ICC news September 15, 2013

DRS set to dominate ICC meet

73

The decision review system (DRS) and the playing conditions at the 2015 World Cup are set to dominate the proceedings at the two-day ICC chief executives' committee (CEC) meeting in Dubai on September 16 and 17. Although the ICC discontinued last year its practice of publishing the agenda and results of the CEC, it is understood that the meet will see a divided house with England and Australia joining hands to take on the other front led by India with support from its sub-continental neighbours - Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Bangladesh - especially on the topic of the referral system.

According to an official privy to the ECB-CA plan, both members want to continue utilising the DRS in bilateral series despite its shortcomings - especially during the recently completed Ashes series. Jonathan Trott was given out lbw on review at Trent Bridge despite an apparent edge, while Usman Khawaja's caught behind dismissal in Manchester during the third Test was upheld even though replays showed daylight between bat and ball. Hot Spot's inability to detect fine edges also created confusion, and towards the end of the series, its evidence was routinely ignored by the third umpire. Geoff Allardice, the ICC operations chief, met with the two sides before the fourth match in Durham to address some of their concerns.

It is understood that David Collier, the ECB chief executive, and his Cricket Australia counterpart James Sutherland are expected to put forward a series of proposals at the CEC to make the DRS more consistent.

During the latest Ashes, one visible hindrance to the DRS was the amount of umpiring errors. To remedy that, both England and Australia want the ICC to enhance the clarity in the communication between the third umpire and the on-field umpires.

"Based on evidence during the Ashes some conversations between the match officials were unintelligible because of language barriers and the ECB and CA want the ICC to create a mechanism where the match officials can communicate between themselves and the broadcaster without creating much confusion," the official said.

Another proposal is to make the role of the television umpire a specialist role. During the Ashes, the ICC had conducted trials allowing the third umpire instant access to TV replays which could help him overrule mistakes committed by the on-field official. During the Old Trafford Test, England umpire Nigel Llong sat in the back of the TV truck, where he received a direct feed of pictures to help him improve the quality of decision making using instant technology.

Dave Richardson, the ICC's chief executive, had said that the exercise would help avoid incidents like the Stuart Broad one during the Trent Bridge Test, when the England allrounder edged Ashton Agar but stood his ground. Aleem Dar, the on-field umpire, failed to detect the edge and Australia, having exhausted their reviews, were left frustrated and annoyed.

The other suggestion England and Australia want to discuss is if the DRS is just there to clear up a howler then a team should not lose a review when it becomes an umpire's call. "Because the margin of error is so minimal between an out and not and an umpire's call," the official said.

However, England and Australia feel not all umpires can adapt quickly to the challenges of being a television umpire. Collier and Sutherland are expected to discuss the issue with Simon Taufel, ICC's umpires training and performance manager.

However constructive their suggestions sound, England and Australia still need India, the staunchest critic of the DRS, on their side. What might make their defence of the DRS weak is the admission of Warren Brennan, the Hot Spot inventor, who stated that tests carried out recently on various modern bats revealed protective coatings across the edges of bats unquestionably diminished the thermal signatures.

Such a reasoning can only enhance India's doubts over the DRS being far from 100% foolproof, a condition they have set in order to accept the referral system. It is understood that N Srinivasan, the BCCI president, had a separate meeting with the representatives of Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka on the sidelines of the Asian Cricket Council held in Chennai on Saturday, to garner support.

The other contentious topic the sub-continental teams have become wary about is the use of two new balls in ODIs. The rule came into force from October 2011 after the ICC Cricket Committee recommended it. However, all four Asian countries believe such a rule has proved to be deterrent to their slow bowlers, who play an integral part in the team structure. Not just India, a team like Sri Lanka is heavily reliant on its slow bowlers and is opposed to the two-ball rule only because the hard ball does not allow the spinner to grip the seam properly.

Bad light is another topic member countries are concerned about and there is supposed to be unilateral appeal to the ICC to change the playing conditions to make use of the floodlights at grounds wherever available.

Nagraj Gollapudi is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • sachin_vvsfan on September 16, 2013, 5:46 GMT

    ECB/CA should have trialed DRS in their domestic games first before using it in international games. We know nothing is 100% right but some obvious shortcomings (like absence of real-time snicko, reducing referrals for marginal calls and hotspot defects) could have been avoided/addressed. ICC should also own up some of the costs related to DRS (given that not all boards can afford the cost) . Indians had only problem with the ball tracking technology. BCCI will be happy to use limited DRS(for stumpings, pad-bat catches, runouts etc). Slowly once the other errors are rectified get them to use a near perfect DRS. I know some fans argue BCCI should not be treated separately. But when you are dealing with crickets economic power house you have to deal with them practically and sensibly. Dont believe? know USA?

  • jmcilhinney on September 16, 2013, 5:27 GMT

    As far as I'm concerned, the DRS technology in use right now is quite up to the job and the introduction of real-time Snicko would enhance it further. It's not perfect but noone ever claimed that it was. For anyone to say that such technology needs to be 100% accurate to be acceptable is just lain stupid because anyone with any sense knows that nothing is ever 100% accurate, technological or otherwise. How is it that India is happy with umpires who aren't even good enough to make the ICC elite panel and yet DRS can't be contemplated unless it can be proven to be 100% accurate? There definitely needs to be some tweaks to the use of that technology but those are already being investigated. Whatever changes are made though, they still won't please everyone because everyone wants different things.

  • P.BIPULKUMAR on September 16, 2013, 0:35 GMT

    It is once again going to be Asia vs Rest of world in the ICC meeting. It is good see that Boards are going to press their views regarding the playing conditiond of WC 2015 & DRS . As a true cricket lover i want there should be a disscussion on the test cricket`s survival.Easiest way to survive test is to start HOME & AWAY macthes in a four year circle among Full Members.Recent success of Zimbabwe against Pakistan clears that Minnows like Bangladesh & Zimbabwe needs oppotunities .So, ICC should work proper way instead of investing money in USA, CHINA, where people are asking What is cricket ?.Every Test team should get to play at least 18 test (9+9) in different conditions in a four years.First of such circle should be completed by February 2017 to determine top four of first ICC TEST CHAMPIONSHIP 2013-17..

