Decision Review System October 11, 2011

DRS no longer mandatory, says ICC

ESPNcricinfo staff
171

In the space of three months, with the England-India series serving as the catalyst, the ICC's executive board comprising its ten Full Member nations has gone back on the mandatory application of the Decision Review System in Tests and ODIs, and made it subject to bilateral agreements between the participating boards.

The decision, which followed sharp and sustained criticism of the DRS by India, marks a complete reversal from the agreement reached by the ICC's executive board at its annual conference in Hong Kong in June, when infra-red cameras and audio tracking were included in the basic requirements for the DRS. ICC chief executive Haroon Lorgat explained the turnaround at a media briefing in Dubai, saying, "There are quite a number of countries who favour it and there are some who have got concerns about its reliability."

In Tuesday's announcement the ICC also struck Hot Spot off its list of basic requirements for the DRS, confirming "the situation that existed before is now restored". When the DRS was first instituted bilaterally in 2008, the basic requirements included a ball tracker and a clear sound mike, as a result of which LBWs were also included under the review system. In this year's three-month experiment with a mandatory DRS, however, the referral of LBWs had been omitted from the system, due to the absence of a ball tracker in the mandatory requirements.

When asked whether the ICC was disappointed that they had chosen to return to a three-year-old stance on the use of technology, Lorgat said, "It's also a recognition that Hot Spot was not as reliable as we would like it to be ..."

The ICC will, however, still use the DRS at all its events, and was "confident about its future". Lorgat said the ICC understood the importance of sticking with the DRS. "We do get the benefit of more correct decisions and we can rectify blatant errors, so there is a use for DRS. But some members are not convinced by the incidents of ... call it the failure of the technology."

The England-India series in particular, Lorgat said, had provided evidence about Hot Spot that was "not comforting". "There were a number of occasions where Hot Spot did not detect a traceable mark," he said, adding there were members other than the BCCI, the most strident critic of the DRS, who also expressed their concerns about the technology at the executive board meeting.

"This was a board decision that came out through considerable debate and eventually there was a unanimity that we need to revert, and let those who are comfortable use it and give those who are not the option to decide not to use it."

One of the consequences of the reversal of the DRS's mandatory inclusion in two formats of international cricket would be the inability to get a central uniform sponsor for the technology. The cost of the DRS is estimated to be approximately $5000 a day according to the ICC, making it unaffordable for some nations in Test series. The previous ruling about mandatory inclusion had made an exception for commercial handicaps among member boards. The current Bangladesh-West Indies series, for example, is being played without DRS.

Lorgat said, "If it's not universally used across the board we will not be able to secure a sponsor." Ironically, on Tuesday the PCB became the first board to announce the application of a sponsored DRS in its offshore series against England and Sri Lanka, to be played in the UAE this winter.

The ICC's decision has once again left DRS funding to be juggled among home boards, broadcasters and technology providers. Lorgat said, "The previous position was that we make a contribution, and we will continue to work with the members and broadcasters to see how we can best employ the use of DRS."

Research and development in ball-tracking, in what he called a "pioneering technology", will continue. Lorgat said the constant changes around the DRS was a phase the ICC was bound to go through "in terms of developing and working with technology suppliers".

"Some time in the future, it will prove to be more reliable," he said. "Look at all the equipment we have got today, it is a far cry to what we had a few years ago."

When asked what it would take to make the DRS mandatory again and whether any minimum standards had been set down for the technology providers, the ICC's response stated that there was no time frame, "just that research into technology will continue".

In Hong Kong, the BCCI were unable to get the support of the required number of executive board members required to prevent the DRS from being made mandatory. The inclusion of Hot Spot in place of the ball tracker on the list of basic requirements was seen as a compromise then. However, India's recently-concluded disastrous Test series against England, which England won 4-0, included a few contentious Hot Spot decisions and has turned the BCCI away from the thermal imaging cameras as well.

At the Indian board's annual general meeting last month, president N Srinivasan said the current technology was simply not good enough after Hot Spot proved inconclusive on a few occasions on the tour and that the board would raise the issue at the next ICC meeting. India's captain MS Dhoni also voiced his displeasure at the handling of the DRS on more than one occasion during the tour. Over the previous two ICC meetings in Dubai, evidently, the BCCI's arguments around the DRS have been extremely persuasive.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • nayonika on October 14, 2011, 6:25 GMT

    Okay, BCCI has muscle and money..or so everyone says. But surely the other ICC members have their tongue,throat and voice box intact? They can disssent...cant they? Just stop with neutral umpires and do away with the electrnonic gadgets. Even if we get 95% sucess rate from the umpires,thats good enough. Afterall even with gadgets we are not going to get 100% sucess rate. Instead of spending money on DRS better spend it popularising the game around the world so that CRICKET BECOMES A TRULY GLOBAL GAME like football.

  • Fast_Track_Bully on October 14, 2011, 4:03 GMT

    @ Aryansblue Because BCCI rule the cricket world. rest of them do not have any opinion other than 'yes sir' comment...ha ha ha...BCCI is the master and they will order...others must obey it... :D

  • Cric1988 on October 13, 2011, 15:10 GMT

    well cricinfo wont publish my comments where i have pointed out flaws in BCCI. anyways i am seeing people commenting on the issue of cost and saying that the cost is high thats why its BCCI doesnt want it. well let me tell you BCCI itself did not comments on DRS's cost but in fact commented on the functionality if DRS, secondly if other boards can afford it (SA/ENG/AUS) why not BCCI which is the richest board. people plz get your facts right.

  • Aryansblue on October 13, 2011, 8:53 GMT

    If ICC does anything wrong why only BCCI is to be blamed there are other 9 countries members present. why these people are not blamed ???

  • mohsin9975 on October 13, 2011, 4:21 GMT

    I ve been posting this many times bt cricinfo hasnt publishd my comments. My argument is y dusnt icc make a simple ultra slomo replay d min reqt for drs? Why u need hightech devices to eliminate howlers?Let d onus to review decisions rest wid umps. Let them ask for replays they want to review. Evn lbw howlers can b eliminated by this.

  • kristee on October 13, 2011, 2:33 GMT

    In the recent CL a third umpire messed up a run out call (Gavaskar would have been sulking all day if such a thing happened to an Indian in an international match!). Would it be an excuse to do away with run out reviews? I'm really disappointed and losing interest in cricket; a beautiful game is being destroyed for partisan interests!

  • mohsin9975 on October 13, 2011, 1:26 GMT

    Contd. Why nt bring d ultra slomo techno into proper cricketing use? Why waste it for showing flowing hairs of cheergirls? It looked gr8 initially.We ve been seeing this 4 over 2 yrs. bt nw instead of using it properly we see it being abused. In d recent ipl nd cl, evn d hi' lights section is filled wid close ups in ultra slomo instead of regular live pictures. U-slomo ws 1st used by c-9 in aus jst to popularise it. Bt in india we r commercially abusing it

  • on October 13, 2011, 0:02 GMT

    @kingcobra: a couple of things, dravid's wrong dismissal #1 was because he didn't review. Errors #2 and #3 were due to the blunders made by the third umpire, the system never ever showed a nick, so pls don't blame the system. By the same token, did you see sachin get away with 3 or 4 lbws in the last test alone simply because there wasn't DRS for lbws? or how about as many as 3 lbw s going against Sa team last year in the 2nd test at durban? if the complete drs package is used as is available in Australia,England, more correct decisions will eventually be made and it will make for much more exciting viewing. However, the ICC has to take the responsibility to act in the interests of the game. Sachin/Dhoni/BCCI aint bigger than cricket!

  • Texmex on October 12, 2011, 17:54 GMT

    DRS is good provided the third umpire only intervenes in the case of a howler. In marginal decisions the onfield decision should stay. In the Ind-Eng series Dravid was given out several times and the onfield decision overturned even though DRS was inconclusive.

  • bobmartin on October 12, 2011, 15:42 GMT

    Posted by azzaman333 on (October 12 2011, 05:13 AM GMT)

    "So, a system that objectively improves the quality of umpiring by a statistically significant amount is removed because it's not 100% perfect. Good work ICC, another step backwards for cricket"

    Absolutely spot-on azzaman333... I couldn't have put it better myself. It sums up magnificently the whole farcical issue. You couldn't make it up !!! ICC now stands for International Clowns Convention....

  • nayonika on October 14, 2011, 6:25 GMT

    Okay, BCCI has muscle and money..or so everyone says. But surely the other ICC members have their tongue,throat and voice box intact? They can disssent...cant they? Just stop with neutral umpires and do away with the electrnonic gadgets. Even if we get 95% sucess rate from the umpires,thats good enough. Afterall even with gadgets we are not going to get 100% sucess rate. Instead of spending money on DRS better spend it popularising the game around the world so that CRICKET BECOMES A TRULY GLOBAL GAME like football.

