SA v Pakistan, 1st Test, Johannesburg, 2nd day

Pakistan angry over Hot Spot decisions

Firdose Moonda

February 2, 2013

Comments: 108 | Text size: A | A

Misbah-ul-Haq watches the ball closely, South Africa v Pakistan, 1st Test, Johannesburg, 2nd day, February 2, 2013
Misbah-ul-Haq was involved in one of several controversial decisions involving umpire Steve Davis' interpretation of Hot Spot © Associated Press

Pakistan were left privately seething as four incidents involving Hot Spot technology went against them during a mauling by South Africa in the first Test at the Wanderers.

Although none of the match participants or team administrators would comment on the technology, the Pakistan manager and coach were seen in animated discussion with the third umpire after the day's play. Dav Whatmore later told the media: "Any comments will be done in the right channels."

Whatmore was visibly upset after Misbah-ul-Haq was given out on review in the morning session. Jacques Kallis appealed for a catch at the wicket which was turned down on-field but South Africa referred. The camera showed only a faint mark which disappeared quickly and the decision was then overturned by the TV umpire Steve Davis. Misbah also showed his annoyance as he walked off.

Pakistan's anger was heightened because a similar decision against the South Africa batsman, Faf du Plessis, was upheld as 'not out' yesterday. Pakistan reviewed an appeal for caught behind by Rahat Ali against du Plessis when he was on 21 and given 'not out' by Billy Bowden. Despite a faint mark on Hot Spot, the decision was upheld.

Later on, an appeal for caught behind against AB de Villiers resulted in the same decision. De Villiers indicated that he padded the ball away but even that did not show up on the Hot Spot camera.

The final incident took place when de Villiers survived again on review in the second innings. He was given out lbw to Saeed Ajmal and immediately gestured to his bat to indicated he had hit the ball. Although the Hot Spot camera did not show an edge, the decision was overturned and de Villiers continued batting.

At the post-day press conference Whatmore was reluctant to talk about Hot Spot. "I wouldn't like to comment on that because it is part and parcel of umpiring decisions but any comments will be done in the right channels," he said.

Neither did he use the issue to play down the total dominance of South Africa's pace attack, led by Dale Steyn, who finished with 6 for 8. "I've never seen two hours of relentless, incredible pace bowling such as I have witnessed today," he said.

SuperSport's producer Louwrens Rensburg told ESPNcricinfo that the Hot Spot cameras were in perfect working condition. He added that in the current "atmospheric conditions," which included heat and bright sunshine faint edges would only show up slightly.

A match official confirmed early in the day that the umpires and match referee, Jeff Crowe, were satisfied with the technology available to them.

Sky TV promoted more sensitive Hot Spot cameras for South Africa's series in England last summer that they claimed were more reliable.

Firdose Moonda is ESPNcricinfo's South Africa correspondent

RSS Feeds: Firdose Moonda

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by CaptainKool on (February 3, 2013, 16:24 GMT)

Ban this DRS. Ridiculous!

Posted by johnathonjosephs on (February 3, 2013, 16:11 GMT)

You guys need to understand that the 3rd umpire also has access to the mike which he turns up very loud to hear and use during these decisions. It is a combination of hot spot (which by itself is not too reliable) and NOISE. Based on the two, the umpire makes the decision. If nothing shows on hot spot, but there is a NOISE when the ball passes the bat, it is out. Hot spot itself is not very reliable for small nicks

Posted by michoos98 on (February 3, 2013, 16:05 GMT)

Now that is enough evidence for India's stand regarding DRS.....Make it flawless and then counter point

Posted by GHemrajani on (February 3, 2013, 16:05 GMT)

Got to give credit to Whatmore for airing any compliants through appropriate channels.

Posted by aewahid on (February 3, 2013, 16:00 GMT)

It doesn't matter how faint the edge is, as long as there is an edge of any sort, and decisions are CONSISTENT throughout the sport, the DRS as imperfect as it is, is still better than no DRS.

But this does the raise the prospect that certain teams, and certain ranks, mean that all 50-50 calls go in your favor.

Posted by inswing on (February 3, 2013, 15:44 GMT)

These are just DRS growing pains. Turning hotspot into judgement calls is asking for trouble. There have to be specific policies, decided in advance, about what counts as out and what doesn't. What is "faint"? Come up with a threshold. Above the threshold, it is a nick. Below the threshold is unclear and you stick to umpires on-field decision.

Posted by akkers5 on (February 3, 2013, 15:25 GMT)

I saw the first SA innings hotspot decisions. I was not satisfied. Even though the 3rd umpire gave FdP not out I thought there was a faint edge. The commentators started to discuss this after a few overs and it became a hot topic. I think it was DB or FdP edged to keeper, he walked and umpire gave him out. THe broadcaster showed the hotspot very briefly and took it off. When I rewound and saw it again there was no hotspot showing (even though the batsman clealy edged it and walked off himself). What is going on???? I think the 3rd umpire should be checking every edge, appeal or no appeal.

Posted by Temuzin on (February 3, 2013, 15:12 GMT)

Pakistani fans and players are making unnecessary excuses for the ugly performance of their batsman. DRS is intended to help the game of cricket and has exactly done that. In the circumstance, the correct decisions were made using DRS/hotspot/tracker/hawkeye/ third umpire etc. Thanks to $15000/ day technology, we are able to minimize howlers. Technology is the future of cricket. Pakistani fans should learn to accept it. BCCI should also learn to accept it. lol....

Posted by S.Jagernath on (February 3, 2013, 13:41 GMT)

Amazingly,Whenever India or Pakistan tour South Africa,decisions turn tough tours into nearly impossible situations.South Africa always get the better of decisions.If you need proof,have a look at how many times Andrew Flintoff had to dismiss Jacques Kallis to finally get him given out on South Africa's previous tour to England.That does make averaging 56 a lot easier.

