England v India, 1st ODI, Chester-le-Street September 3, 2011

Dhoni questions DRS handling

ESPNcricinfo staff
214

India's captain, MS Dhoni, has once again voiced his displeasure at the handling of the Decision Review System, after Rahul Dravid fell victim to his third controversial dismissal of the summer.

Dravid, who was playing in his first ODI for two years, made 2 from six balls but had initially been given not out by umpire Billy Doctrove, after Stuart Broad and Craig Kieswetter appealed in unison for a faint edge to the keeper.

Broad was so sure of the edge he immediately signalled for a review before consulting his captain, Alastair Cook. However, the evidence reviewed by Marais Erasmus, the third umpire, appeared inconclusive. Neither of the two Hot Spot cameras picked up any edge, and there was no clear deviation on the slow-motion replay.

However, after a brief consultation with Erasmus, Doctrove decided to reverse his decision, to the clear surprise of Dravid. A few minutes later, Snickometer suggested that there had been some noise as ball passed bat, although under the current provisions of the DRS, that evidence is not meant to be taken into account.

Dhoni has expressed his reservations about the DRS in the past, not least during the last ODI between England and India at Bangalore in the World Cup, when Ian Bell was reprieved by Billy Bowden after advancing more than 2.5 metres down the wicket during a referred lbw appeal. On this occasion, however, he seemed genuinely baffled about the inner workings of the system.

"I still exactly don't know how he was given out," said Dhoni. "Whether they used Snickometer, whether Snickometer is allowed to be used, whether the audio technician gave him out, whether the third umpire gave him out. So it is quite complex. There is a fair amount of questions when it comes to the DRS and if there is still some doubt, why shouldn't go to the batsman."

As for Dravid, his latest extraction followed two eyebrow-raising dismissals in the final two Tests at Edgbaston, where he was caught behind off his shoe lace, and at The Oval, where he was given out caught at bat-pad off Graeme Swann despite a lack of clear evidence. On that occasion, he defused the subsequent row by admitting he had got a thin inside-edge, but this time, he was not so conciliatory.

"He said he had not edged it," Dhoni said. "There was no mark when it comes to Hot Spot. There was no visual deflection as such. And the umpire had given not out. I thought the benefit of doubt goes to the batsman. That is a big thing."

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • on September 6, 2011, 10:12 GMT

    Doesn't English called gentleman? Can't they recall Dravid as Dhoni did for Ian Bell? Is Indian team the only team with such fair play?

  • drsamprasad on September 6, 2011, 8:50 GMT

    Sack DRS.. Save Cricket!!! ENGLAND is so keen on DRS cos its the only way they can get DRAVID out !

  • sahilmalhan11 on September 6, 2011, 7:26 GMT

    Another example what technology can do but human beings can`t..... English team requires technology 2 get dravid out for d third tym......

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on September 6, 2011, 4:29 GMT

    @davidpk, I agree with what you are saying. That's one decision. Isn't it? And it changed the score line of the series. Here we are talking of multiple decisions going repeatedly against the same batsman in top form and his team; but batsman (KP) from the other team, rightfully, getting the benefit of doubt. This doesn't look benign to me. The score line of this series would have been different too. England might have won the series in the end but the score line would be much more respectable for India. The crucial umpiring howlers have taken the sheen off a tremendous performance by the English. This is probably the first time when there is such solidarity between the media, commentators, the public and finally the umpires as well to see to it that India gets beaten real bad. These howlers just don't seem accidental to me.

  • on September 5, 2011, 21:31 GMT

    england r the biggest crybabies i have seen...they will question everything but are not ready when the shoe is on the other foot...to me Aussies are still #1 in any format....Dravid u r truly the gentleman of the game....wiish we had more cricketers like him...hats off to .....u make me love the game for all it's shortcoming..........cheers!!

  • on September 5, 2011, 16:25 GMT

    DRS turning to be DRAVID REMOVAL SYSTEM!