  • Fast_Track_Bully on October 14, 2011, 4:03 GMT

    @ Aryansblue Because BCCI rule the cricket world. rest of them do not have any opinion other than 'yes sir' comment...ha ha ha...BCCI is the master and they will order...others must obey it... :D

  • Cric1988 on October 13, 2011, 15:10 GMT

    well cricinfo wont publish my comments where i have pointed out flaws in BCCI. anyways i am seeing people commenting on the issue of cost and saying that the cost is high thats why its BCCI doesnt want it. well let me tell you BCCI itself did not comments on DRS's cost but in fact commented on the functionality if DRS, secondly if other boards can afford it (SA/ENG/AUS) why not BCCI which is the richest board. people plz get your facts right.

  • Aryansblue on October 13, 2011, 8:53 GMT

    If ICC does anything wrong why only BCCI is to be blamed there are other 9 countries members present. why these people are not blamed ???

  • mohsin9975 on October 13, 2011, 4:21 GMT

    I ve been posting this many times bt cricinfo hasnt publishd my comments. My argument is y dusnt icc make a simple ultra slomo replay d min reqt for drs? Why u need hightech devices to eliminate howlers?Let d onus to review decisions rest wid umps. Let them ask for replays they want to review. Evn lbw howlers can b eliminated by this.

  • kristee on October 13, 2011, 2:33 GMT

    In the recent CL a third umpire messed up a run out call (Gavaskar would have been sulking all day if such a thing happened to an Indian in an international match!). Would it be an excuse to do away with run out reviews? I'm really disappointed and losing interest in cricket; a beautiful game is being destroyed for partisan interests!

  • mohsin9975 on October 13, 2011, 1:26 GMT

    Contd. Why nt bring d ultra slomo techno into proper cricketing use? Why waste it for showing flowing hairs of cheergirls? It looked gr8 initially.We ve been seeing this 4 over 2 yrs. bt nw instead of using it properly we see it being abused. In d recent ipl nd cl, evn d hi' lights section is filled wid close ups in ultra slomo instead of regular live pictures. U-slomo ws 1st used by c-9 in aus jst to popularise it. Bt in india we r commercially abusing it

  • on October 13, 2011, 0:02 GMT

    @kingcobra: a couple of things, dravid's wrong dismissal #1 was because he didn't review. Errors #2 and #3 were due to the blunders made by the third umpire, the system never ever showed a nick, so pls don't blame the system. By the same token, did you see sachin get away with 3 or 4 lbws in the last test alone simply because there wasn't DRS for lbws? or how about as many as 3 lbw s going against Sa team last year in the 2nd test at durban? if the complete drs package is used as is available in Australia,England, more correct decisions will eventually be made and it will make for much more exciting viewing. However, the ICC has to take the responsibility to act in the interests of the game. Sachin/Dhoni/BCCI aint bigger than cricket!

  • Texmex on October 12, 2011, 17:54 GMT

    DRS is good provided the third umpire only intervenes in the case of a howler. In marginal decisions the onfield decision should stay. In the Ind-Eng series Dravid was given out several times and the onfield decision overturned even though DRS was inconclusive.

  • bobmartin on October 12, 2011, 15:42 GMT

    Posted by azzaman333 on (October 12 2011, 05:13 AM GMT)

    "So, a system that objectively improves the quality of umpiring by a statistically significant amount is removed because it's not 100% perfect. Good work ICC, another step backwards for cricket"

    Absolutely spot-on azzaman333... I couldn't have put it better myself. It sums up magnificently the whole farcical issue. You couldn't make it up !!! ICC now stands for International Clowns Convention....

  • simpleguy2008 on October 12, 2011, 15:04 GMT

    yes true it is indian cricket council rather international cricket council.So i request icc should reverse the decision and should make mandatory with hawk eye and hotspot.Please icc ( international cricket council) pls make a mandatory for udrs.

  • gdalvi on October 12, 2011, 14:09 GMT

    DRS is mess created purely by ICC due to some obligation to give part of the money pie to companies and shareholders in certain countries. That is what it is - plain and simple. This is classic case what happens when you try to use chain saw to cut grass - you get soil/mud all over you (and others too!). Here are some points to think about: If main purpose of DRS is to aviod howlers, why need for all the complicated and not completely proven technology? Can't simple TV replay, resolve ALL of the howlers? If you really need high-tech devices to find the truth (that too with no 100% guarantee) - then it is NOT A HOWLER. Cricket flourished with these marginal decisions for 100+ years and can certainly survive now. This sudden need to get these really marginal decisions right is just media induced frenzy - nothing more.

  • bks123 on October 12, 2011, 14:08 GMT

    ICC needed to take this decision. DRS is not cost effective. For a 5% improvement in correct decision, $5000 a day or $25000 for a test is not a small amount of money. That too also for a handful of reviews throughout the match. ICC had two options..1. provide the cost. 2. revoke it. they took the decision in their favor just by revoking DRS.

  • HLANGL on October 12, 2011, 13:11 GMT

    Stupid move by ICC, to say the least, may be mainly to satisfy the stupid BCCI. When you have a chance to grab 95%, you should grab it, rather than dropping it altogether by pointing out the 5% you cannot get. DRS will only improve the situation, it won't make anything worse. The only thing is, only in certain cases, say 5%, it may not be able to come up with a better resolution due to many practical limitations in technology like the sufficient camera coverage not being available, in which case the original decision made by the on field umplire would remain. Still it won't make it anything worse. In many a case, say 95% of the cases, it will simply improve the quality of the decision. So what the rationale against DRS ?. Stupid move by ICC to join hands with the stupid BCCI. BCCI cannot digest the fact that their team had been humiliated in England because they were simply not good enough, so they simply point fingers at DRS again & again, which has to be said nothing but ridiculous.

  • kingcobra85 on October 12, 2011, 12:50 GMT

    did anyone watch the end vs India serious rahul dravid was giving out atleast three times wrongly using this system and hotspot showed nothing on all the three occasions dont blame BCCI ...its just a sensible decision by ICC.

  • kristee on October 12, 2011, 11:42 GMT

    DRS is reducing, if not eliminating, howlers. Everybody knows this. A third umpire messed up with a run out referral during the recent CL; still, overall, but for the referrals, viewers would have had reason to complain. At least, there would be more consistency about decisions. Worryingly, ICC's caving in would even send a wrong signal to the umpires. Mark my words, there will be howlers in the ensuing Ind-Eng series and most will benefit the former! So the Indian support for the reversal is understandable.

  • Devon_Dumpling on October 12, 2011, 10:34 GMT

    ICC cave in to Indian pressure. What an absolutely predictable and pathetic state of affairs.

  • anver777 on October 12, 2011, 9:55 GMT

    Yes/No scenario from ICC !!!! why not they have a firm decision so that, cricket lovers can follow the matches without any complications & confusions.......

  • on October 12, 2011, 9:52 GMT

    The ICC set up DRS for failure by succumbing to the BCCI's pressure and opting for the unknown quantity of HotSpot versus Hawkeye which was the source of the improvement in the quality of decisions. Now, that HotSpot is proven to be less than satisfactory, it was merely a matter of dumping the bathwater. The baby had already been disposed off.

  • on October 12, 2011, 9:21 GMT

    Money talks, when australia and england had the money they used veto powers and acted like bully but now things have changed India has the money so all rules will be made keeping the indian perspective in mind. so those who are cribbing about bcci bullying icc let me tell you something in this modern world Money >>>> morals + gentlemanliness+ spirit of cricket combined

    so be a man and accept the fact that the professionalisation of cricket will make it more and more money oriented rather than morals oriented.

  • Lmaotsetung on October 12, 2011, 9:05 GMT

    Aussie fan can now breath easier as your team is no longer the most hated in world cricket. That title now belongs to India thanks to the BCCI. As an English fan we root for England and for anyone playing against Australia and to think that this coming Dec I'll be rooting for the Aussie to beat the living hell out of India just doesn't feel right but that is what I'll be doing.

  • RandyOZ on October 12, 2011, 8:35 GMT

    Seriously, I gona side with the BCCI here. Anyone who saw Hughes' LBW can see as plain as day that the system is flawed and until then it is useless. What the ICC should have done is made HotSpot/Snicko compulsory AND provided it.

  • Dilmah82 on October 12, 2011, 6:27 GMT

    This is such a backward and rediculous step by the ICC. Hopefully India will hget whitewashed by Australia also, and if poor umpiring decisions are the cause even better!!!