  • ramli on September 18, 2013, 8:15 GMT

    DRS can be retained for another purpose ... as a source of entertainment ... audience look forward to DRS replays for the fun of it in the course of a dull and dreary test match ... at least you can ridicule the umpire for his vanity???

  • ReverseSweepIndia on September 18, 2013, 8:02 GMT

    IMO, do away with this expensive monster called DRS and replace it with simple replay. After howlers can be detected by normal cameras too. No major extra costs, may be few extra cameras in place, it still will be lot cheaper and even broadcaster won't have any objection to bearing cost. And also from 2 review, make it 2 conclusive review. For instance if a caught behind appeal has been denied because its not conclusive, fielding team does not lose review.

  • fireballer on September 18, 2013, 0:23 GMT

    Why is there an umpires call? If DRS shows out it should be out irrespective of the umpire's decision. Less confusion,no complication & no reviews lost.

  • bharatputra83 on September 17, 2013, 15:08 GMT

    @ mngc Also, the ball tracking tech is based much on mathematical extrapolation which itself is based on far too less frames to say that each and every tracking is accurate.

    So, it would be best if DRS is shelved for now and the technology as well as the officials handling it are given enough training along with the ICC formulating better implementation of rules for the referrals. All this takes time. The fact of the matter remains that international matches are not meant to be serving as trials for a DRS system which is nowhere near acceptable to all as yet. Let those trials and errors be done in domestic matches and then bring it forth. The DRS as of now, is simply an unfinished product brought hurriedly into the market by the western boards for reasons they themselves know.

  • bharatputra83 on September 17, 2013, 14:59 GMT

    @ mngc I think by now pretty much every team has been on the receiving end of DRS, with and without it being in implementation. The thing is there have been controversies even when DRS had been in place. Read my comment again. I am not saying to remove DRS forever, but rather let it improve and become what it can by ironing out its faults and then it can be reintroduced as well as being made mandatory.

    Even with referral to your own point, the third umpires cannot be trained in the system overnight.

    The financing of DRS is also a big issue for some boards/sponsors. Even some of the tech appears insufficient, like that of hotspot as evident in the Ashes.

    The snickometer wont be of much use in the subcontinent where the noise levels are very high and also there is the issue of it not being able to distinguish between bat and pad when both are close to the ball. Ball-tracking tech doesn't take matters like pitch, weather conditions, wind etc into much consideration. Contd....

  • Iddo555 on September 17, 2013, 13:31 GMT

    DRS is pretty good as it is, hot spot is not perfect and is the one thing I would say that causes problems. Real time snicko will be the breakthrough and will make the tech as near perfect as can be

  • popcorn on September 17, 2013, 12:40 GMT

    The Gentleman's game as it was meant to be, is no longer that.As Simon Taufel, amongst the best Umpires EVER,and certainly the best in this modern era of Technology,has said, "Technology has made umpiring tougher,because of the invasive nature of this broadcasting".Every decision by the Umipre is analysed for right or wrong. There are far more armchair experts.Technology should be left in the hands of the Umpire to ratify his decision of giving it out or not out,and the Thid Umpire and the Onfield Umpire should be conversing when in doubt. The Third Umpire should ASSIST the On Field Umpire. There should be no challenge permitted by the players. Technology can never be perfect becuse it does not take into account pitch conditions, wind and other factors.Tennis too has challenges, but though Roger Federer was against it initially for similar reason, he accepted it gracefully. To expect grace from the Indians is like expecting the sun to rise in the west.

  • sachin_vvsfan on September 16, 2013, 5:46 GMT

    ECB/CA should have trialed DRS in their domestic games first before using it in international games. We know nothing is 100% right but some obvious shortcomings (like absence of real-time snicko, reducing referrals for marginal calls and hotspot defects) could have been avoided/addressed. ICC should also own up some of the costs related to DRS (given that not all boards can afford the cost) . Indians had only problem with the ball tracking technology. BCCI will be happy to use limited DRS(for stumpings, pad-bat catches, runouts etc). Slowly once the other errors are rectified get them to use a near perfect DRS. I know some fans argue BCCI should not be treated separately. But when you are dealing with crickets economic power house you have to deal with them practically and sensibly. Dont believe? know USA?

  • jmcilhinney on September 16, 2013, 5:27 GMT

    As far as I'm concerned, the DRS technology in use right now is quite up to the job and the introduction of real-time Snicko would enhance it further. It's not perfect but noone ever claimed that it was. For anyone to say that such technology needs to be 100% accurate to be acceptable is just lain stupid because anyone with any sense knows that nothing is ever 100% accurate, technological or otherwise. How is it that India is happy with umpires who aren't even good enough to make the ICC elite panel and yet DRS can't be contemplated unless it can be proven to be 100% accurate? There definitely needs to be some tweaks to the use of that technology but those are already being investigated. Whatever changes are made though, they still won't please everyone because everyone wants different things.

  • P.BIPULKUMAR on September 16, 2013, 0:35 GMT

    It is once again going to be Asia vs Rest of world in the ICC meeting. It is good see that Boards are going to press their views regarding the playing conditiond of WC 2015 & DRS . As a true cricket lover i want there should be a disscussion on the test cricket`s survival.Easiest way to survive test is to start HOME & AWAY macthes in a four year circle among Full Members.Recent success of Zimbabwe against Pakistan clears that Minnows like Bangladesh & Zimbabwe needs oppotunities .So, ICC should work proper way instead of investing money in USA, CHINA, where people are asking What is cricket ?.Every Test team should get to play at least 18 test (9+9) in different conditions in a four years.First of such circle should be completed by February 2017 to determine top four of first ICC TEST CHAMPIONSHIP 2013-17..

  • ramli on September 18, 2013, 8:15 GMT

    DRS can be retained for another purpose ... as a source of entertainment ... audience look forward to DRS replays for the fun of it in the course of a dull and dreary test match ... at least you can ridicule the umpire for his vanity???

