We look back at the year gone by

The DRS: Where do you stand now?

Looking back on 2013, we talk to Sanjay Manjrekar, Daryll Cullinan, Mark Butcher, Sharda Ugra, David Hopps and Sambit Bal about the DRS

Producer: Arya Yuyutsu

December 23, 2013

Posted by VB_Says on (December 27, 2013, 15:52 GMT)

The idea of using technology to "eliminate" human errors is logical. Instead of using it retrospectively, the current hardware will be upgraded to give instant decisions. The on-field umpires would be redundant. Loudspeakers and digital screens will be used to communicate with players.

Posted by   on (December 26, 2013, 4:56 GMT)

It is not the system..but it is the umpires that are not capable of using the DRS...in other words not know how to use it properly

Posted by regofpicton on (December 25, 2013, 3:40 GMT)

To say that DRS can make things worse simple ridiculous. The system cannot possiby turn a good decision into a bad decision, but it can turn some bad decisions into good decisions. Of course some players can make things worse by trying to exploit DRS in inapparopriate ways, but that is the fault of the players, not the system.

Posted by   on (December 25, 2013, 2:02 GMT)

I am absolutely Pro - DRS. It reduces the howlers a lot. And as far as the bad decisions in the Ashes or elsewhere goes(there are very few), if conclusive evidence are not found, then the umpire's decision stays...ri8? which is what would have happened has DRS been not there. For all Indian fans, remember the Sydney Test, we would have won it had DRS been there :D

Posted by Hemanga1 on (December 25, 2013, 1:08 GMT)

Umpire errors consider as part of the game as long as impartial. No one talks about umpire decisions after one or two days.

Posted by   on (December 25, 2013, 0:08 GMT)

Purpose of DRS: To eliminate the "howlers'. Basically, to correct an umpire when there is a very bad decision e.g. Stuart Broad 'ninking' to first slip.

My problem is this, the howlers are obvious issues, but how often do you really see a genuine howler?

Right now, I have no problem with teams using it on the 50/50 calls because rather than correcting an Umpire, it can be used to either back him up or to actually get the right decision.

I agree with Mark Butcher, if you get a 50/50 challenge, ie an "Umpires Call", wrong you should keep your reviews. However, like with any sport that use technology (AFL, NRL, Football (soccer) or Tennis etc), the "3rd Umpire" should have the ability to overturn a 'howler' without a challenge being required.

Use the last ball of the day from Johnson to Carberry that was a half LBW shout. Was given not out and was not reviewed, however, if it had been, it was out. Isn't that also a 'howler' as the decision was wrong and could've changed the result

Posted by kiwi_cricketer on (December 24, 2013, 23:38 GMT)

I personally like the idea of DRS to get the right decision but if it's umpire call then the appealing team should not lose a review. Still keep it at 2 reviews per innings.

Posted by   on (December 24, 2013, 23:17 GMT)

3. Either all test matches should be played with DRS, or none. It should also be applied to stumping and run out decisions for the sake of consistency, and the sake of simplifying the game.

Every time fans see a dismissal like Kallis's in the recent test when there is no DRS in place them frustrated, whichever side they are supporting, when simultaneously in the ongoing Ashes they see such howlers easily overturned. Equally, Broad's non-dismissal under the DRS system was also frustrating. In neither of these two instances was the howler avoided, whereas with the changes I suggest, I feel virtually howlers will be eliminated, and the game will be more approachable to new fans as a result of the simplified system.

Posted by   on (December 24, 2013, 23:07 GMT)

I think a couple of ways to approach the current problems in the DRS system would be as follows: 1. Eliminate hotspot, real time snicko, and any other expensive technology which countries refuse to hand out to countries that are not England or Australia based on 'security' concerns, or are simply too costly to be catered for, as the ICC seems unwilling to stomach the bill. This would make DRS consistent across all test matches. 2. Take the DRS out of players' hands. Players should be playing high quality cricket, not wasting their time learning how to become better than PAID PROFESSIONALS at umpiring. 2 or 3 TV replays will suffice for almost all decisions, and is affordable for all host Test nations. Please stop saying time is an issue, if it is an issue, it is a minor one, especially given how captains around the world don't seem to care for over rates. While a review is being considered, the fielding team should position itself as if the next delivery were to be bowled.

Comments have now been closed for this article

Play Video
A fast bowler who changed the tone of a series

Jan 3, 2014 Sambit Bal, Mark Butcher, Ian Chappell, Mark Nicholas, Jarrod Kimber and David Hopps talk about Mitchell Johnson's searing spells (03:58)

Play Video
Is there too much fuss about sledging?

Jan 1, 2014 Mark Butcher, Ian Chappell, David Hopps, Mark Nicholas, Sanjay Manjrekar and Sambit Bal have their say (03:14)

Play Video
Highlights: England U19 v South Africa U19

Highlights: Action from the 5th Youth ODI between England U19 and South Africa U19, in Derby (06:47) | Aug 22, 2014

Play Video
Highlights: Windies decimate Bangladesh to take series

Highlights: The West Indies bowled out Bangladesh for 70 on their way to a comfortable 177-run win and clinched their three-game ODI series in the process, at St George's (06:35) | Aug 22, 2014

Play Video
'It was a great team effort' - Dwayne Bravo

Interviews: West Indies captain Dwayne Bravo was naturally delighted with his team's performance after their 177-run win against Bangladesh (00:56) | Aug 22, 2014