  • Nampally on September 5, 2011, 16:02 GMT

    So much has been credited to the DRS & there are a lot of supporters in these columns. But how does it work? I thought if the DRS is inconclusive, the batsman gets the benifit of doubt and is declared NOT OUT. But Does Umpire has the right to over turn the DRS? If he has, why do we have DRS at all?. It is ironic that the same batsman who happens to be the best scorer in the Cricket today falls a victim three times to the so called DRS which is supposed to get the right decision.In the latest ODI decision, Umpire had given Dravid NOT Out to start with. DRS did not say he was OUT. Why did Umpire reverse his decision? Giving him out caught behnid of shoe laces is attrocious. Bat/Pad when it is only pad is also poor.However in all cases DRS did not give the batsman OUT. It was the Umpire who over ruled the DRS or reversed his call based on inconclusive DRS. Is it Dravid who is unacceptable to Umpires or England selling their case by their vociferous& constant appeals at every opportunity?

  • indianzen on September 5, 2011, 14:35 GMT

    had it been against England, then Cook Bell and Broad would have called the technology naive and would have stopped using it from the 2nd ODI. anyways england would have lost if there were no Rain. India and England are the same, Lions inside the country but lambs outside...

  • on September 5, 2011, 14:24 GMT

    they also do this if it will be PAKSITAN instead of INDIA it could have been ok?

  • bumsonseats on September 5, 2011, 11:35 GMT

    in the last series in SA v eng smith was given not out when if memory serve me on 5 and went on to score 100. they went on to beat england and level the series. a certain 3rd umpire no names. could not see a deviation or heard a noise.the host nations TV broadcaster heard on their mikes a sound and it as shown 10 mins late. low and behold the stump mike that the same no names had not even got it switched on in the 3rd umpires room. as england were beaten by an innings it conjecture but you never know. but on saying that be it the standing umpires or them with the DRS. they can not always get it right. just accept it. i can see the DRS in the long run giving a higher proportion of right decsions right. dpk

  • on September 6, 2011, 10:12 GMT

    Doesn't English called gentleman? Can't they recall Dravid as Dhoni did for Ian Bell? Is Indian team the only team with such fair play?

  • drsamprasad on September 6, 2011, 8:50 GMT

    Sack DRS.. Save Cricket!!! ENGLAND is so keen on DRS cos its the only way they can get DRAVID out !

  • sahilmalhan11 on September 6, 2011, 7:26 GMT

    Another example what technology can do but human beings can`t..... English team requires technology 2 get dravid out for d third tym......

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on September 6, 2011, 4:29 GMT

    @davidpk, I agree with what you are saying. That's one decision. Isn't it? And it changed the score line of the series. Here we are talking of multiple decisions going repeatedly against the same batsman in top form and his team; but batsman (KP) from the other team, rightfully, getting the benefit of doubt. This doesn't look benign to me. The score line of this series would have been different too. England might have won the series in the end but the score line would be much more respectable for India. The crucial umpiring howlers have taken the sheen off a tremendous performance by the English. This is probably the first time when there is such solidarity between the media, commentators, the public and finally the umpires as well to see to it that India gets beaten real bad. These howlers just don't seem accidental to me.

  • on September 5, 2011, 21:31 GMT

    england r the biggest crybabies i have seen...they will question everything but are not ready when the shoe is on the other foot...to me Aussies are still #1 in any format....Dravid u r truly the gentleman of the game....wiish we had more cricketers like him...hats off to .....u make me love the game for all it's shortcoming..........cheers!!

  • on September 5, 2011, 16:25 GMT

    DRS turning to be DRAVID REMOVAL SYSTEM!

  • Nampally on September 5, 2011, 16:02 GMT

    So much has been credited to the DRS & there are a lot of supporters in these columns. But how does it work? I thought if the DRS is inconclusive, the batsman gets the benifit of doubt and is declared NOT OUT. But Does Umpire has the right to over turn the DRS? If he has, why do we have DRS at all?. It is ironic that the same batsman who happens to be the best scorer in the Cricket today falls a victim three times to the so called DRS which is supposed to get the right decision.In the latest ODI decision, Umpire had given Dravid NOT Out to start with. DRS did not say he was OUT. Why did Umpire reverse his decision? Giving him out caught behnid of shoe laces is attrocious. Bat/Pad when it is only pad is also poor.However in all cases DRS did not give the batsman OUT. It was the Umpire who over ruled the DRS or reversed his call based on inconclusive DRS. Is it Dravid who is unacceptable to Umpires or England selling their case by their vociferous& constant appeals at every opportunity?

  • indianzen on September 5, 2011, 14:35 GMT

    had it been against England, then Cook Bell and Broad would have called the technology naive and would have stopped using it from the 2nd ODI. anyways england would have lost if there were no Rain. India and England are the same, Lions inside the country but lambs outside...