  • ReverseSweepIndia on September 18, 2013, 8:02 GMT

    IMO, do away with this expensive monster called DRS and replace it with simple replay. After howlers can be detected by normal cameras too. No major extra costs, may be few extra cameras in place, it still will be lot cheaper and even broadcaster won't have any objection to bearing cost. And also from 2 review, make it 2 conclusive review. For instance if a caught behind appeal has been denied because its not conclusive, fielding team does not lose review.

  • fireballer on September 18, 2013, 0:23 GMT

    Why is there an umpires call? If DRS shows out it should be out irrespective of the umpire's decision. Less confusion,no complication & no reviews lost.

  • bharatputra83 on September 17, 2013, 15:08 GMT

    @ mngc Also, the ball tracking tech is based much on mathematical extrapolation which itself is based on far too less frames to say that each and every tracking is accurate.

    So, it would be best if DRS is shelved for now and the technology as well as the officials handling it are given enough training along with the ICC formulating better implementation of rules for the referrals. All this takes time. The fact of the matter remains that international matches are not meant to be serving as trials for a DRS system which is nowhere near acceptable to all as yet. Let those trials and errors be done in domestic matches and then bring it forth. The DRS as of now, is simply an unfinished product brought hurriedly into the market by the western boards for reasons they themselves know.

  • bharatputra83 on September 17, 2013, 14:59 GMT

    @ mngc I think by now pretty much every team has been on the receiving end of DRS, with and without it being in implementation. The thing is there have been controversies even when DRS had been in place. Read my comment again. I am not saying to remove DRS forever, but rather let it improve and become what it can by ironing out its faults and then it can be reintroduced as well as being made mandatory.

    Even with referral to your own point, the third umpires cannot be trained in the system overnight.

    The financing of DRS is also a big issue for some boards/sponsors. Even some of the tech appears insufficient, like that of hotspot as evident in the Ashes.

    The snickometer wont be of much use in the subcontinent where the noise levels are very high and also there is the issue of it not being able to distinguish between bat and pad when both are close to the ball. Ball-tracking tech doesn't take matters like pitch, weather conditions, wind etc into much consideration. Contd....

  • Iddo555 on September 17, 2013, 13:31 GMT

    DRS is pretty good as it is, hot spot is not perfect and is the one thing I would say that causes problems. Real time snicko will be the breakthrough and will make the tech as near perfect as can be

  • popcorn on September 17, 2013, 12:40 GMT

    The Gentleman's game as it was meant to be, is no longer that.As Simon Taufel, amongst the best Umpires EVER,and certainly the best in this modern era of Technology,has said, "Technology has made umpiring tougher,because of the invasive nature of this broadcasting".Every decision by the Umipre is analysed for right or wrong. There are far more armchair experts.Technology should be left in the hands of the Umpire to ratify his decision of giving it out or not out,and the Thid Umpire and the Onfield Umpire should be conversing when in doubt. The Third Umpire should ASSIST the On Field Umpire. There should be no challenge permitted by the players. Technology can never be perfect becuse it does not take into account pitch conditions, wind and other factors.Tennis too has challenges, but though Roger Federer was against it initially for similar reason, he accepted it gracefully. To expect grace from the Indians is like expecting the sun to rise in the west.

  • Green_and_Gold on September 17, 2013, 8:39 GMT

    Thanks India - rather than adopt DRS and working with the technology providers to produce a better system you are saying that you will only accept it when its 100% ready. You are actually causing the roll out of a better system to be delayed. DRS should be down to the home country to decide per series - if India dont want it at home then fair enough but they shouldnt be able to stop it being used abroad.

  • ShanTheFanOfSachin on September 17, 2013, 8:08 GMT

    I wonder what is the logic when people say "DRS is remove howlers".. I hope people haven't forgotten how many controversies it actually created during ENG-AUS series alone!

    Yes it may be good at correcting certain howlers,but weren't those howlers were possible to be corrected by a 3rd umpire???. If a board needs to invest so much million on implementing DRS, then it MUST bring lot more than just 'erradicating howlers'

    But I am not against DRS or any other technology. No technology is perfect, and what benifits it brings always depends on HOW one uses it.

    I think it should be kept as simple as possible and be left to the umpires and give 3rd umpire the right to overturn a decision. Also find a way to fund boards such as ZIM, WI in implementing DRS if you ever make it mandtory(I wonder if you can make it mandatory until it becomes stable)

  • ifrakurshid on September 17, 2013, 2:33 GMT

    for India its the initial cost of system and then its cost of maintenance plus efforts to shift from one venenue to another means more gaps in matches

  • on September 17, 2013, 0:57 GMT

    @ icfa. The DRS technology business is owned by outfits in Australia & England. And the two respective boards are backing, despite the horror they went through in the Ashes. They are the ones to profit from the premature enforcement of DRS. Cricket is always a collateral victim.

    Personally, I am in favour of gradually moving towards the use of more technology; but all concerned should be trained . The "rules" governing its application also need thorough review.

  • mngc1 on September 17, 2013, 0:15 GMT

    @bharatputra83. It is easy to say drop DRS for now because you have not been on the receiving end as badly as the team where I reside. I do not see why we have to wait until other things are fixed before accepting DRS. It is already in place in most places so what is the issue? For your info in the test series WI vs England in 2012 there were 25 reviews. Only in 5 were the umpires correct (20 %). 10 were absolutely wrong (40%) and 10 were in the grey area called "On Field Decision" (40 %). Of the last 2 cases totaling 80 % most were in one sides' favour by about 2 to 1. It is not a level playing field without DRS for whatever reason.

    DRS HELPS the umpires and gets more decisions right BY FAR. Those who say that it is faulty do not really understand the technology. We need to fix the 3rd umpires who sometimes use it wrongly.

  • on September 16, 2013, 17:09 GMT

    TV Umpire should be empowered with responsibility of reviewing on-field decisions and over turn in case of howlers. Giving authority to the players to challenge the on-field umpire decision is absolutely rubbish and is against the spirit of the game.

  • Jayzuz on September 16, 2013, 16:05 GMT

    Sadly, this is India vs the rest of the world. DRS is no longer just DRS. It is a synonym for Indian ego and power. The BCCI are not interested in what is good for cricket, simply in maintaining its power base.