  • IndiaNumeroUno on October 12, 2011, 6:15 GMT

    " system that objectively improves the quality of umpiring by a statistically significant amount "... How do you know when that basis itself cannot be relied upon?!! 93% or 98% doesn't make any sense when its clear that the comparison is being made on a flaky system canvassed as being accurate.

  • azzaman333 on October 12, 2011, 5:13 GMT

    So, a system that objectively improves the quality of umpiring by a statistically significant amount is removed because it's not 100% perfect. Good work ICC, another step backwards for cricket.

  • gdalvi on October 12, 2011, 4:55 GMT

    Continuing my comments below: (2) They say DRS improved accuracy from 93% to 98%. But how much of that could have been resolved using a simple TV replay and/or stump mike with 100% certainity? I would most of it, since other technology are not reliable to begin with (3) All DRS has done has complicated the game with new rules that keeps changing. (4) My biggest bone with system is why only 1 unsuccessful review? It means if a team gets really tight decision wrong on 1st ball of an innings, they can basically get all the remaining decisions wrong. Did DRS accuracy rate of 98% meaure wrong decisions due to no review left? It should. (3) How did they measure DRS accuracy improved by 5%? Did they use the same technology known not to be 100% to measure? vI think a simple system where the TV replay in slow motion with stump mike recordings are instantly replayed on the field umpire's hand-held device like IPAD so that he make an informed decision will work just fine

  • popcorn on October 12, 2011, 2:05 GMT

    The only positive that has come out of this is that Dhoni and his team - mates will not have any excuses for a dismal performance in future series.

  • RogerC on October 12, 2011, 0:51 GMT

    Wherever DRS is used in future, ICC should apply a penalty charge to the owners of DRS for every wrong decision coming out of it. I think most comments here supporting DRS come from certain countries because they think DRS is their product and they need to support it at any cost. We have seen several times that DRS is not mature enough to be applied in international games and ICC is right to revoke the mandatory status.

  • bobagorof on October 11, 2011, 23:33 GMT

    The BCCI's chosen captain, MS Dhoni, is not 100% correct in all his decisions and so should be removed. This uses the same logic that the BCCI is using against the DRS. My logic is that Dhoni is better than the other options, and that he should stay. Following my logic, the DRS is better than on-field umpires alone, and should stay.

  • Ms.Cricket on October 11, 2011, 23:12 GMT

    The decision by the ICC and BCCI is final. You cannot DRS this decision. If you do not like it, do not watch cricket and do something useful instead.

  • on October 11, 2011, 22:28 GMT

    Head Organisation giving in to a member country. Looks bad for both ICC and BCCI.

  • DocBindra on October 11, 2011, 22:02 GMT

    Its clear no matter what, everyone is going to blame India and the cricket board for all the ills of the world!!! Mr. Lorgat said, "...SOME who have got concerns...", SOME as in more than ONE. Maybe there is a serious problem comprehending the article, its up to the individual boards to come up with sponsorship and agreements. It doesn't mean DRS has been removed altogether. Guess where the sponsorship is probably going to come from? It costs more than $5K per day, so its up to the individual boards to figure out a way to pay for it, no more hand outs. Here is the cold hard fact: India is the powerhouse of cricket because they generate more revenue than everyone else put together!!! That is a fact. If they don't want DRS, it is there prerogative, GET OVER IT!!! Don't like the power they have? TOUGH!!! No matter how many derogatory and slandering posts are posted, it will not change that FACT!!! Well done India and BCCI, do what you have to do till the system improves.

  • Rupert147 on October 11, 2011, 21:55 GMT

    While we are at it, lets do away with the 3rd umpire, ban stump mikes and also bring the coverage to the viewers in grainy black & white like the apparent good old days. This way an experienced and wily bowler can work on umpires with no fear of retribution and or whether any decisions are correct or incorrect. India are failing to move with the times and its their loss. Newly crowned coach Duncan Fletcher was very pro-DRS and he went someway to putting it into practice from the outset so his gagging on the subject during the England tour undermined him and didn't help India. The BCCI are partly to blame for the recent demise of their beloved team and todays move by the ICC will cause much guffaws amongst the serious Test cricketing nations who are pragmatic as opposed to dogmatic.

  • on October 11, 2011, 21:43 GMT

    DRS was NOT farcical in Eng-India series. Dhoni's lack of experience with DRS gave that impression. After all, he has used it less than any other captain. People at the helm of BCCI are NOT concerned with the advancement of the game, but only with making money. So, I cannot say anything against people gunning for heads to roll at BCCI or even against people lambasting them. May we get genuinely well-meaning administrators there.

  • Harvey on October 11, 2011, 21:34 GMT

    Spineless ICC bows down to backward BCCI. Pathetic.

  • tictoc on October 11, 2011, 21:22 GMT

    One step forwards, 3 steps backwards. Progress is halted once again. It seems the BCCI are completely blaming the DRS (Hotspot in particular) for their terrible tour of England. The fact their bowling was a joke, the fielding was atrocious and the only player who looked comfortable with a bat in his hand was Dravid, tells me they cant face the real facts.

  • itsali on October 11, 2011, 21:15 GMT

    India would not have won WC2011 had it not been for DRS. Tendulkar plumb LBW to Ajmal, reversed by DRS - remember anyone?

  • Blazedragon on October 11, 2011, 20:57 GMT

    @Spa-Master: Oh give it a rest with the excuses. Nobody but Phil Hughes got because of DRS. All other were umpiring errors which England suffered from too. Crying won't wash away your 8-0 humiliation in England.

  • bitofcricket on October 11, 2011, 20:53 GMT

    IMHO it's all about the money. Once the BCCI or someone in the collective is a stakeholder of the intellectual property rights to the technology you will find they suddenly become big fans and push for it's inclusion. While the money goes elsewhere the stance will remain consistent.

  • on October 11, 2011, 20:52 GMT

    Way to stand firm, ICC. It's okay though, in 20 years you'll all be redundant because no one will play Cricket anymore due to horrible mismanagement.

  • skhashmi on October 11, 2011, 20:15 GMT

    The reason y ppl blaming BCCI and indian players coz they never wanted to use DRS system specially for LBW decision, and we have a genuine example of recent ENG-IND series, if u remember before series started indai opposed DRS system and then they decided to use it but not for LBW decisions. I dont think apart from BCCI any other board denied for DRS system. And in my opinion DRS system is good for cricket and for umpires, if we go back we know how many umpires has been disgraced and sacked by bad umpiring. So umpire can take full advantags of DRS system and give more precise decisions.

  • SixoverSlips on October 11, 2011, 19:48 GMT

    The DRS was a joke, and Dravid was given out 3 consecutive time because of that. Without DRS, Dravid would have stayed on all those three occasions.

  • oj..cricfan on October 11, 2011, 19:44 GMT

    People please USE YOUR MIND, will you!!! ICC is not asking everyone to stop using DRS, it is for the respective boards to choose. If Eng, Aus, SA and others want to use it they can. ICC or as you say BCCI, is not stopping them. You cannot force it on any board if that is not affordable and not correct. Cricket existed before DRS and it can exist after DRS. It is a sport be a sport.

  • on October 11, 2011, 19:28 GMT

    what idiotic debate on #DRS. ppl forget that it was #SimonTaufel who submitted the official report against the #DRS to #ICC and not #BCCI

    #HawkEye can be good 4 #Tennis but not surely 4 cricket .

    1) the ball is different and its nature is different in different climate & the nature of trajectory are diff.

    2)Trajectory & angel in geometry R formed by straight line, but the swinging ball doesn't so hw can #HawkEye predict

  • cool2cool on October 11, 2011, 19:24 GMT

    If I am not wrong, the Pakistan- Sri Lanka series in UAE will not have DRS for tests. Also, for ODI only ball-tracking provided by Hawk-Eye would be used. Then why no-one is blaming them for not using the full DRS to improve the decision making?

  • gunnerr4life on October 11, 2011, 19:20 GMT

    Foolish decision by the ICC , ohh sorry i mean BCCI !

  • cool2cool on October 11, 2011, 19:14 GMT

    1] First, ICC has not stopped using DRS, it is has ended the mandatory use of DRS. 2] Secondly, with and without DRS, no single team would benefit. 3] BCCI didn't find spending so much of money on DRS which is not perfect, if other boards can afford they are still free to use the same. 4] There were people questioning the DRS during the world cup (specially after Sachin's LBW reversal in semis), now the same people are supporting DRS just because BCCI is against it. 4] Also if the people think that BCCI is controlling the game and not ICC, fine, they can ask their respective boards to boycott BCCI and stop playing against them. Who is stopping them from doing so?

  • TheMysteryMan on October 11, 2011, 19:13 GMT

    Why is everyone blaming BCCI for this?

