cricket if the other members do not make a stand against this stupidity. Boycot India until they comply

Posted by bobmartin on (June 28, 2012, 14:40 GMT)

Posted by coolmask on (June 28 2012, 11:58 AM GMT) "Will howlers still continue after its usage - YES of course, always (Go through Gayle's recent decision). Will the players be happy at present after its usage (Ask Gayle)" To answer is to the last point first... of course Gayle will say he was not out...if he had thought otherwise he would not have asked for a review.. so that's a rather silly point to make. On your first point, that howlers will still be made, yes of course they will.. but the mistake will not be in the technology, but in a human's interpretation of it, and as the old saying goes, to err is human. And on the subject of Gayle's dismissal, where is your proof that it was wrong. The technology showed everything exactly as it happened, just as it was designed to do. It was the human who made the decision, not the DRS. So are you saying you know more about umpiring than the man who made that decision, because that's what it appears you are doing..

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 14:35 GMT)

@ coolmask...............aBSOLUTELY PEFECT COMMENTS

Posted by getsetgopk on (June 28, 2012, 14:28 GMT)

@coolmask: Would it have been able to eliminate 17 howlers that happened in the recent PAK-SL match? Big YES. Were people happy in the stone age? a Big YES so what are you doing surfing the internet? Why dont you go back to the stone age along with dear BCCI? Common sense is not that common after all!

Posted by dhchdh on (June 28, 2012, 14:21 GMT)

coolmask: very aptly written just a little correction...its $50000 per day not $5000 per day.

Posted by whatawicket on (June 28, 2012, 14:06 GMT)

coolmask gayles lbw was not a howler if the ump had given him out with no drs in use most would have said great decision for a guy to be able to see the bowl had hit the pad a fraction before the bat. howlers are were billy bowden could not give out tendulkar when the bowl was going to hit 1/2 way up middle stump during the indian series v england . i know its the rest verses india, but if players of the rest could be asked do you want it used the answer would be a definite yes as anyone in their right mind wants the right decision. the indian players and their captain are not savvy enough in its use.

Posted by   on (June 28, 2012, 14:06 GMT)

DRS in domestic matches? You're aware of how much it costs to run? There's a reason it's only used in internationals.

Posted by gpindian on (June 28, 2012, 13:52 GMT)

So from the articles I read and people's comments, I see 3 issues here: 1. India wants an error-free system, which is not reasonable because no system is error-free and definitely not the on-field umpires. 2. ICC is not paying for the DRS systems and are instead placing the responsibility on the TV channel covering it. That's not fair either. 3. Cricket is a sport and by bringing in dependency on technology, the human factor is being taken away. Not the ideal thing to do.

In my opinion, the 3rd point is the most important of them. I prefer having howlers from time to time rather than having technology take away the human factor. And I dont like the fact that local cricket will not be able to follow all rules of cricket any more.

Posted by Shafi79 on (June 28, 2012, 13:52 GMT)

at least make it mandatory for the other 9 test playing nations, if India want to live in the stone ages and act like spoilt brats fine ... find a way to sponsor the DRS for series like SL v PAK and make it mandatory please ....

Posted by Ben2014 on (June 28, 2012, 13:43 GMT)

Well said, Mr. Richardson. As technology improves, India will gradually start accepting it. Till then, DRS is not thrown out the window. Majority of the matches will have the DRS - meaning except those involving India, all others will have the DRS. That would mean 80% or more of the major test playing nations will be using the DRS. As for India's position, I will still support India on this. Most of the instances where they had tried, there were problems due to technical flaws. So it is only fair that the decision is left to the individual boards.

Posted by SnowSnake on (June 28, 2012, 13:36 GMT)

I am glad India kept is foot down. If ICC forces anything on India, India should cutoff all relations from ICC and go on its own. Money matters and money is power. If ICC wants money from India then it must give India its independence, otherwise ICC and India should get a divorce. Other countries can go their separate ways if they can because listening to ICC for other countries is a marriage of convenience.

Posted by Salim_123 on (June 28, 2012, 13:36 GMT)

What a joke. ICC won't proceed or do anything without BCCI's say. If India says no there is no way ICC can do anything. who wants to lose the money. Nobody has the guts to say anything.

Posted by S.Alis on (June 28, 2012, 13:16 GMT)

Okay. "DRS won't be forced on India" but it will be mandatory for other 9 full members? ICC will take full control over it? and pay for it if board can't afford it in bilateral series? sadly i can't find any answer for these question. i wonder if i missed anything.

Posted by anuradha_d on (June 28, 2012, 13:01 GMT)

It sounds a hollow statement from Richradson AFTER ICC TRIED to make DRS mandatory........and could not.