    The DRS just need modification, especially in clarifying the decision making process for the public. The only people who need fear that are those who keep getting dodgy series wins thanks to home town umpiring.

  • bharatputra83 on September 16, 2013, 15:00 GMT

    @ mngc It's easy to hide behind statistics. Do read my comment again. All I have said is to abolish the DRS for the time being. Iron out the basic non-DRS related faults we all already know to occur time and again.

    In the meanwhile, ICC can train their third umpires in DRS, decide about the financing of DRS, as well as all the DRS related tech can work out the shortcomings, advance their technology to weed out the known kinks and come back stronger.

    Once this is done, DRS may even be made mandatory. BCCI will surely accept such a DRS, but right now, the implementation leaves a lot to be desired.

  • JG2704 on September 16, 2013, 14:16 GMT

    Personally I don't see too much wrong with DRS. For me generally the issues in the Eng/Aus series were due to the 3rd umpire going against the system.

    I don't remember such issues in any of the 2012 series involving England in defeats vs Pakistan/SA , drawn series vs SL, and wins vs WI/India. Maybe Hot Spot could be an issue but the few changes I'd make are

    1 - Make it clear what technology takes precedent. IE if there is audible sound but no hotspot which do they go with 2 - Maybe give viewers access to the dialogue between onfield umpire and tv umpire 3 - And this is something I feel most strongly about - re umpire's call on LBW decisions

    I have nothing against LBW reviews which are made by the bowling side which are clipping the wkt remaining with the umpire but the bowling side should not lose a review in such instances. So either it remains with the umpire with the review staying in tact or it is given as out

  • crick_sucks on September 16, 2013, 14:16 GMT

    @jmcilhinney , your argument is totally insane. You say DRS was not a failure in the recent series. The very basis of DRS to be brought in was to eliminate howlers. And DRS just did the opposite. You know that. You say it is human error that caused this. I say the human was part of the DRS system. Read my comments in the entirety and understand it before shooting off a reply.

  • on September 16, 2013, 14:06 GMT

    I request the ICC to not to listen to BCCI until and unless they accept the drs system

  • gandabhai on September 16, 2013, 13:47 GMT

    who wants DRS and who wants CDMOTT ? ( Correct decisions most of the time ) ." I say have CDMOTT as the goal and work out a plan to have correct decisions most of the time" . DUMP the DRS rubbish!Who says DRS has a god given right to be the ONLY system that can be used? Clearly a faulty system.

  • trav29 on September 16, 2013, 12:57 GMT

    @bharatputra why is it a typical western attitude to suggest that people learn from the mistakes of the past rather than repeat them ?

    I could say the BCCI attitude is typical of someone with a chip on their shoulder trying to get their own back for perceived wrongdoings rather than do the right thing

    the current fiasco regarding the away SA series is a perfect example of that , rather than do whats best for cricket , rather than give their fans a series against the best team around, rather than act like a body capable of using the power they currently have they are acting like a spoiled child who is picking and choosing who is allowed to play with them as they are the only one in the village who owns a ball

  • on September 16, 2013, 12:19 GMT

    drs is absolute joke these days. either improve it or discard it altogether, no more wishful reviews that only half ball will hit stumps(that too is implored by dodgy hawk eye) why spend thousands of dollars per game on shoddy drs when some cricket boards like zimbabwe, bangladesh ,sl cant even pay heir players on time. drs should be done with by icc after this meeting.

  • mngc1 on September 16, 2013, 12:16 GMT

    @bharatputra83. Abolish DRS? Whilst not 100 % accurate it is far superior to the technology of the human eye / brain system. The human eye takes 10 "photos" per second that the brain connects to a moving picture. It may not take the shot at moment of impact. How can this be better than slow motion cameras that can take shots as speeds of 400 frames per second? It has improved correctness of borderline decisions from as low as 25 % up to about 95 %. DRS should be fully adopted complete with Hot Spot and Snicko.

    The changes I would like to see are the removal of the "On Field Decisions". Make all such borderline cases not out or all out. Allow more reviews but charge a percentage (5% suggested) for each failed additional review.

  • bharatputra83 on September 16, 2013, 11:39 GMT

    @trav29 That's a typical western attitude everyone advocates. When I am the one calling the shots, I will use my power howsoever I feel like, doing what I want to do without worrying about the damage caused to the game or whether it is right or wrong. But when you are calling the shots and we are at the recieving end, you should practice restraint and be Mr.niceguy and what not.

    When the english and australian boards are not accepting that they were wrong and not publicly apologising, whyis the BCCI measured with a different yardstick?

    Also, the boards are actually meant to look after their own interests. For looking after the games interests, there is a seperate board called the ICC.

  • milepost on September 16, 2013, 10:13 GMT

    @RednWhiteArmy on (September 16, 2013, 9:20 GMT) Agree with comments that the DRS was largely an umpiring fiasco during the Ashes however, the rules are problematic - why should the umpire get the benefit of the doubt? If it is out, it is out, if it is not out it is not out. It there is doubt the benefit of it should go to the batsman, like it always has, not to the benefit of the umpire. I think it should be used as it was intended - to eliminate howlers, not to let captains gamble on marginal decisions and that it should be administered by an off field official and taken out of the players hands. I want cricket commentary not DRS commentary.

  • bharatputra83 on September 16, 2013, 9:55 GMT

    The reason BCCI doesn't promote much test cricket is because of revenue.

    Test match has lost considerable viewership in India because people have become more busy with their lives. They don't get many holidays and hence can watch T20's in the evenings after their daily work hours done.

    Test matches are exclusively during office work hours. The tendency of people over here is that if they are taking a day off from work anyway, they would rather watch an ODI where they will get all the action instead of betting on a test match where they may not see their favourite star doing what he does best because his side wasn't batting/bowling that day.

    Let there be night test matches and you will see increased spectators and change in the BCCI attitude as well.

    @ jjamie15 You want ST's ODI stats? I think I will let you find that out on your own right here on cricinfo. Oh, and you do know that ST doesn't play international T20, right? He gave up saying international T20 is for younger men.