    We all saw how farcical it was in recent India - England series. When those Indian said that they dont think technology is accurate, people called them names and accused them of using their clout to bend ICC. Then we got DRS and it failed miserably only proving that BCCI was right all along when they said the technology is not reliable.

    If anyone is to blame, blame the ICC and the companies which claimed to have provided good technology. It obviously was not. And what would other nations who supported DRS will say now when it failed in front of live TV and stadium audience?

  • jackdanielss on October 11, 2011, 18:11 GMT

    Very good decision by ICC. Now a days good decisions are being made and they are coming in very fast, healthy sign for international cricket. Now DRS is not mandatory, so teams have option to use it. Rememeber latest incident of Gayle decision in CLT20 final - hawk-eye showed ball hitting off/middle and Ian Chappel repeatedly kept saying this can not be ginven out, considering huge stride by Chir Gayle. Such incidents have already proved that technology needs lot of improvement. High profile ex-cricketers outside BCCI or india have always opposed LBW decisions given based on haw-eye. this technology is adequate for 'Tenis' but its premature for to be used in 'cricket'. Looks ICC is now rectifying errors it made in quickly introducing this technology. Thanks to BCCI for batting against mandatory DRS and letting premature technology imfluencing the game.

  • Kays789 on October 11, 2011, 18:04 GMT

    this is just getting ridiculous by the year. might as well get rid of the ICC and appoint the BCCI to control everything. if there is a 5% improvement isnt that alone reason enough to continue with it? just because one country cannot master the use of it the rest of the cricket playing nations should also pander to their ridiculous requests? thats unacceptable.

  • Stark62 on October 11, 2011, 17:47 GMT

    I guess the icc must have a big board hanging on the wall with the slogan "Bow down to the bcci" at their HQ.

  • AKG0479 on October 11, 2011, 17:46 GMT

    I wish ICC could reinstate to the rules & formats to what we had till 2003 or so... TV replays only for run outs, natural LBW decisions, no challenging, no DRS, no power playsno T-20's, no IPL's , no CL et etc etc.. I wish Cricket could be reinstated as a 'Gentlemen' game.. but I know it would never happen again.. :-(

  • on October 11, 2011, 17:32 GMT

    A foolish decision by ICC.This will benefit the home team against England.

  • kristee on October 11, 2011, 17:31 GMT

    Unless cricket becomes global, which I'm not very hopeful of, things like ICC's bungling decision about use of DRS are going to leave it even more stagnant. A beautiful game is in the wrong hands; what else to say!

  • snbirdi on October 11, 2011, 17:24 GMT

    YEAAAAAAAAAA baby! India rules cricket. Why don't all you people complaining and crying go on and make your own Council. BCCI's always going to rule the ICC. Live with it, stop moaning.

  • Allen.Arendtsz on October 11, 2011, 16:57 GMT

    This is an absurd decision taken by the ICC , the DRS was undoubtedly improving. I am afarid to say that the ICC is being totally controlled by the BCCI, I thought the ICC stands for International Cricket Counsil, if it does how come the other countries do not have a say in this matter, since i last checked all the countries accepted to opt for the DRS, except for the BCCI, whom at last was forced to go for it, and now the ICC pulls out which only proves that the BCCI has more than a say on this decision. This matter has to be upheld sooner rather than later.

  • Spicydevil on October 11, 2011, 16:55 GMT

    well can't say its dominance of BCCI its right of BCCI to object on technology if they feel that its not beneficial,,, however i think its not fault of technology but of TV umpiers who are not using it properly and still giving away wrong decisions so BCCI has every right to go against it... if people want to show their anger then show it to third umpires who are still giving wrong decisions after using technology....

  • on October 11, 2011, 16:48 GMT

    Not everything is perfect but we use them. I think DRS was the one which helped India to win the world cup.

    I think you have to use those imperfect things until you find some thing perfect, if you stop using them then you can find perfect things (as it is imposible to find something without experiments) I think it improved the game.

    If BCCI want all perfect things then why using D&L system as this is not perfect, who can predict score perfectly.

  • on October 11, 2011, 16:46 GMT

    Everybody who thinks it's BCCI who forced it are idiots. BCCI just put the foot and said if you like it, YOU PAY FOR IT.. BCCI doesn't like it, and they don't want to pay for such technology that isnt working...other than India, Aus, ENg and SAF nobody can afford it.. so how can ICC make it mandatory in bilateral series for SL, WI, BAngaldesh, PAk etc whose boards are broke? Who will pay $ 2 Million for a technology that doesnt even work that well?? especially in test cricket where stadiums are empty...ICC doesnt want to pay for poor countries' games...so it goes back to broadcasters...why will a broadcaster want to pay in a WI/Bangladesh/SriLanka game?? unless India/AUS/ENG is playing there is not enough money to earn for them.

  • PrasPunter on October 11, 2011, 16:44 GMT

    Wish bcci's team be at the receiving end of several dubious decisions from here on !! they should lose their sleep wondering why they opposed the DRS.

  • m_ilind on October 11, 2011, 16:37 GMT

    Once again ICC has caved in to the pressure caused by BCCI. BCCI was not happy about HawkEye after the WC, and now it's not happy with the HotSpot either. So there goes the DRS.

  • St.as.ram.rod on October 11, 2011, 16:26 GMT

    @Desisd: Dear Desisd, Can YOU please share some logic and be specific about it...

  • m_ilind on October 11, 2011, 16:26 GMT

    ICC seems to have caved in to the pressure created by BCCI.

  • Robster1 on October 11, 2011, 16:18 GMT

    How low have the quite incompetent ICC now sunk - is everything in cricket solely run for the benefit of India's batsman? I'm starting to get embarrassed about being a cricket fan.Shame again on the very weak ICC. Is it now time for every board aside from India to now leave the ICC so that the game can become well run. For goodness sake even the umpries themselves prefer it.

  • on October 11, 2011, 16:15 GMT

    Yet another spineless decision from the ICC. They aren't fit to run the game.

  • RogerC on October 11, 2011, 16:13 GMT

    DRS is still not good enough to justify its cost. Pakistan supporters who keep writing in forums about Sachin Tendulkar's LBW escape in WC semi-final should know that it was due to the decision of the DRS. Why support a system that's not any more reliable than on-field umpire? Good decision by ICC.

  • on October 11, 2011, 16:08 GMT

    Do not know why everyone is up in arms about this.DRS is no longer mandatory and is subject to bilateral agreements between the participating boards. Which means everyone else can use it except in test matches involving India. ICC had the chance to get this right and blew it. Blame Erasmus. apart from the 3 Dodgy decisions against Dravid there was the Pietersen reversal which cost India the Lords test. The BCCI get in 70% of the ICC revenue which means it calls the shots. Nobody said life was fair or democratic. Five nations with the power of veto at the UN is not fair either nor was it fair when the ECB and the Australians had two votes each at the ICC. Times they are a changing it is the BBCI way or the highway.

  • St.as.ram.rod on October 11, 2011, 16:00 GMT

    All those who think it is a good decision are devoid or logical reasoning... How can anything that help reduce errors be not helpful. It is absurd argument that Technology is not error proof so lets not use it.. even if it removes 10% errors, is it not worth.... The main issue is that our great BCCI dont want to spend money across different stadiums and that is all this is...

    Ausies did it on pitch with their might and BCCI does it off it with their money..

  • on October 11, 2011, 15:42 GMT

    This has India written all over it. We might as well just merge all the cricket boards under BCCI and call it BCCI+I. When the entire world is moving towards technology, India ( ironically a software developer producing country) is dragging the entire cricket authority backwards. This whole 'revenue' only model, pioneered by India, is just so blatantly ignorant and pathetic,, I am just surprised that Pakistan, Sri Lanka, South Africa board is also dancing with India on this one!!

  • Srini_Indian on October 11, 2011, 15:37 GMT

    Man, this would be forced by ECB. They are not happy with hotspot technology and questioned the accuracy of DRS after supporting it. Guys, this is due to the pressure of ECB and don't blame BCCI for it. Everybody blamed BCCI for the scrapping of Associates but it was obvious later that it was due to CA the ICC took the decision. All these rubbish decisions would be forced by CA and ECB but everybody blame BCCI, as they are the scapegoat.

  • zavahir on October 11, 2011, 15:35 GMT

    bigwonder - lost badly in England, blamed DRS and now bye bye to DRS. What a shame. Gald to see some Indians supporting DRS. ICC is toothless and incompetant.

  • naudurivsm on October 11, 2011, 15:31 GMT

    Best decision in my opinion, ICC has taken in recent times. here are the reasons why: 1. It proved inefficient and unreliable in IND vs ENG series. this was proved earlier also as not a 100% reliable technology 2. Extremely expensive and not worth the accuracy and consistency of results it provides. 3. Not every Board can afford. 4. umpires are getting spoiled because of this. they tend to give decisions without any second thought and depend on the technology to sort it out. this tells us then there is no need for on field umpires.