Posted by JohnnyRook on (February 3, 2013, 13:12 GMT)

@moBlue. You have hit nail on the head. Noboay sees the argument. They only see who is making it. So far I have got not answer to the question "Why shoudn't we just use a TV replay instead of Hotspot/Hawkeye/Virtual Eye if it is only to correct a howler.". I haven't got an answer to the question "Why should we pay $5000 a day to these companies when a fair number of member nations are in a financial strife". Jayzuz. May be you can try to answer it

Posted by cricTorque on (February 3, 2013, 12:54 GMT)

Just provide the onfield umpires with a tablet where they can replay the ball. No one minds close enough being given out or not out. Its the howlers which are to be avoided. And just because some video edit software paints a line on video feed about ball direction, doesn't make it a future telling wizard globe!

Posted by JohnnyRook on (February 3, 2013, 12:53 GMT)

@OzWally. I love DRS but I hate Hotspot/Hawkeye (atleast at this cost). They don't add any value if they are to be used only for eliminating howlers. Why do you need this complicated technology for a rank bad decision. Problem is that BCCI has taken an anti-DRS stand instead of anti-Hawkeye/Hotspot stand and world has taken an anti-BCCI stand. In other article there was a featured comment from "HotspotInventor". I asked this to him too but didn't get the answer.

Posted by PACERONE on (February 3, 2013, 12:48 GMT)

What is needed is consistent 3rd umpiring.The inconsistency will always appear to be favouritism.The funny thing about this is that it always seem to favour certain teams.

Posted by Jayzuz on (February 3, 2013, 12:04 GMT)

DRS is good, and the odd mistake is always going to happen - although the 3rd umpire should never overrule the onfield umpire when there is no clear evidence to do so. This happened with a Mike Hussey decision vs India last year, and to Clint McKay vs SL just a few weeks back. There was a a WI player given out in similar circumstances today in the ODI (but of course when AUS benefits it is an evil conspiracy, even though the third umpire in none of these cases was Australian). Yawn. Get on with the game and stop playing victim. BCCI knows DRS is good, but are just playing a power game. Everyone knows that. That's why they won't relent, regardless of how it may benefit the game. They are simply interested in maintaining their own power.

Posted by baskar_guha on (February 3, 2013, 11:54 GMT)

Note to ICC: Only use video replays in DRS. Leave out science projects like hot spot and hawkeye from cricket. Address the fundamental issue which is to improve quality of umpiring, on the field or off the field.

Posted by dilscoop_uk on (February 3, 2013, 11:20 GMT)

To make DRS successful Super SLOMO , Old fashioned Stump map and snicko meter are more than enough. Hawkeye is a Flop and can be manipulated . Sachin's LBW decision in WC2011 in the semis against Pak is the best example of that. Eagle eye is another excuse of making money by the Aussies who refused to give their Hotspot Cameras during the Worldcup 2011 . England Australia and SA are trying to convince BCCI to support DRS because they know they can or their respective companies can Mint more money by selling it to every match . Well done BCCI !

Posted by badmaash on (February 3, 2013, 11:15 GMT)

Being a Pakistan fan I am quite annoyed at these decisions, although I am much more annoyed at our batsmen. Pakistan batted shabbily and all credit to the SA bowlers, but Misbah's decision was a howler and so was the de Villiers overturn.

At the least I would expect consistency in the 3rd umpire's obvious incompetence - if he did not overturn du Plessis' decision, then he should not have overturned Misbah's and de Villiers'.

Posted by M_Majeed on (February 3, 2013, 11:00 GMT)

umpire decision was clealy doubtfull....DRS is good thing if not used as in this test that was resulted in biased decisions.....

Posted by ManintheWhiteCoat on (February 3, 2013, 10:32 GMT)

I don't think it's the DRS fault but the 3rd Umpire. Its like blaming the car on a car accident by poor driving. I think Umpires should undergo sight and hearings tests especially when the Umpires reach end of their career. There is a tendency where the Umpires give the benefit of the doubt to the stronger team (i.e. More powerful country, not necessarily the talent). This is a classic example. Cricinfo pls publish!!

Posted by kam_uk on (February 3, 2013, 10:23 GMT)

The technology is there to take the howlers out of the game not to create howlers. The Misbah decision was a howler by the technology and the the incompetence of the third umpire. The the FAF Du Plessis decision in the first innings was identical the umpire gave it not out. The Misbah decison should have been given as benefit of the doubt in the batsman's favour as was Du plessis. In this match the Misbah decision will not have major bearing on the outcome but will have a bearing on the use of technologyfor its doubters ie BCCI.

Posted by Avradeep on (February 3, 2013, 9:42 GMT)

My personal view on DRS is that it should only be used to get rid of howlers and not try to be a means of getting 100% correct decisions. In pursuit of 100% correctness, strange considerations come to the picture like ball hitting 50% of he wicket, lbws rejected if ball pitches 2.5m away from stumps etc. The question is, how does one achieve that. My suggestion is very simple.

Use a ultra slow motion camera from only the angle that the field umpire sees the ball from. Use only one replay, and in that replay, make use of hawk eye, hot spot and snicko. After just one replay played in extreme slow motion, if there is enough evidence that the on field decision is right, upheld it, else, even if there is a bit of doubt, reverse it. This is exactly what an on filed umpire would have done if he imagines the event happening at extremely slow speed. To make the process more fair, make the 3rd umpire a 3 member panel put in isolated boxes. Then for each decision go as the majority does.

Posted by nilaksh on (February 3, 2013, 9:28 GMT)

So instead of having umpiring errors now we have umpires error in use of technology. Laughable. India is better of not wasting money on inadequate technology and perhaps BCCI is right in rejecting DRS. Its just not good enough.

Posted by rhtdm302 on (February 3, 2013, 8:51 GMT)

@Dubaieyes isnt the technology there to reduce the Human errors ??

Posted by Resultpredictor on (February 3, 2013, 8:47 GMT)

Pakistan stop blaming Hot Spot and DRS, just accept that you are not good at playing seam and swing bowling. This is just the beginning of this tour and many more spirited bowling performances from SA are yet to come. If you prepare well also you cannot play SA bowling. Just be ready for more humiliation

Posted by MuhammadArsalanHaider on (February 3, 2013, 8:28 GMT)

We in software Engineering often say: most of the problems in softwares lie with the people who use it. I can say that for DRS now!!