  • bharatputra83 on September 16, 2013, 9:43 GMT

    Abolish DRS for now, talk about it later.

    First sort out the niggling issues like how the Champions trophy finals was reduced to a T20 affair due to lack of reserve days.

    Think about making a test match of 6 days with the sixth day being a reserve day to complete the mandatory 90x5=450 overs a match so that bad light doesnt affect results.

    Make bad light play stoppage decisions more transparent.

    Direct boards to form their FTP's according to the prevailing weather conditions so that matches aren't washed out.

    Make FTP a bit more binding on the boards.

    Decide on a specific minimum number of home/away tests/ODI/T20 to be played by a team per year.

    Make fringe teams like Bangladesh qualify for a test spot in ICC against Ireland and other upcoming nations so that they too get a chance.

    Train third umpires in DRS properly before using it.

    Let DRS technology become more reliable and then introduce it making it mandatory.

    Till then, get the basics right. I am sure there is lot more.

  • RednWhiteArmy on September 16, 2013, 9:20 GMT

    Why is it when the aussies are losing, instead of rising to the challenge of improving, they want the rules changed? Pathetic stuff really.

  • on September 16, 2013, 9:07 GMT

    "DRS set to dominate ICC meet". How about the ICC set to dominate their meeting discussion about how best to expand the game beyond the traditional eight teams that dominate cricket and the board meetings.

    How about the ICC discuss changing the following: (1) All cricket nations are classified as a "member" with no distinctions. (2) ANY eight (or more) "members" can select ONE board member (8 x 13 = 104). (3) FTP is replaced with multi-tiered test cricket, where any "member" can put forward a team to play test cricket with unseeded teams starting in lower tiers. All tiers have promotion & regression based on two year tier results (eg: six teams, five series per team, four tests per series, every two years).

  • trav29 on September 16, 2013, 9:04 GMT

    @ramakrishnan two wrongs do not make a right

    the BCCI should have learned from the mistakes made previously about how much damage could be done to the game through individual boards looking after their own interests only

    we are meant to have learned as a society from the mistakes made in the past not just repeat them

  • on September 16, 2013, 8:43 GMT

    While people from all countries are slamming BCCI for their bullish approach , nobody remembers how dominant ECB and CA were , when these countries had the veto power to overrule any proposal from any other country . It is now the turn of BCCI to show others what they are capable of . After all , BCCI is providing the maximum financial income to ICC and hence they have no option but to tow the line of BCCI . I am not an ardent support of BCCI but I am only saying that the wheel is not stationary and the ups and downs depend upon how fast the wheel rotates .

  • venkatesh018 on September 16, 2013, 8:09 GMT

    When did India start caring about its spinners? They were the pioneers in making the boundaries smaller and the pitches flatter. The real reason for the opposition to the 2 new balls is Indian batsmen will have their hands full against the pacers in the next World cup in Australia in 2015 rendering their only weapon, batting, floundering?

  • ladycricfan on September 16, 2013, 7:39 GMT

    Everybody here agrees that DRS is going through trial period and there is a lot need to change before it is accepted as finished product. Instead of ICC, why can't individual boards devise their own formula of DRS, get the approval form ICC and trial it in their home series. At the moment different countries have different preferences/ limitations. After 1 or2 yrs of trial period which ever version works best ICC can implement it.

  • jjamie15 on September 16, 2013, 7:08 GMT

    The facts are - and there is no getting away from this - DRS gets more decisions correct than umpires did without it. Fact. To say it needs to be 100% is a ridiculous argument and merely an excuse for not using it.

    I don't see the BCCI coming to the table with any way of improving test cricket. They want to over-hype T20, which by its very nature is a lower standard of cricket than any other (Gilchrist, Warne, Murali playing into their 40s?!). Therefore, the BCCI are part of the problem. If they don't want to play test cricket, then don't. They can pretend all they like it doesn't matter, but I don't see ST fans quoting his T20 or ODI stats. As someone once put to the BCCI chief - why not push yourself and improve Test cricket?

    DRS in the ashes didn't work because of the Umpires. Broad would still have been given not out. Yes, its use needs amending, but its a great tool.

    The ICC need to man up and make all countries boards accept it.

  • WalkingWicket11 on September 16, 2013, 6:40 GMT

    @bobmartin Do you even know the operating costs of DRS? Why waste about $60000 per day if it only increases the accuracy by about 5% and still causes controversy? Cricket boards, except BCCI, ECB, and CA, cannot afford it. Even so, that money can be better spent on other things. Some boards are having enough trouble even to pay salaries or match fees to their players, why burden them with an additional expense?

    Now don't tell me the broadcaster has to pay for it, because then what is next? Broadcasters should also pay for the players' hotel rooms and air tickets? ICC wanted DRS, so they should pay. Tomorrow, ICC may make a rule that players have to be air-dropped into stadiums using helicopters, and then they will ask broadcasters to pay.

  • CrICkeeet on September 16, 2013, 6:39 GMT

    ICC meeting??? No need... Just ask BCCI what they want nd make it a rule...........

  • bobmartin on September 16, 2013, 6:03 GMT

    How illogical is it that the anti-DRS brigade are quite willing to accept a greater number of errors made without it, than less errors with it. And is it not even more strange that the loudest anti-DRS noises come from the country who in the past has been the biggest complainer about on-field umpiring decisions. .There are none so blind as those who will not see.

  • Waqs77 on September 16, 2013, 5:33 GMT

    ECB and CA are doing the right thing. When you have a facility you always try to improve it not to stop using it because at this moment it is not providing 100% accurate results. If that would have been the mental approach of inventors of scientific technologies, perhaps we were never been able to use so much advanced facilities in our lives. BCCI is just a bunch of stubborn ppl, who doesn't understand that something is better than nothing. DRS has reduced the errors in game (although not 100% as of now) so it should be applied throughout, regardless of any particular board's interests and the agenda of discussion should be to improve it rather than to USE IT or NOT.