    I am happy that ICC is finally thinking in the right spirit.

  • getsetgopk on October 11, 2011, 15:28 GMT

    Bravo !!! I think BCCI is loosing it big time, worst ever defeat at the hands of poms, an aging fleet of batsmen, bowlers that are very close to if not all togather useless, IPL rattings going down and then empty stands all around in CL20, castrated the drs and then got rid of it all togather, pressurising umpires of good repute into making loaded decision BCCI needs a quick remedy before it flushes everything down the gutter

  • CricFan78 on October 11, 2011, 15:05 GMT

    " DRS has increased correct decisions from 93% to 98% " ... That 98% increase is assuming that hawkeye works perfectly fine, which is a ridiculous claim in itself

  • AidanFX on October 11, 2011, 15:05 GMT

    Funny how ICC caves to BCCI. After the Serena tirade I was saying if she had done that to an umpire in cricket they would have thrown the book at her and she would have missed 6 months minimum. I truly believed players didn't go there. The I learnt about some of the Dhoni complaints whilst he cried "we are playing in the spirit of the game" and I could not believe the way he brought the game into disrepute with his accusations against certain umpires, and always seeming to think his team had been dealt the heavy card in a game. I can't believe he has got a way with the stuff he has said and done as a captain of an International cricket side. Now the ICC is caving at least in some measure to him, and the BCCI. It makes me angry. Please me sincere cricket fans feel the same way.

  • Brumby90 on October 11, 2011, 15:00 GMT

    Once again India controls the ICC and changs the laws. The time is coming where other countries will break away from the ICDD just as world series created a break.

  • on October 11, 2011, 14:34 GMT

    What is the point of ICC.. might as well let BCCI run it.. there won't be any noticeable different.. 'there are some who are not convinced by its reliability' ?? some = BCCI ..

  • Desisd on October 11, 2011, 14:29 GMT

    Very welcome decision by ICC. The technology should be full proof to be used.

    Guys use some sense and logic before shouting on BCCI.

  • k.hameed on October 11, 2011, 14:20 GMT

    Another example of BBCI getting what they want....DRS & Hotspot had really improved decision making and added an other dimension of entertainment and knowledge to the Tv viewers. ICC you are loosing respect, control & authority

  • meeransb on October 11, 2011, 14:20 GMT

    The boss is always right. Cricket is lucky that it found India . The England-India series was a bad advt for DRS. Kevin Pietersen was given out in first test after caught by Dravid and the third umpire overruled that. Dravid was given not out by umpire and given out by the third umpire who always went beyond his brief. To hell with DRS. Cricket is after all a sport and by not making it mandatory in not end of the world. And I find some Pakistanis commenting about BCCI. Come on three of your cricketers, one of them captain, are seriously implicated. I am not sure when was the last time a true match was played with Pakistan maybe the first test match they ever played. Get your house is order and then comment.

  • on October 11, 2011, 14:13 GMT

    DRS is not perfect and it beats all logical thinking why people want BCCI to be convinced(FORCED) to use an imperfect technology with out their agreement. Moreover they made the use of DRS as optional not illegal. So countries who wish to use this system can use it, or force the use of same in a bilateral series against India. Why are we making a big deal of some thing which has to be improved a lot before being used in international matches.

  • Mary_786 on October 11, 2011, 14:05 GMT

    Terrible decision by the ICC. DRS improves the quality of cricket as a whole, providing more fair decisions and making umpires more alert and more enjoyable to watch as well.

  • skhashmi on October 11, 2011, 13:47 GMT

    Well there is another example of BCCI dominence on ICC, coz indians were always against this DRS system. Well done ICC (Indian Cricket Council).

  • bigwonder on October 11, 2011, 13:41 GMT

    Good decision. Nay sayers will blast BCCI for this without logic reasoning.

  • yash911 on October 11, 2011, 13:35 GMT

    See I'm Indian, and I can say that I'm bloody embarrassed by the BCCI. They're doing a pathetic job and killing the game. Its really beyond me why anybody would not want the DRS in some capacity atleast.

  • Baundele on October 11, 2011, 13:14 GMT

    Bad decision by the ICC. DRS improves the quality of cricket as a whole, providing more fair decisions and making umpires more alert.

  • Ramesh_Joseph on October 11, 2011, 13:09 GMT

    The bad decisions India got were not due to the DRS. It was due to the 3rd umpire going beyond his brief. The 3rd umpire is only supposed to check the technology and get back to the onfield umpire..but in England we saw the 3rd umpire over-ruling DRS each time and gave Dravid out. If technology is being used the umpires should go by that else stop using technology. There is no point in blaming BCCI for everything. Let all other countries use DRS and say they are 100% satisfied. Then we will see.

  • on October 11, 2011, 13:06 GMT

    Another shining example of ICC incompetence. As long as the CEOs of each full member (and only the most powerful few of those) are running the show, we are going to continue to see the rules bent in the interests of a few men in suits. How much money have they wasted on all this to-ing and fro-ing?

  • Salim_123 on October 11, 2011, 13:03 GMT

    I knew this would come. I would show this article as BCCI refuses to endorse DRS hence not mandatory. It is clear that umpires are scared to give out LBWs or caught behind to Indian batsmen for fear repercussions. ICCI stop being puppet to BCCI. shame on you.

  • durhamd on October 11, 2011, 12:58 GMT

    Spineless. Actually angry at this. Think maybe it's time for the umpires to stand up against this? Aleem Dar is a big fan, and if others take his stance, well...

  • mjcoxx on October 11, 2011, 12:55 GMT

    Completely spineless decision.

  • on October 11, 2011, 12:48 GMT

    Another proof that BCCI is still running ICC- DRs no longer mandatory and Test championship delayed is a proof of that.

  • sriramaka on October 11, 2011, 12:46 GMT

    As Dhoni n thier men can only influence the on-filed filed umpires,they just want it that way.

  • on October 11, 2011, 12:43 GMT

    Technology is good for cricket but it as to high standard, else some one as the advantage, hotspot, hackeye, snicko etc as to improve in the future

  • demon_bowler on October 11, 2011, 12:42 GMT

    Once again the ICC shows that the I in its name stands for 'India.' What a craven, lickspittle organization.

  • AidanFX on October 11, 2011, 12:42 GMT

    @ AlanHarrison - Some of us are annoyed at the BCCI don't think their is some conspiracy involved we just think the ICC is spineless. Broad's hat-trick LBW should have been enough for them to be lining up for it.

  • on October 11, 2011, 12:40 GMT

    peoples thrashing BCCI for forcing their decision specially the ones from pakistan;but they all do know that ICC is run by several other peoples also and whats wrong if BCCI forcing their decisions; of course they have money and power with them and its nature rule that is"survival of the richest" so in the future be ready for such so called india friendly decisions.

  • kasi_214 on October 11, 2011, 12:40 GMT

    good decision from icc

    from bcci, watch the problems the players and the team has faced during the english tour, so many errors were found in the systems like hotspot, in some matches the 3rd empire made some mistakes regarding no balls. trackers are artificial intellegence through mathematics the ball can be tracked, do u really think if, when shane warne had wicket of an england batsman with a ball that turned nearly 90 degrees. assume that if it was an LBW shout and the batsmen have moved towards the ball (to the pitch). NOW can u tell me that the ball tracker can give u the same result warne got.

    technology cant be made at a pin point accuracy but can be made to a par. not only any boards but we the followers of cricket want that and nothing else.

  • AidanFX on October 11, 2011, 12:24 GMT

    How happy will Dhoni be? Seriously ICC pump money into making the technology equal everywhere, make it uniform across all series and things will make sense.

  • ani_cric on October 11, 2011, 12:23 GMT

    Come On India... Play cricket ethically and try to win. Now indains will have lot of records as Umpires will be baised with indian cricketers as they want to offiicaite in IPL and also no technology to stop them. now sachin will make 100 th 100 as he may get 4 + chances.... he requires atleast 5 chances to score century .... ICC , plz get the approval from India before making any announcements such that the game can help India win ..

  • hhillbumper on October 11, 2011, 12:21 GMT

    do you think that the Indian board do not like DRS because it shows how often the supposed galacticos are really out

  • AlanHarrison on October 11, 2011, 12:20 GMT

    Ludricous to suggest that this is some kind of plot to get India back the no.1 ranking. They've just played a series without DRS and lost 4-0 (and lost the no.1 ranking)!