  • on September 5, 2011, 14:24 GMT

    they also do this if it will be PAKSITAN instead of INDIA it could have been ok?

  • bumsonseats on September 5, 2011, 11:35 GMT

    in the last series in SA v eng smith was given not out when if memory serve me on 5 and went on to score 100. they went on to beat england and level the series. a certain 3rd umpire no names. could not see a deviation or heard a noise.the host nations TV broadcaster heard on their mikes a sound and it as shown 10 mins late. low and behold the stump mike that the same no names had not even got it switched on in the 3rd umpires room. as england were beaten by an innings it conjecture but you never know. but on saying that be it the standing umpires or them with the DRS. they can not always get it right. just accept it. i can see the DRS in the long run giving a higher proportion of right decsions right. dpk

  • hussrocks on September 5, 2011, 10:55 GMT

    I dont think the technology is at much fault..... the problem lies is how you use it..i guess it just goes on the show the low level of confidence some umpires have, third umpires have the full benefit of the technology unlike onfield one on making the decisions,if they start neglecting hot spot then it will surely lead to stupidity in decision making.

    And as far as dhoni is concerned he has the full right to question DRS whether or not his team is winning or losing.

  • madras_boy on September 5, 2011, 10:39 GMT

    India's emerging players are more than enough to beat this england team. Comeon BCCI, rest dhoni, raina and praveen. Replace them with Pathans, Robin Utappa and another bowler. They should easily beat this england team.

  • mrcool on September 5, 2011, 10:23 GMT

    Even though hot spot didnt show anything,dravid was clearly out..why batsman look at wicketkeeper after playing??Note that I am from india. Team india players should try their luck in bollywood.its true that in test matches 2 decisions were against dravid but this time he was out and he was showing different expressions in dressing room as if he was not out and different expressions on pitch as if he was out.

  • Sakthiivel on September 5, 2011, 10:10 GMT

    @ Mani Nix : As per ICC only hotspot given to 3 rd umpire. You may go and stand as 10 th umpire and give all Zim wicket. Atleast then ur team will win against minnows

  • getsetgopk on September 5, 2011, 9:40 GMT

    this is all the result of that 4 nill drubbing nothing else, an dont worry india fans you'll get through this

  • Philip_Gnana on September 5, 2011, 9:34 GMT

    Is there a case for specialists third umpires, such as a Technology Umpire? Recent events need to be considered in improving the system not going back to the old ways. There is time between balls (if not spinners) for the third umpire to intervene which still gives the umpires the decision making. The third umpire being an umpire himself may be biased against technology and overlook important details and may have a tendancy to go with the flow. Once technology is in place the decision to be given out has to be without doubt. The whole purpose was to get the best decision. This I think can be done by specialist umpires. Philip Gnana, Surrey

  • Philip_Gnana on September 5, 2011, 9:23 GMT

    The matter in question is having responsible umpires. It was not the technology that was at fault but the implementation. The many bad decisions that have been reversed has helped cricket. Human error was supposed to be minimised. Here we find the third umpire making the error which is regrettable when he is there to ensure that the fair decision was made. Many decisions would not go the third umpires if the onfield umpires was strong. The lack of confidence in the onfield umpires will only increase. We has seen decisions where the ball was going to hit middle of middle stump not being given by the onfield umpire which had to be referred to the third umpire. This cannot happen. How bad do you have to be not to give such decisions?

  • reghuh on September 5, 2011, 8:32 GMT

    @ scratching tendulkar and all other goofers, DRS was not supposed to use snicko in the series as simple as that........it was a wrong decision to give Dravid out.....Dhoni has every right to raise his voice....

  • siddharth_r2001 on September 5, 2011, 7:36 GMT

    @Marcio: What has the india-australia game got to do with this series? It was decided before the series that no DRS would be used. and if Laxman came into the game with an injury, Ponting should have refused him a runner. Also the umpires didn't refuse him one, which means his runner was legitimate. And shame on Australia, they had India down to 124/8 and they could not get nos 10 and 11 out, allowing the last 2 wkts to add 92. If you allow a no 10 batsman to bat that long, you don't deserve to win a test, DRS or no DRS!!