  • jmcilhinney on September 16, 2013, 5:14 GMT

    I'm a proponent of DRS; have been all along and this last Ashes series has done nothing to change that. The fact that I think DRS should be used does not mean that I think that the current implementation is perfect though. A great many DRS supporters, myself included, have been saying for some time - since well before the Ashes - that some changes needed to be made to the implementation. There really is no one perfect system, as can be seen from the fact that lots of people have lots of different ideas about what "obvious" changes need to be made. Many, if not most, of those suggestions have been made to solve a problem without considering what new problem(s) the change might introduce though. If the ICC jumped to make some of the suggested changes and they created new problems then they'd be lambasted further, so it's appropriate that they consider changes very carefully.

  • jmcilhinney on September 16, 2013, 5:07 GMT

    @icfa on (September 16, 2013, 4:11 GMT), I refute pretty much everything you said. Firstly, DRS did not bomb big time during the Ashes. There were only a few occasions where DRS technology was at fault. Most of the issues were due to umpire error. Take Broad's case. People try to use that as an argument against DRS and yet he would still have been not out if DRS was not in use. ECB and CA want to use DRS because they see how it can improve cricket, which is hardly stupid. They have wanted DRS since before BCCI opposed it so your assertion has no basis. Noone has ever claimed that DRS is 100% accurate so to now claim the fact that it's not as reason to oppose it is the stupidity. No technology can ever be 100% accurate but it can be more accurate than human umpires, which is the point. You claim that no attempt is being made to improve DRS and yet this very story says that several of your suggestions are already being discussed and were even during the recent Ashes. That's stupidity!

  • vish57 on September 16, 2013, 5:03 GMT

    ICC should consider to declare a batsman not out during stumping or run out appeal if any part of the body or bat though not grounded if within the crease; the present rule is unfair especially during stumping; also ICC should consider maximum of 5 overs a bowler in T20 games and T20 power play should be flexible such as first 2 overs mandatory, bowling team power play of 2 overs between 13-18 overs and batting team power play of 2 overs between 5-10 over; substitute if Wc gets injured with a regular WC should be allowed; DRS should be implemented in all international matches with the desired correction.

  • on September 16, 2013, 4:32 GMT

    DRS system must enforce. I had seen so many wrong decisions by the umpire & also it is very difficult by the umpires while giving. Third umpire decision will be taken in all aspects like run outs boundary lines while deciding 4 or 6. stump outs hit wickets, why not in LBW decision. Once again I request DRS system must be enforced.

  • crick_sucks on September 16, 2013, 4:11 GMT

    DRS bombed big time during the ashes. Despite this CA and ECB insist on DRS. This is just stupidity. Even the technology owners claim that their technology is not 100% accurate and still these 2 boards are adamant on DRS. This is just fanning their egos. They want it just because BCCI opposes it. No attempt is being made to improve the DRS but instead it is just being shoved down the throat of the oppose-rs. Fix the number of reviews, take the call out of the players hands, make the TV umpire an actual umpire not an assist, remove LBW from the DRS and then start a discussion with the rest of the boards. May be then there could be a understanding between all the boards.

  • zoot on September 16, 2013, 3:03 GMT

    Realtime-snicko is a must as hot spot isn't very clear.

  • on September 16, 2013, 2:59 GMT

    two balls was a ridiculous change to begin with. they should scrap that.

  • on September 16, 2013, 2:08 GMT

    Get rid of DRS. It doesn't work and is clearly erroding the authority of the on field umpires, in all levels of cricket.

  • sportofpain on September 16, 2013, 2:00 GMT

    1. Modify the DRS so that it can only be used for no balls, run outs, stumpings and snicks- don't use it for LBW's because predictive path is completely error prone. In other words use technology to show what the human eye may not detect BUT do not use it to infer/ project anything beyond. That would be sensible and less controversial. 2. Remove the arbitrary number of reviews per team. Whenever the above mentioned dismissals are involved allow for the decision to be reviewed.

  • Happy_hamster on September 16, 2013, 1:35 GMT

    Joe Donnelly on (September 15, 2013, 17:30 GMT) I tend to agree with your analysis- Bully boy BCCI says jump and the cash strapped boards of SL, WI say how high just to ensure a lucrative ODI/T20 series. The more important issues like pulling out of difficult overseas test series is apparently of no importance, and the No.1 test side playing half the number of test of some others is frankly skewing the 'rankings'. Imagine the comparison if this was football or rugby it wouldn't be tolerated, to pull out of a series that is on paper as difficult as it gets should result in 0 ranking points for 3 games.

  • Little_Aussie_Battler on September 16, 2013, 1:20 GMT

    Rules should come into force that if you are a test match nation, you must play at least 8 tests a year. This would allow a proper championship and rankings to occur. If it is such an issue to play the lower test nations such as Zim, NZ and Bang. There should be a top division for tests created, then a 2nd division with the rest. It is just a disorganised hotch potch at the moment.

    Yellow balls should be permitted in tests to allow night tests.

    Play should continue if a ground has floodlights. No more stopping matches like we just experienced in England.

    DRS, is a minor issue. Either everyone adopts it, or scrap it. Otherwise do away with umpires and just go electronic.

    50 over cricket needs to be severely cut back or gotten rid of. Noone is interested anymore. All those pointless series over the years has killed off the once golden goose. 20 over cricket might go the same way at this rate.

  • David_Boon on September 16, 2013, 1:15 GMT

    Normally I think the BCCI just act selfishly in looking out for their own interests at the cost of the game as a whole, but in this issue they are spot on. The DRS SUCKS, it needs to go. Playing against India with no DRS is a breath of fresh air (except for the Australian/English commentators going on and on about 'oh if they had DRS that would be out' or whatever). Cricket is dieing, and the administration is killing it. Night tests will the final blow in destroying a game we all love.

  • on September 16, 2013, 1:09 GMT

    Gone are the days when ECB and CA dominated their decision on the ICC. They ruled for over 60-80 years on decisions like which countries to tour, how many tests to be played, playing conditions etc. Guess it just takes time to get used to the fact that they have been side lined and their views will no longer be decisions. It is not about the DRS, Playing conditions or Bad light rules, the point is, their dominance has ended and a new super power now rules - The BCCI. Like it or not, this fact can't be ignored. Hence these meetings seem like a waste of time, just let the BCCI tell the other boards what to do, just as ECB and CA did 30 years back and other shall follow suite. It was not good for cricket when ECB and CA ruled, it is not good for cricket now when BCCI rules. ICC has never been good for cricket.