  • timmyw on October 11, 2011, 12:16 GMT

    This is amazing. I have seen two dodgy decisions the whole time it has been used. That is a whole lot less than human error managed. Weren't the indians the ones complaining about umpire error all the time? I don't understand. Someone please explain to me why they would block this technology and the use of it? One of the dodgiest decisions I have seen in recent years, quite disillusioning

  • on October 11, 2011, 12:00 GMT

    The issue is the dilution of technology with human thinking. The elite panel of umpires should be increased. The rules should be strict on OUT or NOT-OUT and not left to umpires/technicians calls.

  • SnowSnake on October 11, 2011, 11:59 GMT

    I never liked DRS for lbws. Using technology makes umpires dependent on technology and 2 review limit does not achieve anything. I think test cricket was better without DRS for lbws and I would prefer that DRS for lbws is totally removed. Currently, making it negotiable introduces inconsistencies. All countries must play with consistent rules. My personal preference is to abolish test cricket and then abolish lbws and only play ODIs and T20s. Cricket lacks the fairness aspect since people started playing this game.

  • OConnor on October 11, 2011, 11:54 GMT

    Astonishing ..... why would any self respecting governing body choose to wilfully get fewer things right than is possible? Just incredible. The DRS may not be perfect, but it is less imperfect than not having it; proven.

    Once again, the ICC rivals only FIFA for sheer stupidity, myopia and weakness. I only hope that the BCCI's position comes back to haunt their players ..... maybe Sachin given out to a terrible LBW on 99, in front of his home crowd, needing 1 for his 100th Hundred. Who am I kidding, it wouldn't happen ....... the Umpires are just as scared of the BCCI as the ICC are. Maybe that's why they they object so much; getting more decisions right clearly mustn't be in their interest?

  • harshalb on October 11, 2011, 11:50 GMT

    More episodes like umpires Steve Bucknor, Daryl Harper

  • sy.shah on October 11, 2011, 11:34 GMT

    Great progress. Let stop using third umpires as well! .. ICC is a puppet of BCCI, cricket is doomed!

  • TheMehssiah on October 11, 2011, 11:28 GMT

    We all know why the Indian team doesn't like the DRS system, particularly the ball tracking - the bowling team gets more decisions in their favour when it is used, and India's strength is their batting unit (which frankly isn't saying much: India's bowling attack is probably the weakest of all the major test nations).

    One can only hope that their reluctance to use all available technologies to get the best possible decision bites their team in the ass as often as it did in England.

  • shivansh.bhatnagar on October 11, 2011, 11:23 GMT

    i feel technology always helps...its overuse is bad for the game...just heard the rumor that the delhi ODI has some issues.... hope that happens coz iv already booked tickets online through a website called bookmyseats..... fingers crossed...comeon india...

  • on October 11, 2011, 11:17 GMT

    Chalk up another win to the BCCI. ICC is more of a paper tiger than the United Nations

  • Rupert147 on October 11, 2011, 11:10 GMT

    Pretty embarrassing really, almost as embarrassing as India refusing DRS in the recent series then not winning a match on the tour. The Stuart Broad hat trick would never have happened had common sense prevailed and they had allowed DRS to continue, given that other countries had already emraced it. Also this nonsense about ball tracking and the BCCI's somewhat prehistoric distrust of it. As for Dravid, and the 3 apparent controversial decisions, the bootlace incident was given out by the onfield umpire so under the laws India want, would have meant he would have still been out and he didn't refer it anyway. The bat pad catch which was referred and given out was a nick (which Dravid graciously admitted) and the ODI "incident" was also a nick behind, albeit a thin one which was later picked up by snicko. Mind you don't let any facts deter the BCCI whose out of touch views have played a big part in India's recent on field struggles.

  • olliechuck on October 11, 2011, 10:56 GMT

    Can someone please explain to me why this is the correct decision? When DRS gives 98% of correct decisions against 93% without it then surely it must be used. There is admittedly some way to go to improve the system but unless we use it then we will never get it totally right. DRS is in the best interests of the game while still leaving some human element with the on field umpires call. Why is it only India that do not want this system? I would love to hear Indian fan's views on this....

  • madras_boy on October 11, 2011, 10:55 GMT

    Some ppl here criticise the decision of ICC saying that they are the puppets of BCCI. This is a materialistic world where everything revolves around money. When India plays, itz not just india but the host country also gets good revenue ! So, no choice for ICC. I went to both SL Vs ENG Test and IND vs ENG Test. The stadiums were FULL for India games even when they were loosing unlike the other games !!! Thatz the spirit of cricket in India at the moment. So please dont envy !

  • Nutcutlet on October 11, 2011, 10:53 GMT

    This 'decision' by the ICC should surprise no-one. Too many countries are financially reliant on the BCCI, so in effect, their votes are bought. In some parts of the world such a travesty of the democratic process would be called corruption, but not, it seems, in India. This is what more autonomous cricket-playing nations have to live with. Of course, with power, comes responsibility, but as the BCCI has no understanding of the bigger picture, this is the shape of things as they are and will be for the forseeable future. The rest of the world just has to get on with it. The only question worth asking is: does the BCCI have the good of cricket (as opposed to narrow self-interest) at heart? It seems that many people, including some in India, have already made up their minds on that one. Dictatorships are seldom known for encouraging genuine debate, or developed consciences.

  • JohnnyRook on October 11, 2011, 10:49 GMT

    Same story being repeated all over again. BCCI bullies. ICC (other member nations) bow in front of it for the money BCCI generates. Most non-Indian bloggers abuse BCCI while condoing their own boards. Most Indian bloggers support BCCI. So the merry-go-round goes on and on and on. I really wonder why this world has to be so black and white (More aptly Brown and White). Why do we even need contentious ball tracking and hot spots to detect inside edges on pads and other absolute shockers for which DRS is designed for. Can we atleast start with having that while researching the hot spot/ball tracking and more importantly making their results public. And why can't benefit of doubt always go to batsman instead of going to original umpire decision in case of decision review. But I guess this would need a more consturctive outlook from both the administrators and the cricket lovers.

  • on October 11, 2011, 10:49 GMT

    Well it's official, the ICC are the bcci's puppets.BCCI (Indian board) who never wanted the DRS to work, so that they can claim their No.1 ranking back and now they will WIN, with the help of their Dummy Umpires! Great Work INDIA, you simply have the Cricketing World on its knees in-front of u!

  • Gupta.Ankur on October 11, 2011, 10:49 GMT

    I think a fair and just decision has been made and more then anything else ICC must look to improve the standards of umpiring of its Elite panel........

    Secondly,people can say all they want against the BCCI......simply because BCCI has the courage to stand-up for its players in ICC meetings and has the courage to call wrong things.......wrong.......

  • on October 11, 2011, 10:48 GMT

    I think some of you have got this wrong

    The decision where Dravid was given out was actually correct. There was no fault from the umpires.We heard it on the snicko that Dravid edged the ball( mind you, the snicko was used just for illustrative purposes by the TV channel and was officially not in use). But the same decision when viewed from the Hot-Spot showed no edge. Indians and the BCCI are never against the use of technology. It is just that they need something which is foolproof and the stuff used in the English series was unfortunately not

    All those who are against BCCI are beings victims of selective listening

  • on October 11, 2011, 10:47 GMT

    dont understand why everyone is seeing it as influence of BCCI on ICC. Why dont you accept DRS has real problems? We have seen hot spot not detecting edges not once but several times. The same Pakistanis who are crying about BCCI's power now, also complain about Sachin's not out in WC semi. If technology is not working well then why not to stick with the umpires. And if you count that much on technology then what is the need of having umpires standing in the field? Simply use technology for all the decisions. Instead of thinking that BCCI forced ICC why dont you think that ICC was convinced with DRS not working well and BCCI proved to be right in opposing it. Still those nations who want to use DRS can use, ICC did not ban DRS. Imagine if CA or ECB would have opposed DRS.

  • madras_boy on October 11, 2011, 10:47 GMT

    Good Decision by ICC. DRS is not good in its current format. The flaws in hotpot were exposed recently and the company accepts it as well. It needs a number of changes before it can be made mandatory. Probably ICC should set up a panel who can review DRS independently match by match until everybody is happy before implementation.

  • Fast_Track_Bully on October 11, 2011, 10:46 GMT

    BCCI rocks!... India have only one stand and it is apprvd by ICC. Not like some one who support DRS and oppose it when they r at the receiving end (WC) and again criticize BCCI for not using it and then deny it in own matches!!!!

  • on October 11, 2011, 10:42 GMT

    very unfortunate decision by indian cricket council *ICC*.this is not good for cricket

  • on October 11, 2011, 10:40 GMT

    IS IT BCCI IS RUNNING THE ICC THATS WHY THE DRS IS NOT MANDITORY UPSET BY THIS DECISION

  • cskfangg on October 11, 2011, 10:39 GMT

    Oh come on you peeps... DRS was created to get 100% correct decision,but with current DRS system,you cant correct decisions,we have so many incidents to prove it.. So what is use of technology then.. you accept umpires decision and move on..

