Decision Review System

DRS no longer mandatory, says ICC

ESPNcricinfo staff

October 11, 2011

Comments: 171 | Text size: A | A

Ashish Bagai asks for a review, Sri Lanka v Canada, Group A, World Cup 2011, Hambantota, February 20, 2011
The DRS is now no longer mandatory © Associated Press
Enlarge

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."

In other decisions …

  • The PCB and Bangladesh Cricket Board are to submit their nomination for the ICC Vice-Presidency for 2012-14
  • The qualification plan for the 2015 World Cup for Associates and Affiliates has been announced
  • The Independent Governance Review, which deals with the ICC's constitutional framework and the election process for its president among other things, is likely to report to the ICC in early 2012, after which the suggestions will be made public
  • There is a question mark over the fate of the Test Championship, with the ICC conceding it faced commercial challenges in replacing the Champions Trophy

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.

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by nayonika on (October 14, 2011, 7:25 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.

Posted by Fast_Track_Bully on (October 14, 2011, 5:03 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

Posted by Cric1988 on (October 13, 2011, 16:10 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.

Posted by Aryansblue on (October 13, 2011, 9:53 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 ???

Posted by mohsin9975 on (October 13, 2011, 5:21 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.

Posted by kristee on (October 13, 2011, 3:33 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!

Posted by mohsin9975 on (October 13, 2011, 2:26 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

Posted by   on (October 13, 2011, 1:02 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!

Posted by Texmex on (October 12, 2011, 18:54 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.

Posted by bobmartin on (October 12, 2011, 16:42 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....

Comments have now been closed for this article

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

Why not you? Read and learn how!