Posted by drpramit on (February 3, 2013, 7:48 GMT)

Nothing wrong with the technology, its human part which is erring again & again. remove 3rd umpire from the game just make a device which can give decisions on its own with or without referring......

Posted by quittthewhinging on (February 3, 2013, 7:44 GMT)

I am all in favour of DRS & don't think the BCCI has been vindicated at all. If Ian Chappell is against it then I'm all for it but that's another story. :) I think it is great for LBW decisions but I must admit that Hotspot is a load of rubbish. Where is Snickometer? that was much better. Amid all the controversy no one has mentioned the decision to give out Elgar to a catch down the legside. I'll bet my house that ball never went near the bat. I don't understand why he didn't appeal because he was clearly upset at the decision; were SA out of appeals or what?

Posted by Dubaieyes on (February 3, 2013, 7:01 GMT)

It was'nt Technology Error, It was a Human Error.

Posted by nauman421 on (February 3, 2013, 6:37 GMT)

Its not the 'technology' which has to be blamed for this fiasco, its again the man who used the technology to be blamed. Inconsistency then consistency was there by humans, i.e the umpire (Davis) and not the technology. If Faf was given not out in the same circumstances, then consistency demands the same for Misbah too. And if Misbah is the example then AB should have been given out alongwith FAF too. Its simple when its logical!!

Posted by screamingeagle on (February 3, 2013, 6:13 GMT)

Sunny conditions - Good for cricket. Sunny Conditions - Bad for hot spot. Am I missing something here?

Posted by Papa_Tango on (February 3, 2013, 6:12 GMT)

A match official confirmed early in the day that the umpires and match referee, Jeff Crowe, were satisfied with the technology available to them.

That says it all: despite the bad decisions made by the not so competent, Davis, Crowe is satisfied. Really? There is no public, transparent accountability of these umpires and referees, and this more than anything else will sink DRS. These two ICC officials have done more damage to the DRS than the BCCI can dream of. Maine the referee and umpires do not want the technology themselves !!

Posted by ejsiddiqui on (February 3, 2013, 5:42 GMT)

I am a Pak fan and still believe that There was nothing wrong with the DRS or technology but the interpretation of technology. In case of Misbah and Faf, DRS did not gave out but it was Umpires who gave out for one and not out for other, in nature both the decisions were against Pakistan. ------ IT WAS BAD UMPIRING RATHER THAN BAD DRS-----.

Posted by RednWhiteArmy on (February 3, 2013, 5:40 GMT)

Lets not get too carried away. When there was no DRS everyone used to think the umpires gave them bad decisions if they lost. Since DRS i dont think ive once blamed the umpires when England lose.

UDRS does a job, I wish i had it when i play club cricket.

Posted by indianpunter on (February 3, 2013, 5:27 GMT)

Pakistan ( my 2nd favourite team) were certainly hard done by here. I cannot understand, how Misbah could be out, if Faf was not out !! Like it happens, the higher ranked team/ home team gets more decisions in their favor. This is true even in other sport ( eg, ManU) and this needs to be stamped out. 3rd umpires, who make the final call, should be clearly instructed on whats out and whats not. These cant be arbitrary decisions based on a whim.

Posted by samincolumbia on (February 3, 2013, 5:26 GMT)

BCCI stands vindicated yet again....these incidents are close on the heels of Ian Chappel's comments that DRS has utterly failed for what it was designed for!!

Posted by FurqanKhan on (February 3, 2013, 5:25 GMT)

Well, wht ever the technology has is just unacceptable for a team to b bowled out for 49 with only one controvercial decision...9 wickets fell caught behind the wickets...just a worst display of batting...that was surely a great spell of bowling...but that was just outswing...score should hav been better than that...Pak fall into SA bowlers shell... they didnt make them thnk wht so ever...nd wht was misbah doing while playing that stroke when he just lost his partner nd 4 wickets were gone under 40 odd...!!!Pak also lack sum swing bowlers here...hardly any swing from them with the ball...!!!

Posted by drnaveed on (February 3, 2013, 5:12 GMT)

to me , steve davis was more dangerous than steyn,with his umpiring. remember , he was the third umpire sitting outside, what he would have done ,had he been inside the ground ????.he took 4 for 0. where as , steyn took 6 for 8.........

Posted by rustyryan on (February 3, 2013, 5:10 GMT)

Ha ha suddenly all teams mull over DRS. So BCCI is right once again. Is there any other team in the World cricket right now, who have not opposed DRS? But I dont understand why they still support something that is highly speculative and controversial. By trying to prove BCCI wrong, these boards have made the mockery of themselves.

Posted by Nasir_Mahmood_Malik on (February 3, 2013, 4:41 GMT)

With due respect to both Rahat Ali and Eshan Adil, the selection of them is not a wise decision and lacks logic. For selecting somebody as a test bowler:

> He must have confidence of performing at international level; and > He should have proven ability to take wickets of top class batsmen.

One should test someone with talend in limited over formats to give him confidence at international level and to ascertain the wicket taking ability of good batsmen. If somebody passes this grade, he may be tried in tests. Based on these parameters, both Rahat Ali and Eshan Adil should not have been selected for this series. Muhammad Irfan has the confidence but I am not sure about his wicket taking ability. Our selectors should stop day dreaming, that somebody like Imran Nazir will come without playing major cricket and will blow the opposition away. What is wrong with Aizaz Cheema, Wahab Riaz and Tanveer. I feel they fulfil the above criteria lot better and were more deserving for selection.

