Decision Review System June 17, 2011

DRS has improved umpiring - Kirsten

ESPNcricinfo staff
24

Gary Kirsten, the new South Africa coach, has come out in support of the Decision Review System (DRS), describing it as a "great system" that had had a positive effect on umpiring standards. However, Kirsten, who quit as India coach after the team won the World Cup, admitted there were misgivings about the system in India.

"I think what it has done ... is that it has increased the consistency of umpiring so I am a fan of it but I know there are some negative views of it within India," Kirsten told Reuters. "Personally I am very much in favour of it. I think it's a great system."

The DRS has been adopted by most Test-playing countries since it was first used in the India-Sri Lanka Test series in Sri Lanka in 2008. But India have steadfastly refused to use the system since struggling to come to grips with it on that tour, voicing concerns about the technology's accuracy; and the BCCI declined to have it in place for the upcoming tour of England.

Among the senior players who aren't convinced of the accuracy of ball-tracking technology is Sachin Tendulkar, who recently told ESPNcricinfo that the DRS would be "more effective with the support of the Snickometer and Hot Spot technology." Kirsten agreed there was still room for improvement within the system.

"There can be a few adjustments. I know one thing that was discussed at the [ICC] cricket committee [meeting in March] was that they might bring down two appeals per inning to one appeal so that it takes away the strategy around using DRS.

"The tool is there to improve umpiring so it takes away the players using it as a strategic tool. I know that is being floated but I don't know if that has been passed yet."

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • John on June 18, 2011, 19:42 GMT

    @SRT_GENIUS: Your allowed to review any umpire decisions. So if you want to waste it reviewing no balls, wide balls and such go ahead.

  • Randika on June 18, 2011, 8:06 GMT

    After producing a whole host of completely incompetent umpires BCCI ridicules themselves by denouncing the implementation of DRS. manipulation has to end at some point if world cricket is to remain appealing to all audiences in the future as well. Otherwise India can play their own cricket like US play 'shupper-bowl', and the ICC should continue with the rest of the 95 member states.

  • al on June 18, 2011, 3:56 GMT

    @landl47: How about 5 insted of 3 umpires. And why every decision - every non-decision should be reviewed as well.. for example - wide, no ball, balls left in an over. I think that should make everything consistent and fair.

  • Dummy4 on June 17, 2011, 21:20 GMT

    @Jim1207: If you read the document, you would have found that the testing was done independently by MCC whom I trust more than BCCI (atleast just me). In contrast depsite BCCI giving various press conferences about saying they are not convinced, they have not given any independent research/study of theirs proving it to be more inaccurate than Bucknor, Hair or de Silva's senses. When tennis is ready to make mm line calls on Hawk-Eye and when the ultimate cricketing authority MCC has tested it, I don't see why BCCI shouldn't scientifically back their opinion. I am view of that the technology does indeed have uncertainties but is better than a human with all due respect to Aleem Dar and Simon Taufel. After seeing India win in Durban and recently in WI with decisions going their way, I'm not surprised why BCCI doesn't want the DRS now.

  • Harsha on June 17, 2011, 19:54 GMT

    IT`s DRS vs TRS (or should I say SRT)

  • Bob on June 17, 2011, 18:39 GMT

    Vnot If for whatever reason, the third umpire gave the wrong decision, that is not the fault of the UDRS, that's the fault of the umpire. Hotspot isn't infallible... there was a case in the current Eng v Sri Lanka series where hotspot did not register a ball hitting the batsman's glove, but with several replays and consultations between the on-field and third umpires, they arrived at the correct decision. There was also another incident where hot spot didn't register a faint edge so the batsman was given not out. The stump mic on the TV replay showed a clear snick which could only have come from the bat No-one with any sense claims the system is 100%, but it has proved on numerous occasions to be more accurate than relying on the judgement of a human who sees the action once in a split second. True, the top umpires get it right more than not but as someone else has pointed out, UDRS has also weeded out a few not so good ones who would still be making wrong decisions undetected

  • venkataramana rao on June 17, 2011, 17:26 GMT

    Vishwanath, you need to see the DRS decison which gave Sehwag out. It is one of the worst decisions in the history of cricket and that was due to lack of common sense in the 3rd umpire who followed the rules but did not bother to give the right decision. It is easy to sensationalize but difficult to actually understand the issue

  • vishwanath on June 17, 2011, 16:30 GMT

    against Sri Lanka, the Indians had no clue to playing Ajantha Mendis, and conveniently blamed DRS for their pathetic performance... so then, they manipulated the hawkeye to get the LBW decision in favor of SRT in the semi final, and yet do not find favor with the Indians. (saeed ajmal says he was baffled that his straighter one was tracked as a regular off-spinner by hawkeye) What more do they need to do to get BCCI's blessing? maybe tell BCCI that 70% of India's referrals will be given in its favor....

  • Dummy4 on June 17, 2011, 16:19 GMT

    The DRS is good if implemented properly. I totally agree with Sachin that DRS should be implemented with all options (ball tracing, snicko, hot spot, etc). We saw in world cup that the reviews were useless for catching a faint edge without hot spot. The other benefit is that the umpires are put on guard and have to use better judgement in the first place. They of course would not like it if their decision is overturned. Secondly, it helps in assessment of umpires performance by looking at the number of decisions overturned and upheld. This assessment also led to downgrading of couple of umpires in the world cup. So, go for the technology but use all that is available.

  • Alex on June 17, 2011, 16:12 GMT

    Bringing it from 2 to 1 is BAD IDEA. I completely understand there is one issue in that some team captain is more brilliant than others and use the DRS effectively

  • No featured comments at the moment.