  • on September 5, 2011, 7:30 GMT

    out country needs more ppl like Satyajit... after all its just a game of cricket... the team is down at the moment but they surely will rise up soon, after all v did win the world cup folks! ups n downs r part n parcel of life, dun v perform below par at our respective work places sometimes?

  • SatyajitM on September 5, 2011, 7:00 GMT

    Lot of people have voiced their opinion without understanding what Dhoni is saying. He has voiced his opinion on one specific dismissal and is rightly wondering exactly how DRS has been implemented in the series. As per understanding between the two boards the DRS is implemented with hot spot and without snickometer. So, even if snickometer is available with broadcaster the third umpire can't use it. As simple as that. It doesn't matter how the third umpire felt, he had to follow the rule laid down. The orginial decision could have been turned down only if there was conclusive proof about the opposite using the available technology (in this case hot spot). Dhoni's team isn't doing well in the field doen't mean he loses the right to raise the valid questions. This is a classic example when people come heavily on a guy who is already down.

  • on September 5, 2011, 6:32 GMT

    Mr. Dhoni, keep giving excuses but not accepting there defeats. its 5-0 Mr. Dhoni

  • on September 5, 2011, 6:14 GMT

    well said Mannix 16 we forget our own mistakes,DRS saved INDIA in semifainal and because of tat IND won the cup,we have never beaten AUS in AUS just winning in IND did not justify our no.1 position,yes ENG are a better side,but the way they battered IND reminds me the pasting we gave them in '93,still MS has done a great job as captain,but he should not be so reactive ,he is forgetting his art of winning tru BAT not talikng or complaining,the difficult task is to rebuld this team and inject new blood ,where is saurabh tiwary who scored 188 vs AIS,whwn are we going to test them?on docile indian pitches is not fair,we shuld have had shaun pollock as coach not old fletcher and DRAVID can be used as batting consultant after his retirement,AUS have started the path on way to WC 2015 already,this is ore than a wake up call now,OH MS u are the best but restore to your old ways of let the BAT do the talking and ur moves in field cal the shots not complaing for stupid DRS..

  • on September 5, 2011, 6:00 GMT

    @vinod first see the title and according to that you can post ur replies. India is always a better team than any team. Dont compare with the one series lost. India will bounceback

  • R.Senthil on September 5, 2011, 5:10 GMT

    Since broad's father is in ICC panel he is getting everything in favour of him

  • on September 5, 2011, 5:09 GMT

    @Marcio: oh testify, Marcio, testify!! Exactly the things which i said after indias first test win vs aus but for some reason my comments did not get published. Oh and also the same thing happened vs 2nd test against SA

  • on September 5, 2011, 2:24 GMT

    England is a way better team than us at this moment. YOU KNOW

  • Wismay on September 5, 2011, 2:21 GMT

    @kaiser1 Here Dhoni is talking about HANDLING of DRS. Have you read the title? And BCCI opposed DRS. DRS showed Sachin not out! So what should umpire do? Give Sachin out? Then what is the use of DRS? They need to set clear guidelines for every type of dismissals and how to use DRS in those cases till then errors will happen.

  • Marcio on September 5, 2011, 2:11 GMT

    I didn't hear Moany Dhoni whining after India won the first test against AUS in India on dodgy LBW calls and an abuse of the runner rule for Laxman, who won the game with a runner in both innings after coming into the game with a chronic back injury.

  • peteurite on September 5, 2011, 2:06 GMT

    It does matter who you give out wrongfully in the game , any fool can see this?Give out any of your star batsman who win the game for the team? c'mon man?.........and go back and see!!! these kind of decisions has cost a game or games ?? 4-0 could have been different seinario............I know it s happen all the time in MLB also???????????

  • Mannix16 on September 5, 2011, 1:54 GMT

    Seeing some of the comments on this page really makes me sad. Though it did not show on Hot Spot, replays show there was an edge to the naked eye. Why are the Indian Fans so anti-UDRS? If it was not for the UDRS, India would not have even made it to the WC Final when Tendulkar was given LBW by Ajmal on 33. In that case the UDRS saved India, but Pakistan did not argue as much. It really depresses me when I read these comments and the comments from the last 2-3 tours (since South Africa). In the late 90s/early 2000s, Indian Fans used to be one of the nicest fans out there (probably second to only Lankan, South African, and New Zealand fans). Now, just reading some of these comments reminds me of the Australian fans of the 90's/2000s. I used to cheer India/Tendulkar/Ganguly/Dravid on, but after the change in heart of the fans, I find myself wishing for India to lose. Seriously guys, if you changed your attitudes, you would win the heart of the world with your outstanding players.