Posted by moBlue on (February 3, 2013, 4:39 GMT)

first of all, i am not at all a BCCI fan... in fact, i detest the BCCI... but even a broken clock is right twice a day! as an IND fan, i have always seen the BCCI's argument as consistent and logical and sensible, no matter *who* is making the argument!

to all you naysayers who love(d) to pile on anything the BCCI says or does... please defend the crappy decisions yesterday! how on earth is the DRS better for the game of cricket if misbah was given out when he was not?!? misbah is key for PAK! i don't care how well steyn was bowling, he didn't deserve to be gifted misbah's wicket just because he was unplayable! misbah was playing him fine!!! ...and given time, we all know what misbah can do! when we look at the collective impact of the 4 erroneous DRS decisions, the DRS wrecked PAK yesterday almost as much as steyn did!

there is no - zero!!! - defense of using DRS in the form that it is at present! i hate to say this, but the BCCI has been right all along about the DRS!!!

Posted by Inspector_Clouseau on (February 3, 2013, 4:39 GMT)

People seem to overreact with every dubious decision technology makes but numerous blunders made by on-field umpires are accepted to be the norm. In spite of some controversial decisions now and then, we need to persist with the use of technology. That is the only way we can perfect it. Over time new methods will emerge as we learn from the mistakes. In this match, however, it is the 3rd umpire that made inconsistent decisions. There is room for improvement right there in the human machine relationship.

Posted by sahbas_s on (February 3, 2013, 4:32 GMT)

let us commend bcci for sticking to their stand and let us agree tat drs is not complete.

Posted by VickGower on (February 3, 2013, 3:48 GMT)

@ygkd : "As a neutral follower of the game I think it is high time to put all of the technology in the third-umpire's hands"

You want the very same people who are tainting/misusing this technology to be the sole arbiters of it? Really? Nice idea.

Posted by satishchandar on (February 3, 2013, 3:40 GMT)

India faced it and they protest it as they have that power. Other teams don't have that power and follows the mediocre technology. More than the technology, i would blame poor usage of it. Rather inconsistent usage. As with the LBW rules for tracker where the marginal decisions go with the "On field decision stays" and howlers alone get reversed, they need to go for hotspot too. I was really surprised to see some decisions which were not reversed. The Faf was just unbelievable. That review was the most spontaneous one and with Younis(One of the most genuine cricketer to play the game) feeling very confident, i felt it was a sure edge..

Posted by Nathan74 on (February 3, 2013, 3:26 GMT)

I sometimes think that the Indians have a point when they are against technology. From the way the current voting went on this issue I wonder if some other countries also feel the same way. People are blaming India money but really has the introduction reduced the controversy. Before the technology there were mistakes - after all umpires are humans. But the technology, third umpire the match referee all have brought in more controversy. I would suggest that we get rid of all the technology. Which means it also should not be available for TV or commentators. Everyone sees only what the umpires see and their decision is final. No reviews or technology. Let us play cricket the old fashion way like gentlemen.

Posted by KiwiRocker- on (February 3, 2013, 3:05 GMT)

I got to agree with good friend Zahidsaltin on this. The problem in this match has been that all four decisions have gone against Pakistan. Now in recent series against India, umpiring by Indian umpires was very poor. England suffered even more but one has to admit that on odd occasion Pak and England also benefited from umpiring mistakes.That only meant that Indian umpires were not up to the mark. However, the problem in this match has been that some clear DRS decisions have gone against Pak. I am actually surprised that how calmly and professionally they have handled this.On another day,Imran Khan or Ranatunga would have taken their team out! South Africa is a number ranked team. They are playing at home and their attack is best in the business so odds are all against Pak. However, SA would have not scored 200 and Pak could have dragged to 200 if correct decisions were made! Steyn bowled well..But many such spells have been seen before.Utter shame that it puts mark on SA performance!

Posted by KiwiRocker- on (February 3, 2013, 2:59 GMT)

They say that you better have a long spoon if you want to dine with a devil...Pakistani selectors have failed to select Khurram Manzoor, Asim Kamal and Muhammad Yousaf- All technically and tempramentaly fine players. Indeed, Yousaf is past his best and bit old but he is still better than this lot. If you play just one warm up match and your middle orer fails, then warning signs are there. Why chose mediocre bowlers like Rahat and Tanvir? What sin Wahab and Saddaf has comitted?Now, in all fairness, no other team can do much better than what Pak did as four very crucial decisions have gone against them.I am a big fan of DRS and I believe DRS should be implemented universally despite BCCI bullies but without a doubt SuperSports has stuffed DRS up with flawed hotspot. If AB and Faf were correctly given out in first inning, SA would not even score 200. If Misbah was correctly not out, surely Pak could drag to 150 odd! Now instead of 50 odd is 400+.Did I mention AB in 2nd inning?

Posted by drnaveed on (February 3, 2013, 2:51 GMT)

apart from the 4 hot spot decisions that went against Pakistan ,and hostile fast, swing bowling from the SA fast bowlers ,i think, the Pakistani batsmen , also are responsilbe for the effort they put on together as a unit.yes , the ball was swinging , but they did't move enough to cover for the swing , and hence were mostly dismissed behind the wickets , one after the other.

Posted by DocBindra on (February 3, 2013, 2:49 GMT)

Its ALL BCCI's fault because it always is...maybe, just maybe, their stand holds some water. This kind of decisions just proves that this "expensive" technology is still not bug free. For all the supporters of DRS, sorry, hard to sympathize when things go south.

Posted by Sulaimaan91 on (February 3, 2013, 2:39 GMT)

there is nothing wrong with the DRS system and this in no way justifies the BCCI stance, the only problem here is the way in which the DRS is implemented not the technology itself which is what the BCCI has a 'problem' with. DRS should be left to the umpires, and other than the two on-field umpires, there should be two more umpires overseen by the the match referee monitoring the live footage. Umpires need to be educated on how to interpret the DRS technology and the ICC should standardize it globally.Every decision should be monitored and corrected if needed, there shouldnt be a limit.

