| Series | Countries | Live Scores | Fixtures | Results | News |
Features
|
Photos | Video & Audio | Blogs | Statistics | Archive | Games | Mobile | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
ICC news
India threaten pull-out over DRS
Nagraj Gollapudi
January 31, 2013
|
|||
|
Related Links
|
|||
India have again struck down the latest attempt to bring more consistency to the implementation of the DRS by threatening to pull out of any tour in which the host country insisted on using the technology.
At the ICC executive meeting in Dubai the ECB, represented by chairman Giles Clarke, was the only board that spoke in favour of a policy change where the approval of the host country would be enough to implement the DRS. N Srinivasan, the BCCI chief, shot down the proposal and ESPNcricinfo understands that the remaining boards did not make a stand.
Srinivasan's concerns are understood to still centre on a belief that the technology could be easily manipulated and is unreliable. It has been learnt that he made the claim that India would pull out of bilateral series if a system was in place where the home side could insist on the DRS.
Though the DRS issue was not even listed on the agenda, or in the post-meeting press release dispatched, it was discussed at length in the wake of a renewed push during the ICC chief executives committee (CEC) meeting last month, for universal implementation of the referral system. At that meeting, held on December 4, every member with the exception of India had backed a change in the DRS implementation policy.
The existing playing conditions require the approval of both countries on DRS during a bilateral series, but the CEC suggested a change in policy that would see the home board having the right to choose the use of the DRS regardless of what the opposition wanted. The CEC recommended that the issue should be resolved via a vote during the executive board meeting.
In the end there was no vote as most of 13-man strong board (10 Full Members plus three Associates) failed to stand up to Srinivasan. Only Clarke, who supported the CEC recommendation, felt it warranted a discussion this week again.
This is not the first time the BCCI has opposed the rest of the members on the DRS. At the ICC's last annual conference in Kuala Lumpur, the CEC had passed the resolution to make the DRS mandatory for all events. The move was then passed to the executive board which had to ratify the decision. But despite the push from the CECs, the head of the Full Member boards refrained from putting the issue to vote.
Nagraj Gollapudi is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo
Feeds: Nagraj Gollapudi
© ESPN EMEA Ltd.
| ||||||
| Comments have now been closed for this article |
||||||
TopE-mail
Feedback
Print
Nagraj Gollapudi
Sponsored Links
ICICI Bank M2I. Register Now and Get A Gift Offer.
Safe & simple online money transfer. Apply Now!
Buy Wisden 2013 & get a FREE Playfair
Available now at Cricshop
As the inventor of the Hot Spot for Cricket, I take offence at any comments that suggest the system can be manipulated....this is absolute nonsense. The infrared vision that comes in from the camera and is stored onto the computer is precisely the same vision that gets replayed during a DRS. There is no way the operator can manipulate this vision. It is totally what-you-see-is-what-you-get.
As many have heard me say before, Hot Spot is not perfect and will never be perfect but it is still pretty damn good and has improved considerably over the past 18 months with our latest cameras.
Our new product called the Real-Time-Snicko will complement the Hot Spot and will take faint edge detection to a totally new level. RTS will be available in the middle of 2013 for the Ashes series.
Technology is made for humans by humans. It is used in every field of life to make quick decisions and accurate analysis. On the other hand nothing is accurate and in cricket batsmen make errors and get out at crucial moments while by using technology they bat against bowling machines and also use video analysis to read opposite bolwers. Similarly, bowlers use technology for their advantage. Safer halmets were made available avoid serious injury which is another use of technology. Hotspot, Replays, Hawkeye all are proven technologies and enable poor umpires review doubtful decisions and make their life easier by using technology like their fellow human beings. For example, computers and other electronic devices get obsolete but still we buy them and provide feedback to improve the technology. DRS technologies have a very good record despite being inconclusive rarely and eliminating various howlers. Anti-DRS stance will make field umpires extinct as they are in India.