  • kaiser1 on September 5, 2011, 1:48 GMT

    Dravid has been the victim of course but what about the batters of india? I was baffled by the 3rd umpire's decision when Dravid was given out on review in Edgbaston test which triggered the collapse of indian batting line up but oyhers should step up their effort instead of relying on only Dravid and fuming only his dismissal.

  • on September 5, 2011, 1:43 GMT

    How unfortunate Dhoni is. DRS always goes against him and not any other captain. I feel his pain.. How unfortunate Dhoni is. DRS always goes against him and not any other captain. I feel his pain..

  • kaiser1 on September 5, 2011, 1:32 GMT

    I have a query ? Did they question or dislike the way 10dulkar was given not out on review in the semi final of world cup? Now they are questioning the review system. Where was their conscience in the semi final?

  • kristee on September 5, 2011, 0:16 GMT

    Nothing can be 100 % perfect. There have been instances when a team that would have lost as per D/L method at a stoppage going on to win after resumption. Is it an excuse for doing away with it? Many a howler has been reversed by DRS and it's only frustration that's behind all this whining about it.

  • sabana on September 4, 2011, 21:36 GMT

    Some comments go beyond the core matter of the article. Dhoni was not asked why India lost, he is giving his opinion of the DRS, as experienced by him as the Captain of a top team. Now guys, remember that India does carry heavy financial flak in cricket today and in this century money does talk and everything else walks. If India do not want or trust DRS, please leave them alone with their own views, as they have every right to do so, and stop barking up the wrong tree.

  • NJ68K on September 4, 2011, 20:17 GMT

    I miss the good old days where there was no DRS!

  • BrAvO-Cric on September 4, 2011, 18:46 GMT

    DRS is currently not good enough - simple is that

  • balajik1968 on September 4, 2011, 17:58 GMT

    There are two issues here. One is the interpretation of the 3rd Umpire. There has been inconsistency in this. So that begs the question, do the umpires know how to use the referral system. If not then the ICC must educate them. The second point is that most of the howlers seem to be favouring one team, which looks a little funny. Let us not take credit away from England. They played the better cricket throughout. But one just wonders if the series would have been better contested if not for the howlers.

  • pshar0 on September 4, 2011, 17:21 GMT

    Is it really difficult to come up with rules that govern DRS use? For example - there must be irrefutable evidence to overturn a decision on the field.. Technology will never be perfect, but rules can enforce fairness and lack of perfection. India's reservation against DRS are justified, but the solution is not perfection in technology, which will certainly help, but it seems that DRS rules dont appear to have been thought through. Definitely bad luck to Dravid

  • Evilpengwinz on September 4, 2011, 17:13 GMT

    I've lost all respect that I had for Dhoni on this tour. India for the most part have been terrible, and rather than say "We played badly and need to improve", he's blamed DRS.

    Besides, why is everyone complaining about something which is improving decision making? Who made more mistakes, DRS or the umpires? If there's 3 controversial decisions, then if the umpires have made more than 3 mistakes all series, which they have, then DRS is a good thing.

  • m_ilind on September 4, 2011, 17:12 GMT

    If there is no conclusive evidence from the DRS, the onfield umpire's decision should stay! I hope ICC makes this a law. Two wrongs don't make a right!

  • on September 4, 2011, 16:57 GMT

    India must decide to support the full technology and help resolve any weaknesses in the system. You can't control what you like when you are involve and have another arrangement for other tournaments.The West Indies was always the greatest, never made any rules, but played with what was given them, but were always unbeatable.They theory was to master the field of play.The best example of sportmen with great talent.

  • jackiethepen on September 4, 2011, 16:55 GMT

    I love the way the Indians only question the DRS when it suits them. Bell was not reprieved by Hawkeye. He was actually given not out by the umpire. But Dhoni refused to accept the umpire's decision and appealed. Hawkeye showed that Bell was too far down the pitch to overturn the umpire. So the umpire was upheld. But when the umpire gives in their favour the Indians question any review!! Sounds are less reliable than hot spot. I think the benefit of the doubt should have been given to Dravid but the Indians need to be consistent. Either they want to review or they don't. Make your mind up!! Don't be so partisan that you start making up claims about previous events.