Posted by CiMP on (February 3, 2013, 2:37 GMT)

I have not seen the incidents but from what is reported here it

appears that the technology was not indicating very clearly what

really happened. If a spot appears and then disappears what really

happened? That is essentially for the technical guys to explain or

explore. It is possible that no such expert was available at hand. It is

not likely that the experts could provide a pat explanation even they

were accessible. In the absence of any clear explanation from the

technical guys the best course of action is to revert to the world

before DRS and let umpires take a call. The rule has been that

umpire;s call stays if DRS is unable to provide sufficient evidence

against his ruling. I think that is what should be the case in these

situations. Whoever is affected should take it as part of the much

touted 'human element' of the game. And while deploying technology

one has to always rekon with Murphy's Law "If anything can fail, it will"

Posted by La_Bangla on (February 3, 2013, 2:34 GMT)

Pakistani players are unnecessorily getting emotional. DRS helps the game and right decisions were made, thanks to technlogy.

Posted by Nampally on (February 3, 2013, 1:51 GMT)

I am glad to see further dissent about DRS. It appears to be fashionable for Cricket fans from different parts of the world, incl. Pakistan I might add, to criticise India for refusing to accept the use DRS. When the Inventer of the Technology himself freely admits that it is flawed & unreliable, why don't ICC & Cricket fans GET it. It takes lot of decisions to go against each individual team before the Penny drops- Eh!. Dravid was given out thrice in Tests when India toured England - even though each time DRS did not rule Dravid Out. That is even more puzzling- Neither DRS or Umpire giving Dravid Out but the Third Umpire rules him Out- Figure this for yourselves. Pakistan appeard to have got similar decisions!

Posted by pak_1981 on (February 3, 2013, 1:31 GMT)

This is why we should not have been critizing harshly when India did not support Hotspot. Most people critisism is based on dislike toward that team. Atleast in games we should be neutral. I always felt this technology is simply to make money by some companies. Never meant for the betterment of the game.

Posted by CricFan78 on (February 3, 2013, 1:10 GMT)

So you have to pay $15K per day per camera for this junk of technology? Hate to say this but BCCI has been right throughout regarding DRS.

Posted by dalboy12 on (February 3, 2013, 0:57 GMT)

The only way you will ever get 100% right results is when batsman are prepared to walk, as in the end they are the ones who know whether they hit it or not. However, honesty seems to play no part in cricket nowadays, if it ever did. You even have batsman trying to show an umpire that they hit an LBW shout, when slow motions show that they were no-where near it. Personally, i think DRS should be completely controlled by the umpires, they should ask for assistance from the third umpire the same way they do with run outs and stumping, that way the players are taken completely out of it.

Posted by NAP73 on (February 3, 2013, 0:17 GMT)

What a disgrace. Disregarding the point that there is a dearth of quality competition (it is deteriorating and I prefer to watch a competitive series; at least with T20, one-sided games are over before you need to rest and go back to work), use of the DRS system and third umpires has become a farce. I use to be a strong believer in DRS, but I have since changed my mind. There is even more inconsistency now. Either: (i) scrap it and improve the depth of quality umpires (and perhaps make the best do more games in the meantime) OR (ii) only keep it for the obvious knicks on to the pad where a howler of an LBW decision is made. P.S. The biggest inconsistency has been in applying the 'benefit of doubt'! If there is any whatsoever, it is NOT OUT!

Posted by guitarboy on (February 2, 2013, 23:47 GMT)

Pakistan need to stop clinging to these supposed errors by the third empires in analysing the drs.They would be accused of being sore losers and making excuses for their pitiful performance.Steyn's performance was good but it wasn't spectacular,I've seen better fast boowling than that from,ambrose,marshall,wasim,and waqar.Pakistan should rather focus on their dismal batting performance,particularly younis khan who seems to be over the hill and asad shafiq who doesn't appear to have a brain.

Posted by oayaz01 on (February 2, 2013, 23:42 GMT)

TommytuckerSaffa - What about Du plesis nick yesterday and if I'm not wrong, he had a reprive against NZ as well when they didn't review. How can umpires be so inconsistent. Pakistan would probably still have been bowled out for 49 but atleast that would have been without any umpiring assistence.

Posted by foursandsixes on (February 2, 2013, 23:37 GMT)

Why are all the pro DRS folks quiet?!!! Looks like they only come out of hiding when the BCCI opposes it :)

Posted by Kak-mal_Khan on (February 2, 2013, 23:23 GMT)

Pakistan has always been a big advocator of DRS system to bring justice into the decision making system - there is nothing wrong with using DRS. However it would be advisable that some historical research be undertaken on the panel of umpires being used, in this case umpire Steve Davis officiating in 2010 Durban Test!

Posted by ballonbat on (February 2, 2013, 23:14 GMT)

Saddam Rasool, I'm not sure why you are so confident that Pakistan would win in the UAE. As recently as 2010 SA played Pakistan there and the teams drew two Tests, SA won the ODIs 3-2 and the Twenty20s 2-0. No doubt now that Ajmal has come into his own the Pakistan bowling is stronger, but then the Protea's attack has strengthened too with the addition of Philander and the maturing of Steyn and Morkel. Philander still has to be tested on subcontinent and similar pitches but Steyn particularly has enjoyed great success on them: in India he has got 20 wickets at 20.23 which is a better average than his career average. 63 wickets at 23.71 is not too bad for bowling in Asia.

Posted by CanGrit on (February 2, 2013, 23:14 GMT)

After this game whatever' hope I had as a fan for DRS just evaporated. All this time I was against BCCI's stand against DRS..But now I understand why India is so adamant against it. Most of the time the subcontinent teams seems to be on the receiving end of bad "DRS" decisions. Technology is good but if it still the same umpires making theses decisions interpreting what technology put out then it's better off not to have DRS in the first place. I don't know what umpire Steve Davis was seeing differently than what we all's a shame becauses of desicions like these DRS should be kept out. I'm with India after this game!!!