  • on September 15, 2013, 22:35 GMT

    The DRS should only be used to get rid of the howler of a call. Why they need the players to call for it....their should be enough time after each dismissal/non dismissal for the third umpire to view a replay (get the full high def slow motion replay) and be his call. I would prefer this use of technology more. If the outcome is not obvious, after 2 replays....then field umpires call stand. Take the LBW out of the questioning process too (unless it is edged off the bat).

  • heathrf1974 on September 15, 2013, 21:39 GMT

    I think hotspot is a bit dodgy, but snicko is great.

  • heathrf1974 on September 15, 2013, 21:37 GMT

    I think hotspot is a bit dodgy, but snicko is great.

  • on September 15, 2013, 20:56 GMT

    Electronics and computerization is said to be a vast improvement in development in India, except the non exception of DRS. So pathetic .

  • on September 15, 2013, 20:44 GMT

    Surely if the spin bowlers can play t20 cricket where the ball is never older then 20 overs then there shouldn't be any worry over using two new balls in 50 over cricket. Give some love to pace bowlers.

  • RameshSubramaniam on September 15, 2013, 20:20 GMT

    At least one more fielder should be allowed outside 30 yards after 40 overs

  • on September 15, 2013, 19:28 GMT

    To all ENGLISHMEN who thinks test cricket is the one and all of cricket just needs to come in terms with reality..popularity of test cricket is dwindling outside the BRITISH ISLES...T20 and ODI are here to stay and is integral for cricket to survive..so everything needs to be catered for..and oh yes....CRICKET DOESNT BEGIN AND END WITH ASHES..

  • bajanborn on September 15, 2013, 19:23 GMT

    its time the icc restrict players from going off the field so regularly and sitting in the rest room or otherwise and a sub replacing him .It's unfair for its not in the spirit of the game and also players on the boundary having drinks .its player vs player (team vs team ) or stamina vs stamina for its test cricket which is supposed to be the highest level .i would hope that three onfield umpires be used in test cricket with each one doing two sessions a day .after all they are all in their sixties .DRs was started and should continue .the icc should stand up and implement the rule across the board .

  • atharsherwani on September 15, 2013, 19:21 GMT

    DRS, despite it's occasional hick up, is essential to adjudicate correct decisions. India needs to realise this and stop head in the sand syndrome. I hope that Pakistan does not support India just to be subservient to them. In order to balance the injustice meted out to Spinning Teams 2 balls experiment should be discontinued.

  • on September 15, 2013, 19:17 GMT

    i'm eagerly looking forward to the outcome of the Drs debate.

  • on September 15, 2013, 19:02 GMT

    Hot spot is the weakest component of DRS. Its hard to pick-up and inconclusive. For me, Snicko is a much better option, even if it takes a few seconds longer.

  • on September 15, 2013, 18:50 GMT

    Long live DRS. Isn't this what ppl are suggesting here. We have just seen the problems and errors of the system in the recent Ashes. Why then it's the system still being promoted as is? When talks are on to fix the system why were the views of BCCI consistently ignored earlier? The whole rationale given earlier was that BCCI is regressive and don't want any progress. Now the picture is being painted differently while conveniently ignoring the fact that a change is required. Having had bad experiences they are the first to oppose the system as it stood and demanded a change which others were reluctant to allow. Now having been bitten and left shame faced by the bloopers caused by the system the perpetrators of this folly are trying to adapt the stance taken by BCCI earlier and again not listen to the suggestions of the board. The whole affair is leaving a bad taste in the mouth. But I guess politics has invaded all spheres. What a colossal waste.

  • AndyMick on September 15, 2013, 18:44 GMT

    Just ask BCCI what they want and carry on from there. Whatever ICC or anyone else thinks, if The BCCI don't like it then t won't happen. Remember, one set if rules for all countries, whether here may be potential problems or not, India MUST tow the line, or just make them the Indian Board of Control!

  • on September 15, 2013, 18:21 GMT

    Dear ICC members as an ardent cricket fan I would sincerely request you to pleaselook into the following issues 1.Try to help zimbabwe cricket solve its issues either it's financially helping them or the management issues 2.Please bring back international cricket in Pakistan, such a great cricketing nation can't be ignored because of some people who are against cricket, destroying the image of this game using cheap tactics 3.make this upcoming teams like Ireland, afghanistan and other better performing countries play against each other and let them play some test matches betwen them. 4.All ccricket boards should have their anti-corruption unit which will report to ICC's anti-corruption unit

    Have many points to suggest, But I would be greatful if these issues are also looked into.

    Thanks alot

  • Smithie on September 15, 2013, 18:19 GMT

    It would be helpful to point out that this is only the ICC CEO s meeting and any recommendations they make have to be approved by the ICC Board - it is this ultimate body that Srinivasan influences by offering ( or not) fixtures with India that dangle all too enticing revenue. But with luck the Indian Supreme Court may rule against him and preclude his re-election as BCCI President. This could see a change of heart at the BCCI who must be tired of their tarnished image continuing to be sullied. Fingers crossed for all cricket lovers that the Judges come up with the goods.

  • CrICkeeet on September 15, 2013, 18:12 GMT

    Um nt sure what the writter of this Article wanna mean by "divided house"! what divide.. despite last ashes still i believe all boards will support drs but bcci. the only questn is how 2 improve it if it is a fair votng systm... (though i guess it wont happen)

  • on September 15, 2013, 17:30 GMT

    With all the things wrong in the world of Test cricket at the moment like teams abandoning tests for pointless extra T20's or changing schedules to massage ranking points and this is all they can find to discuss. Then as an exercise it ranks with re-organising the deck chairs on the titanic. We all know that CA&ECB will go one way and BCCI will cast the votes from India SL Zim and Bang whichever way they chose, it will be an interesting sideline to see which way SA goes in the current circumstances and Pak will be forced to follow the BCCI line as once again a possible tournament in India is being dangled as a carrot to ensure they follow the Indian line. All the same corrupt inept self serving posturing that the wolfe report tried to fix.