  • on September 4, 2011, 16:33 GMT

    Now a days cricket game is under shadow of sun set.. all set before the game start who will win and who will lose..

  • avmd on September 4, 2011, 16:24 GMT

    Only India has problem with using technology, all other teams are OK with that.

    Oh, yeah, india lost the series due to DRS, otherwise it would have been 4-0 in their favor. Anyother excuse ???

  • Scratchingtendulkar on September 4, 2011, 16:14 GMT

    I'd say this was a good example of DRS working well. Dravid clearly edged the ball and he knew it (note how he instinctively turmed to see if the keeper had caught it). Snicko proved that the correct decision was reached. End of story! I suggest Dhoni and his team concentrate on the massive cricketing deficiencies they continue to show during this tour instead of constantly looking for excuses.

  • FatsterBobster on September 4, 2011, 16:07 GMT

    england and umpires sholdn't be so stupid

  • rajatgupta_indianfan on September 4, 2011, 16:02 GMT

    @Tom.the pads were away from the bat. So was the ball

  • on September 4, 2011, 15:25 GMT

    Dravid is an outstanding player like his fellows Tendulkar etc. Needless to say Indian betting lineup is top class BUT it can't always make up for bowling weakness AND that's precisely what happened in this series......can't blame DRS for this.

    DRS system fortunately or unfotunately is a victim of frustrated Indian fans/cricketers. I really wish they all stand up when this system goes in their favour e.g. wasn't Tendulkar lbw in WC semi final against Pakistan on Saeed's bowling but thanks to DRS etc?? Needless to say Tendulkar's dismissal could have potentially changed the result.

  • cricpolitics on September 4, 2011, 15:09 GMT

    It's all rubbish and becoming a norm for the Indian captain and the team to come up with excuses and whine all the time. Why is it that the DRS is only being criticized when a decision goes against the Indian team? I have not heard Dhoni or anyone else complaining about DRS when an incorrect decision is given in their favor? Indian team need to grow up and concentrate on their game instead. No wonder why they got thrashed by England in the test matches.

  • on September 4, 2011, 15:07 GMT

    Why is that Indian Team is afraid of UDRS? When one was afraid of hawk-eye and one was avoiding hawk-eye and ball trajectory, one shouldn't be complaining about Suresh Rains's inside edge LBW, should they?

  • on September 4, 2011, 14:55 GMT

    Two things - you cannot make anything foolproof because fools are ingenous !!! Second : The LBW rule hjas become very complex. The spirit of the rule was obstruction by the leg of the ball which would have hit the stumps ion the opinion of the umpire. The spirit is now forgotten. You have pitching in line, outside line, etc. etc. The biggest tomfollery is the leg break pitching outside leg stump, and not out when all the world can see it is hitting the stumps. I dont care where it pitches, it can be Timbuktoo for all I care. If it is hitting the stumps in the opinion of the umpire, it is out. Make the rule SIMPLE !!!! Life is hard as it is. Cutr the crap. Let the umpirtes take charge of the game. Let the technology rate the umpires in a TRANSPARENT manner so there are no claims of partisanship. We are all human, and so will make errors. If an umpire keeps repeating errors, ten he does not deserve to be in the middle. We need TRANSPARTENCY everywhere.

  • on September 4, 2011, 14:31 GMT

    Technology is improved a lot..then what's the use of two umpires who are standing in the ground..Then after some years these two umpires also give their decisions from the tv itself,because technology improved lot...

  • on September 4, 2011, 14:13 GMT

    From an outside view, the gentle natured Indian batter Dravid carried half of INdian batting for his share - what the captain needs to ask is what happended to the rest - that is where they lost the series, and not not a good one at that.

    (Not for publication)

  • on September 4, 2011, 13:53 GMT

    dravid did nick the ball, hotspot has it flaws, though the umpire ignored the rules and went with his gut in the end,it was the right decision... dravid played it, everyone saw how he immediately look back after he played the ball and snicko showed the nick,though it cnt be used to review. the bat was nowhere near the pads and the 2 pads didnt rub together,the bat wasnt on the ground either.... he was OUT....

  • Sakthiivel on September 4, 2011, 13:50 GMT

    DRS will be throw to trash bin as its is not correct in England also in Srilanka. As ICC should confirm what technology will be used in DRS as Hot spot never spotted dravids edge. As snicko is not used then how can a third umpire give out. Dhoni is correct. DRS is a big failure..