Posted by Cricket_Fan_And_Analyst on (February 2, 2013, 22:41 GMT)

Both Hawk Eye and Hot Spot are not good enough technologies. I remember watching tennis matches where Hawk eye would show the tennis ball pitched outside line when it actually would have pitched on line in slow mo replays. Now put that in cricket context when they predict the ball path if they are not getting the spot where the ball pitched correct then their prediction could be completely wrong. If it pitches little further up then sometimes you would see ball going over stumps where as in reality it would have hit the stumps and vice versa. Same for going down the legside stuff.

Hot spot is a joke. It shows only the obvious nicks that even a bad umpire could figure out.

People are saying technology is there to remove howlers , that is not what I see. Every marginal decision goes for referral. Now if you leave it only to third umpires that won't solve the problem either. Again, only the marginal decision will be decided by technology.

Here is what would work ...

Posted by ygkd on (February 2, 2013, 22:02 GMT)

As a neutral follower of the game I think it is high time to put all of the technology in the third-umpire's hands and leave it there along with immutable guidelines about consistency. Pakistan have been outplayed by a strong SA, but they still have a point about the effect the DRS had on their performance. Some of the decisions left me shaking my head in disbelief.

Posted by IAS2009 on (February 2, 2013, 21:45 GMT)

the Fiasco DRS has brought to the cricket is not worth it, I still think it should be used by third umpire only for blunder decision, appeals should be taken away. i am willing to live with filed umpire decision with errors rather than these bone head implementation of rules. Pakistan is not going to loose this match because of DRS but it is not worth the delay in games if system is not good enough. Let the umpire make decision. ICC has to make it happen, they can allow the board to choose how it is implemented. There were many wrong decisions made in India England series it could be forgiven because umpire has one split second. 4 bad decision in 2 days with technology is not acceptable. shame on ICC.

Posted by Zahidsaltin on (February 2, 2013, 21:39 GMT)

The hotspot decisions made in this match and the hotspot not showing some clear cut edges, only strengthen India's stand. I just wish to ask Steve Devis what is his explaination that he turned down a pakistan appeal with a faint hotspot while favoured SA twice when there were no spots at all.

Posted by Zahidsaltin on (February 2, 2013, 21:35 GMT)

No doubt, SA dominated the day but one thing is clear from this hotspot controvercy, The biased umpires on the field or behind the screen will still do what they do best. Steve Davis has given dozens of wrong decisions against Pakistan, he is the culprit whenever Pakistan is on the recieving end. One should be totally out of his mind if he does this as a mistake.

Posted by MiddleStump on (February 2, 2013, 21:11 GMT)

More flaws emerge in the DRS. Hot Spot is hardly spotless. Worse is the limit of two successful reviews for each side. The ICC is trying to improve the quality of umpiring decisions but it has made the DRS another strategy tool. That was hardly the intent. Let the on field umpires have the freedom to go upstairs whenever they are in doubt about any decision. If they are certain, let the decisions stay and there be no review. Players should be kept out.

Posted by sparth on (February 2, 2013, 20:44 GMT)

HA! Media people complain that the BCCI don't want DRS. However when there is DRS, players start complaining. Let's just go back to the old way when there were no problems like this

Posted by Saddam_Rasool on (February 2, 2013, 20:39 GMT)

Guys relax. Pakistan anger is just related to DRS. Apart from that it doesn't necessary mean that Pakistan isnt a good side anymore just because they have failed in one innings. South Africa used their home conditions to their advantage just as Pakistan used UAE/Dubai tracks to their advantage which didnt mean that England wasnt a good side. I am pretty much sure that had this test been played in Dubai or UAE where Pakistan would use its spin bowling to their advantage and SA's fast bowling would count for nothing, they would come out on top

Posted by MunafAhmed811 on (February 2, 2013, 20:35 GMT)

So BCCI stand that hotspot /snickometer is not perfect and not reliable is a fact afterall

Posted by VickGower on (February 2, 2013, 20:17 GMT)

@TommytuckerSaffa, Have a feeling you would be tucking a VERY different tune if ALL FOUR of those questionable DRS calls had gone against YOUR side. You do need a machine to get this sort of shameless bias. In this day and age no flesh and blood umpire FULLY accountable/responsible for decision making would dare to show this much bias against a team. I just hope Pakistani supporters do not forget this day. A lot of "enlightened" people are counting on just that.

Posted by khurramsch on (February 2, 2013, 20:17 GMT)

mates who is saying that pak is excusing hotspot for poor show? read carefully. he didnt say that so stop saying tht they r looking for excuses. however truth is this seres has supported bcci stance more than before. may be its davis interpretation which is making it worse. he was part of a shocker test where 16 wrrors were made and now on tv his interpretations are diffeerent to each other.

Posted by khurramsch on (February 2, 2013, 20:14 GMT)

Hot spot is serving BCCI cause here very well. even where they have clearly knicked there is nothing and when there is a doubt we have steve davis who is i think living in someother world. why decision was not overturned yesterday in FAF review? and how come misbah's lbw over turned today. and the bigger one what was the conclusive evedence when ABD decision is over turned? there was no hotspot no evedence of edge? after that 1st test in SL where davis was involved in 16 wrong decisions he is showing that he cant even do it behind tv now. yes these would not have make any difference but technology is there to remove error not add more.

Posted by Alexk400 on (February 2, 2013, 20:11 GMT)

Hotspot flop. I told you already Hotspot no good against sunshine.

Posted by JACK.SPARROW on (February 2, 2013, 20:10 GMT)

Hotspot issue can't be raised as a reason for pakistan failure. it didn't change the game's fate.Better admit that you were at just 'almost-get away-with-it' situation while facing the fury of steyn

Posted by philvic on (February 2, 2013, 20:03 GMT)

I only saw the De Villiers LBW decision. It didn't need hotspot - the edge on to the pad was obvious on the Slow motion replay.

Posted by peercricket on (February 2, 2013, 19:59 GMT)

i think today was not Pakistan day couple of decision went against them but no doubt dale was unplayable. I still hope that Pakistan will strongly come back in the match....