  • bumsonseats on October 11, 2011, 10:39 GMT

    why not go further and get rid of neutral umpires at the same time. as other sports add technology, eg rugby league/union/tennis and others, to get the right decisions our sport stick its heads in the sand. why have a ruling body like our sport which is absolute toothless. its getting beyond a joke. the cricketing world laughs at pakistan who ban then reinstate and remove and revote players and representatives back and forth. why not give the bcci full power to run the game as they see fit. then at least once they make a decision we know it will stay. the icc our making a joke of our great game. dpk

  • cricmatters on October 11, 2011, 10:37 GMT

    Umpiring standards are still very poor whether the technology is used or not. We need to kick few people out of the current elite umpires panel and make room for fresh faces with younger eyes and ears. The amount of money umpires make these days, not finding the right people can hardly be used as an excuse. ICC has to put procedures in place to ensure that quality umpires are spotted early, trained and promoted to the elite panel by the member boards. Use of technology is more of a hindrance rather than solution as we have seen from recent incidents.

  • SanjivAwesome on October 11, 2011, 10:34 GMT

    In my view this decision by ICC reverses the incorrect position they had taken six months earlier. Technology must be proved to be 100% reliable before it is rushed into a professional sport. I forecast that in a few years, the bugs in the technology would have been settled and it will become more affordable - hence profitable too. They don't rush trial technology into new jetliners either.

  • Poliwag060 on October 11, 2011, 10:33 GMT

    Sigh! More BCCI controlled events. I'd have thought that the wicket of Harbhajan in Stuart Broad's hat-trick when he absolutely middled it onto his pad would have been proof enough that the DRS has a purpose and is actually effective. The same is true for when Dravid hit his shoelace and was given out caught behind (although he could have reviewed it and simply forgot, because India are so unused to the DRS). I remember that Raina and Sharma both tried reviewing LBW decisions against them during the same series. Even their own players want it - it's time the ICC stopped giving in to the BCCI.

  • on October 11, 2011, 10:33 GMT

    drs is a gimmick it will never in england series it became "dravid removal system".he is the one who somewhat played well and got out due to drs many times despite onfield umpires decision of not out.india and drs didn't went well but drs has errors and have to accept it. if not why even ponting,some greats of cricket question it?

  • haroonalvi on October 11, 2011, 10:25 GMT

    ICCs mistakes:

    Should have slowly let DRS sink in before deciding to go all out for it. If ICC required permission from majority of the boards before making DRS mandatory, then it should have been the same before abandoning it.

    BCCIs mistakes:

    They backed off after giving their word of supporting DRS with hot spot. They are bigoted while analyzing DRS. They seem to be trying to prove their strength rather than follow the logic.

  • VEXXZ on October 11, 2011, 10:12 GMT

    Another step BACKWARD in International cricket . SAD,SAD,SAD.

  • Aryansblue on October 11, 2011, 10:10 GMT

    Why u fools are against BCCI. BCCI only pointed out the flaws & drawbacks of DRS. there is nothing wrong in finding mistakes in system. when the DRS was not working properly all the nations where dumb. only BCCI raised the voice against DRS. why to spend money on useless DRS system which never has given correct decisions. even Hot -spot inventors agreed that the system has flaws then why to spend money on useless thing.

  • on October 11, 2011, 10:09 GMT

    IPL has more money spent on it then any other facet of the game. Indian cricket board has no money sounds stupid to me.

  • chad_reid on October 11, 2011, 10:07 GMT

    AS I SAID BEFORE TIME FOR THE OTHER BOARDS TO GET OUT OF ICC AND CREATE A NEW FAIR BOARD IF INDIA DOESNT WANT TO JOIN LET THEM PLAY THIER DOMESTIC CRICKET

  • RogerC on October 11, 2011, 10:06 GMT

    Somehow this has become India vs Rest of the World issue. Fundamentally, the issue is that DRS is not a technology that justifies its cost. Its just only that. Its very strange that people who don't like India and its dominance on cricket in general forget that DRS itself is a bad product. And considering that it costs more than the gate collection in most countries, it just doesn't make sense. Good decision by ICC.

  • Jeffrey_indubai on October 11, 2011, 10:02 GMT

    This is a seriously sad day for cricket. How many times have the DRS provided the opportunity for a team that had been wronged to request reconsideration? I believe that the number of improper decisions has been reduced significantly. At least DRS offers the opportunity to re-assess the situation in slow motion. Sure, you will get some inconclusives, but these are significantly fewer than the number of dubious decisions when no review is possible.

    The lameness of the ICC to stick to a decision does not bode well for the game that I love. What is next? .... a review of the No Runner decision, .... review of the time that a prima donna can go and rest off the field whilst the substitute specialist fielder is on the pitch?.... review of the on-side/ off-side wides for a reverse sweep? ....

  • poderdubdubdub on October 11, 2011, 9:59 GMT

    Its very sad, DRS improved the decision making enormously and gave something to rely on when an umpire makes a blatent mistake. ICC has no teeth when it comes to India, its shame.

  • Paki.Fan. on October 11, 2011, 9:58 GMT

    The only people who will be supporting this would be Indians just for their egos, as the rest of the cricketing nations unanimously agree that DRS improves the umpiring and Cricket in general but unfortunately the other nations don't matter for ICC and they would do what they are told by BCCI

  • 5wombats on October 11, 2011, 9:49 GMT

    Pathetic from the ICC - they have bowed to pressure from those dinosaurs who run indian cricket - the BCCI - The Backwards Cricketing Convention Inflictors.

  • Yevghenny on October 11, 2011, 9:44 GMT

    I don't really see how a side that has just been so miserably crushed in test matches should have such a say. They clearly care more about the t20 commercial enterprise, leave the real cricket to the real cricketers - they're all comfortable with the DRS, or maybe this is why Harbhajan doesn't get any more wickets

  • x-squire-x on October 11, 2011, 9:44 GMT

    Typically spineless from the ICC... congrats, and congrats to the BCCI for their determined efforts to keep cricket in the dark ages.

  • Ellis on October 11, 2011, 9:33 GMT

    A cop out if ever there was one. The recent examples of DRS " failures" were more the result of poor umpiring interpretations than a fault with the technology. Time for the other Boards to tell the BCCI to get with the programme. The ICC has never been a strong body and this decision confirms that reality. They are a bunch of chicken hawks.

  • on October 11, 2011, 9:30 GMT

    shameless icc and well done bcci.And now this clearly shows who runs the cric.

  • Adoh on October 11, 2011, 9:19 GMT

    There goes the mandatory use of the DRS out the window...along with the credibility of the ICC. It should be renamed the IICC.

  • Raju_Iyer on October 11, 2011, 9:19 GMT

    So finally, after all the farcical episodes, India's position has been vindicated, do not use technology unless its benefits can be clearly proven. Anyway, better late than never...

  • Yevghenny on October 11, 2011, 9:09 GMT

    I just can't get my head around the Indian's dislike of ball tracking. The 50% of the ball rule still very much puts the decision into the hands of the umpire, and removes all of the awful decisions. Hotspot is the only one that I don't trust to get right, but we can live without that one for now until someone comes up with a good idea

  • on October 11, 2011, 9:08 GMT

    Right Decision by ICC Finally

  • Nanavaras on October 11, 2011, 8:59 GMT

    DRS using Third Umpire should consider the simple adage that "The Benefit of Doubt ALWAYS goes to the Batsman". Using Whatever Technology you want, but for a batsman to be out all the technology should and must unanimously agree. Even is one of the technologies including Hotspot, Ball tracker, Snicko fails to show a batsman out, He CANNOT BE GIVEN OUT.

  • foxee1 on October 11, 2011, 8:55 GMT

    Well it's official, the ICC are the bcci's puppets. After reporting in it's annual report that DRS has increased correct decisions from 93% to 98%, it has within the space of a few months reneged on it's decision to make DRS mandatory.We now know that the ICC as it is currently structured, is a futile organization. This is no joke. The ramifications of this one decision will be it's downfall and will be felt strongly by fans, players, tv audiences etc. I for one as a longtime cricket fan, (especially test cricket) won't even bother watching the upcoming Aus Vs India test matches, cause I know they won't even be using the minimal DRS system.