  • on September 4, 2011, 13:24 GMT

    Well said Sunil Kumar! As Dhoni said, everything has gone wrong for him and the team this tour but he should add that their performance has also been pathetic and England have played some good cricket in the past two months or so. India couldv won the ODI but even the heavens are against that.

  • on September 4, 2011, 13:00 GMT

    @johnathonjosephs, quite a climbdown from UDRS is 100% right..:) dude wherever there is human intervention, there is bound to be mistakes.. if howlers are created with/without technology, what is the difference ? That said, I feel technology is inevitable and the need of hour is to train the umpires so that the obvious blunders like KP in tests/ dravid yesterday are avoided..

  • happycric on September 4, 2011, 12:48 GMT

    No evidence and Dravid given out again. WHAT A SHAME on DRS.

  • happycric on September 4, 2011, 12:47 GMT

    India had a tough luck in this tour. Their absolute chance of a win has gone down due to rain.

  • happycric on September 4, 2011, 12:46 GMT

    DRS has been handled in England in such a way, that no one will agree for DRS in future.

  • randikaayya on September 4, 2011, 12:39 GMT

    Many many more correct decisions were made during this cricket season with UDRS. It will drastically increase the quality of decisions being made and the situation would have been even better had India consented to LBW reviews. Many Indians here are complaining about the Inside-edge LBW against raina!! But one must remember that it was India who objected to reviewing such decisions so they got only themselves to blame!

  • oranjizer on September 4, 2011, 12:16 GMT

    Today if the snicko was RIGHT the hotspot was WRONG, what if tomorrow the hotspot shows a mark but the snicko does not hear a sound. What will the umpire do ? Will he choose hotspot to give the batsman out or will he choose snicko to give him not out. Is nt it unfair if umpire chooses any... he should either decide to give out if any one technology seems to show it as OUT or choose to give it OUT only if all technology conclusively show it as OUT.. I would prefer the second because, the former clearly shows that technology is not upto mark so better not go with any one.

  • on September 4, 2011, 12:04 GMT

    Irrespective of who these decisions are against to or in favor of, such instances can kill the game. UDRS seems good to me, but there should be uniform rules which can help the 3rd umpire take unbiased decisions. As for the dismissal of Dravid on the first ODI, I am sure 99% people would agree it should have been given not out.

  • yorkshire-86 on September 4, 2011, 11:16 GMT

    The problem with DRS is simple. The person uperating the DRS is currently an UMPIRE when it should be a TECHNICIAN. Umpires have NO qualifications whatsoever on using and interpreting the technology. To operate DRS one should have at least 4 Years studying a relevant subject at university, and at least 20 Years work experience in a relevant field. Umpires usually play cricket themselves till they are 35-40, and and go straight into umpiring afterwards. They dont have time to take the 24 Years out of the game needed to be proficiant in handling things like balltracking and IR sensors.

  • on September 4, 2011, 11:03 GMT

    @ khurramsch you are wrong except lords 5th day , all decisions have been against India, @The_Wog you are clearly biased, Broad and England questioned hotspot during tests how did you miss it? Erasmus broke the DRS law by ignoring all evidence but the sound.

  • Wismay on September 4, 2011, 10:51 GMT

    Erasmas in inconsistent in his decision making. Period. Either he is biased or he doesn't understand which is out and which is not. Gives benefit of doubt to Kevin but not to Dravid. He goes according to what he thinks might be the case and not on pure facts.

  • deconstruct on September 4, 2011, 10:38 GMT

    Its pathetic to find the Indians whining about DRS and home team advantage. In the WC semi-final against Pakistan, Tendulkar looked plumb LBW against Ajmal, but to the amazement of everyone (including the commentators), he was given not out by DRS where the ball was shown missing leg stump, though how the hell that could have happened when it was not a regular off-spin but a doosra? As Amir Sohail rightly pointed out on a local channel, the technology was neutral but those handling the technology were not!

  • on September 4, 2011, 10:38 GMT

    If there is no spot on the HotSpot,then Dravid mustve used Vaseline no??

  • on September 4, 2011, 10:26 GMT

    England wanted Dravid to be out. so the 3rd umpire gave him out. Thats it. No more talks on this. If India raise questions..then they are violating the Cricket laws. So keep quiet whenever Dravid is given out.