Posted by Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on (February 2, 2013, 19:58 GMT)

@bluethroat, can't agree more. Probably the best comment I've heard so far. Keep it simple. Respect the umpires. But if the umpires are committing howlers, take the help of replays and over-turn. Simple. No problem with howlers. What DRS 'technology' is doing is the debate is still on between fans, commentators, cricket experts and what have you regarding the tougher calls. That in itself is an indicator that DRS 'technology' isn't solving the tougher questions impeccably like how slo-mo is solving stumpings, run-outs, no-balls, sixer vs four etc.....the list of camera-aid is as long as it can get in cricket. But some 'intelligent' proponents want to ignore it and jump to DRS 'technology'. Why? The proponents should know the answer. I'm not interested to know their motives in doing this. I'm interested only in the validity and reliability of DRS 'technology' for tougher calls not for the easier calls. Period! As it stands, DRS 'technology' is utter garbage for tougher calls.

Posted by Nadeem1976 on (February 2, 2013, 19:57 GMT)

make any excuse Pakistan, in the end the difference would have been 20 to 30 runs here and there. 49 all out shows us that how good our batsman are. DRS is just a excuse, we don't know how to bat on fast pitch at all. Accept it and move on and improve your batting.

Today was the real test match for Pakistan after 2 years. Thanks we showed how bad we play in test cricket. Playing in UAE don't make us good test team at all. We still are far behind when comes to real test cricket.

Posted by peercricket on (February 2, 2013, 19:54 GMT)

i do not understand why people blaming DRS .I think the mistake made by umpire rather than DRS . i could not get the logic of 3rd umpire who made 2 different decisions for 2 same case.

Posted by cyborg909 on (February 2, 2013, 19:51 GMT)

I have been staunch supporter of DRS but sorry I have changed my mind, BCCI is right, DRS must go. Those arguing for technology should realize technology is not there to be correct and blind umpires really an't helping they making a bad situation worst.

Posted by Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on (February 2, 2013, 19:47 GMT)

@NaniIndCri, people are not satisfied with the technology. They are unfortunately misled with the coloruful graphics and high-flow language. That's all there is to it. It isn't rocket science to understand that you don't need technology for easy things. We need technology for the tougher questions. I can't fathom how those guys aren't embarrassed to repeat like a Mantra that DRS is there to eliminate howlers. They know it and we know it - DRS 'technology' is garbage in answering the tougher questions. I mean, do they have mirrors at homes? How could they sleep well at night after purporting such myths? Probably, they don't sleep well and are indeed embarrassed but can't help but spread their woeful myths. I want to give them the benefit of doubt.

Posted by Major85D on (February 2, 2013, 19:43 GMT)

Maybe the DRS decision was wrong, it doesn`t matter! Don`t blame the umpires for your perfomance! Look at the scorecard: younis khan once again 0 runs, and Mr.Tuk Tuk Misbah is not able to lead the team! very very poor batting by the pakistanis! It`s time for a new coach, new captain and some new batsmen, who are waiting on the bench!!

Posted by mahjut on (February 2, 2013, 19:39 GMT)

If you critics are using hotspot to prove your point you are in fact recognising it's working perfectly as a technology in itself or its evidence would not be submissable. Even if we ignore the fact that your complaints would have meant that neither of the two who "survived" DRS yesterday would not have been out anyway if DRS didn't exist (they were both given not out by the ump), we have to accept that there was a mark for Misbah - even watching on an android phone screen i could see the nick. Now the fact that Faf survived yesterday and Misbah didn't today is not the fault of DRS but of whoever is monitoring it! Not sure that either one today would have made a huge impact even if they'd gone the other way ... i do not think Misbah surviving his would have halted the slide much more (Smith didn't enforce anyway) and if AB had got out on 49 SA would still have put up 450+ to chase. So, people have failed again which is disappointing and your answer is to have only people in charge!!??

Posted by randikaayya on (February 2, 2013, 19:32 GMT)

The problem is no twith the technology, it has been used very intellingently before. On this occassion though the umpire concerned clearly has no clue as to the use of hotspot, highlighted by the four questionable calls last 2 days. AB's LBw reversal is actually a howler in my opinion, enough proof to overturn an originally 'out' decision?

Posted by peercricket on (February 2, 2013, 19:31 GMT)

I do not understand y people are blaming to DRS instead of third umpire. DRS tell same thing in misbah case as it did in faf case but that was umpire who make two diffrent decisions for same case.I think ICC should review their umpire panels the person who cant make right decision even in the presence of technology so what will he did in ground..?

Posted by SuPerDuPerMaN on (February 2, 2013, 19:28 GMT)

It's a real shame to witness the inconsistencies in umpiring. The way umpires have handled the situations has been absolutely gross. ICC seriously needs to think ways of improving the standard of umpiring. Also I'm not an opponent of technology but such a strategy has to be adopted which can streamline the extent to which it can be incorporated plus the umpires ought to be educated regarding its various interpretations.

Posted by mikey76 on (February 2, 2013, 19:10 GMT)

Jee whiz 6-8! Steyn is good but not that good! I wish these sides would stand up and be counted and not just fold. England and a pretty poor Australia line up showed that runs can be had against these guys if you just get your head down. Pakistan's bowlers must be quietly seething after knocking a very good batting line up over for 250. If they can get runs on the board then it would be a very close series. Just goes to show Pakistan haven't found worthy replacements for Inzamam and Yousef.

Posted by OzWally on (February 2, 2013, 18:51 GMT)

@IndiaNumeroUno - You make a reasonable argument regarding cost; however, the problem is not with the technology, that does not lie. What is wrong are the interpretations made by the 3rd umpire. If a decision can be CLEARLY shown to go against the umpire's decision, only then should it be overturned. Over the past 2 days Steve Davis has not done that. Players (and fans) will always disagree over what they feel they see (or hear), DRS creates a leveler playing field in that regard. But should only be used to overturn obvious wrong decisions, if in any doubt, stick with the umpire's original call.