Posted by Sinhaya on (June 28, 2012, 12:57 GMT)

Please make decisions unanimously without fearing BCCI. BCCI is unusually stubborn when all other test playing nations are glad to embrace UDRS. If UDRS is not fool proof, then what about on field umpiring? So many howlers. In this day and age when technology is available, please use it. India could have benefited from DRS had it been used in the 4 test tour of Australia.

Posted by Khali_Singh on (June 28, 2012, 12:56 GMT)

Point #1:"India's resistance to DRS stems from their 2008 Test series with Sri Lanka, when the technology was on trial." Point #2 "N Srinivasan, the BCCI president, has said that the system would only be supported when it was "100 percent error free"." Reasoning which system in its trial do not have glitches and which system do you know that is error free? This stand off is just to show how powerful India is, any decision should be voted on and India being the only one objecting wold only make the DRS universal but then that may end India involvement in international cricket then player would be lure to IPL then no money for ICC so we would have "poor" ICC and rich ruler of the world "BCCI". Sick this arm bending that India is going on with is only backward and depressing in this modern age when you try to adapt to change India is still stuck in the past. Accept it and move on it will only benefit you and the game. DRS is only there to help with errors umpires still makes the decisions

Posted by AazerDurrani on (June 28, 2012, 12:52 GMT)

I think the ICC should make the DRS system mandatory for every country. If a rule has been established, it needs to be implemented for everyone. Just like tennis, where the system is being used in every tournament. If the technology is expensive then it should be completely abolished. My opinion, there should not be any exceptions (India).

Posted by i_witnessed_2011 on (June 28, 2012, 12:42 GMT)

ICC as a cricket's supreme body should not get into act of "Forcing" or "Negotiating" with someboard. They need to hear from all the boards on particular subject, analyse the issue and then bring out set of rules and regulations to solve the issue. Whether thses rules can be adapted or not should be decided by voting. When ICC does not put strong foot forward, then they get into terms like "forcing" or "negotiating"...

Posted by BurtonPilgrim on (June 28, 2012, 12:14 GMT)

So India has unilateral power of veto on ICC decisions. Many other rule changes have been forced on other countries/teams that have not agreed with them. The decision should be based on what is best for world cricket, not the preference of one particular member. No system will ever be 100% error free, as BCCI purport to require - but surely DRS gives a higher percentage of correct decisions than relying on the on-field umpires alone? I dread to think what BCCI do to umpires who are less than 100% error free??? Maybe I'm being cynical, but perhaps BCCI will finally agree to DRS when they have bought the rights to it or created their own version?

Posted by CricFin on (June 28, 2012, 12:03 GMT)

DRS is an immature system which needs to be tested in domestic matches before putting them in international matches.International matches are not the place to do R&D for private companies funded by ICC/boards.

Posted by igorolman on (June 28, 2012, 12:00 GMT)

And there was me thinking the veto had gone the way of the dodo. Does that mean, then, that if the ICC bring in a motion to abolish the new ball - or reintroduce the back foot no ball - or something else, which everyone else (for the sake of the argument) wants, and England kick up a fuss, it will quietly be binned as 'it's never good to take anyone kicking and screaming'? What's the point in a governing body that doesn't govern? Oh well ... just have to wait for Tendulkar to retire and Dhoni to quit the captaincy and then maybe the BCCI will have a sudden re-evaluation of their position!

Posted by coolmask on (June 28, 2012, 11:58 GMT)

Reality Check - Was DRS available a decade back- NO. Were the players happy at that time - YES. Is DRS available at present -YES. Disadvantages- Expensive ($5000 or more per day), can be used only twice, Ball trajectory clipping the bails & wickets is adjudged based on the umpire's initial decision, no guarantee of faint edges, nicks. Can SL afford it - BIG NO, Can PK afford it - BIG NO, Can BG afford it NO-, ZIM- NO, WI - NO , IND - YES ( Not interested to use it), NZ- YES, maybe…, AUS & ENG - YES ( Let them use pay it & use it). Will howlers still continue after its usage - YES of course, always (Go through Gayle's recent decision). Will the players be happy at present after its usage (Ask Gayle). Is it worth it - .......:-)).

Posted by R_U_4_REAL_NICK on (June 28, 2012, 11:57 GMT)

Bowlers need to bowl better; batsmen need to bat better; umpires need to umpire better... Is that what you're saying?

Posted by whatawicket on (June 28, 2012, 11:54 GMT)

so the panel set up previously to check the changes that you asked for and got was a waste of time. if say NZ for example did not want it, using the same things the bcci are saying it would also not have been allowed. you lot must have more splinters in ur backsides, the amount of sitting on the fence you do. FIFA are bad but this lot dont hold a candle to the ICC

Comments have now been closed for this article

Email Feedback Print
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days
Sponsored Links

Why not you? Read and learn how!