  • asif2311 on October 11, 2011, 8:54 GMT

    it is pathetic to see one of the richest sporting body not financially supporting its reveired technology, home boards in india, bangladesh and zimbabwe may never be able to support the technology either through choice or lack of finances. Although I am personally against hot spot and i am for the use of pitch map in order to know weather the ball had pitched outside leg or not.....in a nutshell i want to state that curruption is in ICC as well as it do not want to financially support UDRS but on the otherhand i believe it is a way of ICC accepting the fact that the system had gigantic loopholes with the hotspot which was COLD whenever needed.

  • Z.Saleem on October 11, 2011, 8:52 GMT

    REALLY!!!!! Is this the decision of ICC or BCCI (Indian board) who never wanted the DRS to work, so that they can claim their No.1 ranking back and now they will WIN, with the help of their Dummy Umpires!

    Great Work INDIA, you simply have the Cricketing World on its knees in-front of u!

  • cricketjd on October 11, 2011, 8:49 GMT

    this is meaningless. Without DRS India wil be more benifitted. DRS SHOULD BE MANDATORY. LAST 10 SERIES SHOWS INDIA WERE VERY LUCKY NOT TO BE GIVEN OUT. ENGLASND SHOULD CANCEL THE TOUR OF INDIA IF DRS WON'T APPLY. IS INDIA BOSS OF CRICKET? WHERE 9 OTHER TEST PLAYING NATIONS WERE READY TO ACCEPT THE DRS THEN WHO IS INDIA? I THINK ICC CHIEF EXECUTIVE IS REALLY SCARE OF INDIAN BOARD. TONY GREIG SHOULD BE NEW CHIEF EXECUTIVE.

  • JustinCpt on October 11, 2011, 8:47 GMT

    India are sour over a few decision and now they have ruined it for everyone. Like any system in cricket it takes time to settle in an be effective. The DRS is a really good system, its over turned many obvious bad decisions from umpires. Because india doesnt agree it hasnt been made mandatory. This is really childish of them. Imagine being a batsmen in the days without modern technology? How many times batsmen that were safe in crease were given out run out. I think this decision is going to cost India in future matches, well good luck vs sledging over appealing teams like Pakistan an OZ while there spinners are on. I think ther DRS would actually affect how many wickets india take, if the opposition team can use DRS India an especially Harbajhan cant over appeal an pressure the umpire into making a bad decision.

  • on October 11, 2011, 8:37 GMT

    DRS SYSTEM IN CRICKET SHOULD BE MANDATORY. DROPPING DRS IS GOOD FOR CRICKET. NO GENUINE REASON FOR DROPPING DRS,BECAUSE INDIAN BOARD AND INDIAN PLAYER ARE AFRAID OF DRS

  • on October 11, 2011, 8:34 GMT

    great....simply great...its 9 vs 1 ...can 1 survive without the 9? the reason why BCCI is powerful is simply because of the other teams. I think the other teams should refuse to play with India unless the DRS is implemented in a series. The technology did not cost India any wicket wrongfully, rather the man behind the TV screen did. Having said that, India benefitted from 5 or 6 plumb LBW decisions in the series. So i thought it evemed out

  • itsthewayuplay on October 11, 2011, 8:33 GMT

    I don't agree with this - yes even with the use of DRS Dravid got inexplicable decisions but this was generally as a result of the third umpire's interpretation not because of inaccurate technology. Where there is doubt then then the decision should go in favour of the batsman. I agree that ball tracking is unreliable and currently cannot match the umpire's prediction of the path of the ball. I don't think any amount of improvement in technology will better the umpires decision in this regard as it is a estimation after all and cannot definitively predict the path of the ball after release from the bowler's hand. DRS is still useful in, lbw appeals, such as helping decide whether the ball hit the bat before pad. Also if the technology is there should the fielding team have to appeal at all? The umpires could decide whether the batsman is out whatever the circumstances and if the bowling team disagrees they can challenge the decision.

  • on October 11, 2011, 8:24 GMT

    Once again, ICC cow tow to BCCI pressure, ridiculous.

  • Stouffer on October 11, 2011, 8:21 GMT

    Congrat to the BCCI on getting its wish and seeing a backwards step. Doesn't matter in the long term as they will continue to suffer as their top batsmen all retire at once leaving a bunch of T20 players to try and play test cricket.

  • bestbuddy on October 11, 2011, 8:21 GMT

    What a bunch of cowards...the technology was never there to be 100% perfect - just more accurate than umpires can be.

  • on October 11, 2011, 8:20 GMT

    What if when one country wants DRS and other doesn't? What Happens Then?

  • RogerC on October 11, 2011, 8:18 GMT

    This is the right decision. DRS is just as controversial as no-DRS. For once, BCCI was very right about it from the beginning.

  • on October 11, 2011, 8:13 GMT

    Once again the ICC is bowing down from the pressure of BCCI. It's ridiculous, just because they are the biggest playing cricket country in the world doesn't mean they have the right to do some of the stuff they do. I mean who runs cricket nowaday's...The ICC, or the 'monster' that is the BCCI. I think the other boards around the world need to start putting more pressure on the ICC to stop taking decisions from the BCCI. Give the power of the game back to the country it comes from, England, where the laws of the game where invented and where the game is not being ruined by stupid amounts of money like the BCCI.

  • Tigg on October 11, 2011, 8:11 GMT

    Either drop it completely or use it properly (with Hawkeye, Hot Spot and Snicko). It isn't supposed to be perfect, just remove the occasional awful decision.

  • sifter132 on October 11, 2011, 8:11 GMT

    Wow - this just looks to be straight out bullying by the BCCI. I understand their reservations, but wow, the ICC can't just reverse decisions based on one board's paranoia about DRS.

  • Jhantor on October 11, 2011, 8:04 GMT

    Good decision. Now, ICC, can you just ban DRS altogether for Test matches so we can go back to watching proper cricket again?

  • on October 11, 2011, 7:57 GMT

    It shows the power of BCCI which generates 70% income for the ICC.But whatever haapens,india cannot win matches unless they are good enough to take 20 wks in a test.They cannot relay on umpires for 20 wks which are required to win a test match.

  • PrasPunter on October 11, 2011, 7:56 GMT

    the indians got what they wanted . shame on the spineless ICC !! for the betterment of the game , wish someone tames bcci ( they just dont deserve a mention in capitals )

  • on October 11, 2011, 7:52 GMT

    bcci wins again wow such partial icc, its clearly indian cricket council!

  • jmatwho on October 11, 2011, 7:49 GMT

    Lesson for the day: The ICC is a big joke.

  • Lees_Legends on October 11, 2011, 7:47 GMT

    NO WAY. Hang on, does this mean what I think it does??? ICC make a decision and then reverse it???!?!?!? :O !?!?!?!

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Lees_Legends on October 11, 2011, 7:47 GMT

    NO WAY. Hang on, does this mean what I think it does??? ICC make a decision and then reverse it???!?!?!? :O !?!?!?!

  • jmatwho on October 11, 2011, 7:49 GMT

    Lesson for the day: The ICC is a big joke.

  • on October 11, 2011, 7:52 GMT

    bcci wins again wow such partial icc, its clearly indian cricket council!

  • PrasPunter on October 11, 2011, 7:56 GMT

    the indians got what they wanted . shame on the spineless ICC !! for the betterment of the game , wish someone tames bcci ( they just dont deserve a mention in capitals )

  • on October 11, 2011, 7:57 GMT

    It shows the power of BCCI which generates 70% income for the ICC.But whatever haapens,india cannot win matches unless they are good enough to take 20 wks in a test.They cannot relay on umpires for 20 wks which are required to win a test match.

  • Jhantor on October 11, 2011, 8:04 GMT

    Good decision. Now, ICC, can you just ban DRS altogether for Test matches so we can go back to watching proper cricket again?

  • sifter132 on October 11, 2011, 8:11 GMT

    Wow - this just looks to be straight out bullying by the BCCI. I understand their reservations, but wow, the ICC can't just reverse decisions based on one board's paranoia about DRS.

  • Tigg on October 11, 2011, 8:11 GMT

    Either drop it completely or use it properly (with Hawkeye, Hot Spot and Snicko). It isn't supposed to be perfect, just remove the occasional awful decision.

  • on October 11, 2011, 8:13 GMT

    Once again the ICC is bowing down from the pressure of BCCI. It's ridiculous, just because they are the biggest playing cricket country in the world doesn't mean they have the right to do some of the stuff they do. I mean who runs cricket nowaday's...The ICC, or the 'monster' that is the BCCI. I think the other boards around the world need to start putting more pressure on the ICC to stop taking decisions from the BCCI. Give the power of the game back to the country it comes from, England, where the laws of the game where invented and where the game is not being ruined by stupid amounts of money like the BCCI.

  • RogerC on October 11, 2011, 8:18 GMT

    This is the right decision. DRS is just as controversial as no-DRS. For once, BCCI was very right about it from the beginning.