Posted by TommytuckerSaffa on (February 2, 2013, 18:48 GMT)

For all those people who want to abandon DRS please go back to the STONEAGE. We need modern technology in the game because it is now a professional sport where peoples careers are at stake. DRS is not 100% accurate but its more accurate that human beings. DRS is infact so accurate that it picked up that faint nicks that only Kallis and the batsman could hear (not the umpire or keeper). He still nicked it, but in days gone by it wouldve been let go.

Posted by applethief on (February 2, 2013, 18:45 GMT)

Guys, let's have the hot spot debate after the match, no doubt it needs to be sorted and some consistency applied, but we need to remember it's for the howlers, not close calls. Talking about it now is distracting from the fact that SA are playing for superior cricket than Pakistan and bossing the game

Posted by srinu92 on (February 2, 2013, 18:41 GMT)

thats why india is against using drs because hotspot and hawk eye are not even 80% accurate

Posted by gottalovetheraindance on (February 2, 2013, 18:34 GMT)

With The BCCI fighting tooth & nail against DRS this could not have occurred at a more unfortunate time. What happened yesterday & today strongly suggests that the Analysis of the data received from the technology can be rendered questionable or inaccurate due to human bias. The umpires, Crowe Bowden & Steve Davis needs to step forward & explain the differences they saw between the data he received for the Faf Duplesis decision vs the Misbah decision that caused him to allow the 1 that went in favor of S/A to stand while the 1 that went in favor of Pakistan was overturned.

Posted by bluethroat on (February 2, 2013, 18:34 GMT)

The whole technology saga is turning ridiculous. Sportsman are supposed to be mature and umpire error are part of cricketing life. It sounds like children bickering about bad decesions. Grow up.

Posted by NaniIndCri on (February 2, 2013, 18:31 GMT)

Hotspot in DRS, as some people suggest, is not for removing howlers it is supposed to help in marginal calls. Howlers can be avoided without hotspot with a simple slow motion replay.So if Hotspot cannot do its job of picking up faint edges then its not even worth a cent. And how can Whatmore say that its an umpires job when players are the ones who need to review it? It has become a part of game strategy under the current rules.

Posted by Kingzzzz on (February 2, 2013, 18:30 GMT)

It doesn't matter whether that decision Misbah dismissal was right or wrong it wouldn't have mattered anyway as South bowling was too good. Also where is the crowd? don't tell me Pakistan are minnows :)

Posted by NaniIndCri on (February 2, 2013, 18:22 GMT)

Somehow everyone is satisfied with this unreliable technology, but all up against when anyone questions it.

Posted by Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on (February 2, 2013, 18:19 GMT)

Guys, please get a life! Will ya all? Technology should aid humans in solving difficult questions that we find difficult to solve on our own. We don't need a calculator to add 2+2. Do we? Likewise, we need calculators and computers and what have you to aid us in solving tougher and more intricate challenges. Likewise, we need technology to be able to solve the marginal calls in cricket, not the straight forward ones. Howlers are inexcusable and the umpires need to be pulled up. Invoking technology in the context of howlers is a crying shame on our collective intelligence and mounts to pampering mediocrity on the part of the umpires. Let's be supportive of umpires when they get the tougher ones wrong. Let's not defend them when they get the easier ones wrong. The proponents of DRS technology themselves know that the technology is a sham when it comes to marginal calls and so they started spreading the myth that technology is there for howlers. Seriously? Are we morons to buy that myth?

Posted by SurlyCynic on (February 2, 2013, 18:12 GMT)

Faf was lucky, he should have been out, but his mark was a lot fainter than Misbah's. Even Ramiz Raja on commentary didn't think there was a nick with Faf, only later after studying it in extreme close-up.

But again, the DRS decisions we're arguing about are very marginal, faint nicks. DRS will never be perfect. But without DRS you don't just get these marginal decisions, you also get terrible errors - like in the India v England test series.

Posted by Saffant on (February 2, 2013, 18:10 GMT)

That's just incredibly unfair.

Posted by hst84 on (February 2, 2013, 18:09 GMT)

Steve Davis seemed to have a problem when umpiring from the pavilion as his decisions were obnoxious and brought the game of cricket and the system of DRS into disrepute and left teams hapless and wondering upon using technology should be taken as a merit or a demerit. Teams are on the ground to play and give their best at everything possible but by the looks of using this technology, it remains absurd that anything given for the love of the game is somewhat questioned by hapless umpiring decisions..

Posted by DarkDeBOSS on (February 2, 2013, 18:09 GMT)

I saw the whole series and i think that what happened today was totally not fair with Pakistan, Misbah didn't even touch the ball but still got out, AB de villiers got Lbw'd by Saeed Ajmal but in the Hot Spot it didn't show the ball touching the bat, but still the decisions was in favor of South Africa. I think that Umpires are being unfair with Pakistan.

Posted by Jigga_Seen on (February 2, 2013, 18:08 GMT)

When Hot Spot did not show any edge yesterday, while South Africa was batting - even it believed to hit the pad, why was it used against Misbah but not against AB?

Posted by IndiaNumeroUno on (February 2, 2013, 18:08 GMT)

Guys - please let us all think logically without trying to be against any board or whatever. How can these decisions and use of such a technology be better for cricket? Think as impartially as you can. This is adding complexity, adding another decision point, adding time, adding cost (and its NOT cheap, this DRS). I actually can't see any use of DRS in its present form for international matches. They need to go away, take time to refine it, test it, make it cost effective and then come back with a better set of data for the ICC to review and standardize the whole system. Even BCCI can't argue against that!

Posted by NAHEEM on (February 2, 2013, 18:06 GMT)

Its a horror day of pakistan test cricket. poor short selction by batsmans..tough decision of misbah...unplayable ball to stuff ma styen gun feeling pity for nasir and rahat. now this match is over for pak they should work hard for next 2games. i think after this tour misbah career is in trouble but every one blaming umar akmal for 30 and 40runs but today we missed his 30 and 40 indeed hope we will get back his place in test team very soon. every one has good days and as well as day but we should support team pak

Comments have now been closed for this article

Email Feedback Print
Firdose MoondaClose
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days