  • 2.14istherunrate on September 15, 2013, 17:17 GMT

    it should be a matter for optimism that ICC are meeting to discuss DRS and WC playing conditions., particularly after the far4cical DRS situation this summer and the ineptitude of the 3rd umpire to use it properly. Also after the CT one or two maters desperately needed resolving such as only having one day for the big games so that the final became a glorified game of t20. However given the track record of ICC meetings and the lack of common sense generaslly to emerge from them I am gripped with a sense of foreboding more than eager anticipation. If situations can get worse surely they will after ICC have debated them. Common sense is hardly coomon;within ICC it tends to be as extinct as the Dodo, yet it is really all that is ever required of them. It is time for a new better body to be formed to run cricket SENSIBLY.

  • on September 15, 2013, 16:49 GMT

    When a team use the DRS review on an umpire's decision and the replay shows the Umpire call as border line. His call should remain but that should not be seen as an unsuccessful review with the team loosing further rites to review. The ICC needs to fix that!

  • on September 15, 2013, 16:48 GMT

    Not sure why this author would start off saying it is a divided house. all teams want DRS. Teams just want umpires to understand how to use DRS. DRS isn't the issue. Umpiring errors in the application of DRS are the issue. DRS just assists umpires make a decision. this author is either confused or trying to create controversy

  • on September 15, 2013, 16:48 GMT

    Not sure why this author would start off saying it is a divided house. all teams want DRS. Teams just want umpires to understand how to use DRS. DRS isn't the issue. Umpiring errors in the application of DRS are the issue. DRS just assists umpires make a decision. this author is either confused or trying to create controversy

  • on September 15, 2013, 16:49 GMT

    When a team use the DRS review on an umpire's decision and the replay shows the Umpire call as border line. His call should remain but that should not be seen as an unsuccessful review with the team loosing further rites to review. The ICC needs to fix that!

  • 2.14istherunrate on September 15, 2013, 17:17 GMT

    it should be a matter for optimism that ICC are meeting to discuss DRS and WC playing conditions., particularly after the far4cical DRS situation this summer and the ineptitude of the 3rd umpire to use it properly. Also after the CT one or two maters desperately needed resolving such as only having one day for the big games so that the final became a glorified game of t20. However given the track record of ICC meetings and the lack of common sense generaslly to emerge from them I am gripped with a sense of foreboding more than eager anticipation. If situations can get worse surely they will after ICC have debated them. Common sense is hardly coomon;within ICC it tends to be as extinct as the Dodo, yet it is really all that is ever required of them. It is time for a new better body to be formed to run cricket SENSIBLY.

  • on September 15, 2013, 17:30 GMT

    With all the things wrong in the world of Test cricket at the moment like teams abandoning tests for pointless extra T20's or changing schedules to massage ranking points and this is all they can find to discuss. Then as an exercise it ranks with re-organising the deck chairs on the titanic. We all know that CA&ECB will go one way and BCCI will cast the votes from India SL Zim and Bang whichever way they chose, it will be an interesting sideline to see which way SA goes in the current circumstances and Pak will be forced to follow the BCCI line as once again a possible tournament in India is being dangled as a carrot to ensure they follow the Indian line. All the same corrupt inept self serving posturing that the wolfe report tried to fix.

  • CrICkeeet on September 15, 2013, 18:12 GMT

    Um nt sure what the writter of this Article wanna mean by "divided house"! what divide.. despite last ashes still i believe all boards will support drs but bcci. the only questn is how 2 improve it if it is a fair votng systm... (though i guess it wont happen)

  • Smithie on September 15, 2013, 18:19 GMT

    It would be helpful to point out that this is only the ICC CEO s meeting and any recommendations they make have to be approved by the ICC Board - it is this ultimate body that Srinivasan influences by offering ( or not) fixtures with India that dangle all too enticing revenue. But with luck the Indian Supreme Court may rule against him and preclude his re-election as BCCI President. This could see a change of heart at the BCCI who must be tired of their tarnished image continuing to be sullied. Fingers crossed for all cricket lovers that the Judges come up with the goods.

  • on September 15, 2013, 18:21 GMT

    Dear ICC members as an ardent cricket fan I would sincerely request you to pleaselook into the following issues 1.Try to help zimbabwe cricket solve its issues either it's financially helping them or the management issues 2.Please bring back international cricket in Pakistan, such a great cricketing nation can't be ignored because of some people who are against cricket, destroying the image of this game using cheap tactics 3.make this upcoming teams like Ireland, afghanistan and other better performing countries play against each other and let them play some test matches betwen them. 4.All ccricket boards should have their anti-corruption unit which will report to ICC's anti-corruption unit

    Have many points to suggest, But I would be greatful if these issues are also looked into.

    Thanks alot

  • AndyMick on September 15, 2013, 18:44 GMT

    Just ask BCCI what they want and carry on from there. Whatever ICC or anyone else thinks, if The BCCI don't like it then t won't happen. Remember, one set if rules for all countries, whether here may be potential problems or not, India MUST tow the line, or just make them the Indian Board of Control!

  • on September 15, 2013, 18:50 GMT

    Long live DRS. Isn't this what ppl are suggesting here. We have just seen the problems and errors of the system in the recent Ashes. Why then it's the system still being promoted as is? When talks are on to fix the system why were the views of BCCI consistently ignored earlier? The whole rationale given earlier was that BCCI is regressive and don't want any progress. Now the picture is being painted differently while conveniently ignoring the fact that a change is required. Having had bad experiences they are the first to oppose the system as it stood and demanded a change which others were reluctant to allow. Now having been bitten and left shame faced by the bloopers caused by the system the perpetrators of this folly are trying to adapt the stance taken by BCCI earlier and again not listen to the suggestions of the board. The whole affair is leaving a bad taste in the mouth. But I guess politics has invaded all spheres. What a colossal waste.

  • on September 15, 2013, 19:02 GMT

    Hot spot is the weakest component of DRS. Its hard to pick-up and inconclusive. For me, Snicko is a much better option, even if it takes a few seconds longer.