I think it's a fine line, while I appreciate BCCI stand on this but there must be a way out. If I use Ian Chappell's recent article, he made a brilliant point on empowering the umpires, however I don't recollect if he mentioned the LBW law should be taken away from the DRS rule. This to my mind is the biggest stumbling block for BCCI although doubts will always remain about hot spot specially after the England series in 2011. The whole idea of DRS is to eliminate howlers & from the recent evidences so far the system and usage surely needs second thoughts. Issue as I see is ICC is trying to sell DRS in it's current form and this is not a good idea, instead if ICC can convince DRS will be used only to eliminate howlers and 3rd umpire will be empowered to give correct decisions we may have a breakthrough soon. BCCI will surely agree on this as many a players from India will say howlers are the biggest bain and if these can be eradicated we will have a fair game.
I am Indian and support DRS but not in its present format. The umpires should review every marginal decision and it be left to umpire to request a review. The Third Umpire should intervene when there are blatant wrong calls. They are able to communicate and umpires rated on correct and incorrect decisions.( If the umpire asks for review and decision is corrected, that should awarded as a correct decision as ultimately he got it right). The review decision should be left completely to the Umpires. This will bring uniformity to the process and India should be able to accept the DRS as it is controlled by the umpires!
Two things: (1) The innovators must be innovative. That is, they must thrive to do much more better than, say, 10-15% over the existing set-up. (2) There must be numerical analysis of all dismissals after the first use of DRS, and compare all DRS-linked dismissals to all non-DRS dismissals, bring out the relative statistical assessment of good, bad, poor decisions in both, compare how many umpire-decisions were reversed by DRS to how many controversial decisions were made without DRS. Plus, enumerate how many times a top-order batsman called for a DRS for a sure "out" decison and thereby deny revision of a later, horrendous judgment (this will reflect the efficacy of DRS). I go by Srinivasan. And I stand by what Harmony111 has pointed out. Make wholesome analyses, compare facts, and then decide.
Some fallacies being repeated throughout the comments need addressing. Whilst Hawk-eye was developed by a British company it is now owned entirely by Sony, a Japanese company. Hot-Spot is owned by an Australian company. Furthermore, the suggestion that because it is owned or operated by people from one country would mean the images would be manipulated is ridiculous. With live feeds going to the 3rd umpire the only possible manipulation is in positioning of cameras. But if you move the camera, how can you know which team will benefit from the repositioning? Short of seeing the future you can't know where to put a camera so only 1 team can benefit. Additionally, a number of academic studies exist assessing the accuracy of the technology. They testify to the efficacy of the systems and make note of the margin of error, a margin of error taken into consideration by DRS. The major flaw with DRS is people have to analyse the images and people make mistakes.
@bobmartin: Obviously you would now want to somehow save your face by accusing me of not answering to your question(s) when in fact I've answered pointedly to each and every one, I even gave you the time stamp of the one you explicitly raised.
Ppl here know it pretty well that I do not avoid anyone or anything here so your attempt to back off using a half-thought yet oft-used tactic can fool no one here.
You began with a weak argument and when rebutted turned it into a ridiculous one and then when rebutted again asked me to answer you first when I had already answered it and when I gave you the time stamp of that answer and asked you to talk about DRS per se and not about tangential topics then you felt desperate to find some face-saving ploy cos you had no DRS-specific answers and so now you are saying that you can talk anymore to me cos I am not answering to your already answered questions.
Bye Bye dear.
Posted by cricfaninlv on (February 3, 2013, 2:59 GMT)how hard is it for people to understand that technology will never be 100% accurate but it will always be more accurate than the human judgement. Should we get rid of runout replays too? Technology will always help make more accurate decisions, how you use it is up to interpretation but it definately helps to have the technology. Finally India needs world cricket just as much as world cricket need India. so India isnt gonna travel to England, Aus and SA because those countries wants to use DRS? India is bluffing big time. I would love to see where Indian cricket will go if they dont get to play above cricket boards.. BCCI has to stop acting like spoiled brat and use its immense power responsibly..
Posted by snbirdi on (February 3, 2013, 0:49 GMT)So Pakistan is angry about hotspot decisions that went against them on Day 2. Funny how everyone can't wait to rant about BCCI when they're being bullish, yet no one says a word when they're proven right that the technology is not reliable.
Posted by Chris_P on (February 3, 2013, 0:44 GMT)Again, it is the choice of the host country. What right has the BCCI got to dictate what other countries should use for hosting home series? I wonder what their response would be if the other countries stated that they must use DRS. You would hear the whining from Hobart! Childish response form the BCCI, very childish.