  • Jayco on September 4, 2011, 10:23 GMT

    That decision was absolutely rubbish. There was no clear evidence the on-field umpire got it wrong. I've noticed in England that the use of DRS is ridiculous...they always look for tiny reasons to give something out instead of obvious evidence that the on-field umpire made a clear mistake. What a farce!! The third umpires are not operating within their directive to only overturn when their is clear evidence. A slight noise with no proof that it came from the bat? What a joke.

  • on September 4, 2011, 10:22 GMT

    @khurramsch: What are you talking about, bad decisions going India's way are you? Well for your kind information, Broad got a hat-trick with a huge inside edge given as lbw, Ian Bell got a reprieve despite being clearly out, Dravid was caught behind off a shoelace, Raina was given out lbw to an edge and Dravid was given out without being out. Where was the English spirit then? They took all of them more then happilly. And the English fans are still gaga over a 4-0.

  • on September 4, 2011, 10:12 GMT

    C'mon guys! you are there to win matches not to find excuses. just play...talk later when u win.

  • on September 4, 2011, 10:07 GMT

    England is using DRS for Dravid Removal System...........

    Bad Luck Dravid......

  • johnathonjosephs on September 4, 2011, 9:44 GMT

    @pkhunter i think you and other Indian fans need to realize that you win some you lose some. Without UDRS there will be mistakes (more without the UDRS than with the UDRS) and the object is not to make a deal out of it. Perfect example is in the West Indies earlier this year. The umpire (forgot his name but he was a well known umpire and was retiring that series) made some decisions against India and they were correct decisions. The Indian team, however did not agree and made a huge deal out of them. Eventually, the umpire could not finish the rest of the tour (even though he was retiring) and was essentially "fired". You can't fire every umpire that makes a mistake just like you can't dismiss Hawkeye over 2 mistakes and 10 saves over 22 days of cricket. Why is it that only India has problems with UDRS? If it was not so reliable, wouldn't the rest of the world also agree? Unless BCCI has special powers that the rest of the world does not.....

  • on September 4, 2011, 9:43 GMT

    please next time dont make any mistakes in smaller things also ..... India total score was 274/7 not 247/7 as shown in dis video at the end please make sure of it ..... espn cricinfo is the best site for cricket no doubt.... so keep it going...

  • sahilakhtar on September 4, 2011, 9:38 GMT

    I think Currently DRS= Dravid Removal System ! Hope For Best In Next Match

  • khurramsch on September 4, 2011, 9:28 GMT

    dravid should not be given out if not 100%. BUT for dhoni & india i would say why dont they raise questions when wrong decisions go in their favor? that time they are happy but when against they question.in test series many wrong decisions went in their favor but they raised questions on the agianst one.

  • deepak_sholapurkar on September 4, 2011, 9:05 GMT

    All these wrong decisions with DRS is due to the human failure nothing to do with technology. I agree that technology need tobe improved but with with available technology Third umpire should be competent enogh to understand the replay's/hot spot and give the decision. If third umpire makes these kind of mistakes even once he should never be allowed to umpire, as its clearly indicates he can't understand the replay.

  • madras_boy on September 4, 2011, 9:02 GMT

    It seems that DRS is for the benefit of the home team ! So, when ENG comes to IND, IND knows how to handle the DRS. Probably Ganguly and Anil Kumble can provide some good comments like Vaughan and Naseer in welcoming their guests !

  • The_Wog on September 4, 2011, 9:01 GMT

    @Gupta.Ankur, sure - if you want to define "wrong dismissals" to include dismissals where the batsman himself says he nicked it then you'll certainly mount a case quickly against UDRS. Frankly, it's Dhoni and the BCCI's repeated attempts to intimidate umpires (successfully, in the case of Billy Bowden) that prove why we NEED technology. Maybe they could just tweak UDRS so that it doesn't apply to Sachin until he gets his 100th 100, and doesn't apply to IND's leading runscorer in the summer than everyone would be happy and we could get on with the game?

    In the real world, Erasmus watched it in full speed as they tend to do, heard the click and communicated that. End of story.

  • Haleos on September 4, 2011, 8:59 GMT

    @Ayaz Noor M - the noise can come by bat hitting the pad.

  • Haleos on September 4, 2011, 8:58 GMT

    @Tendulkars_Tennis_Elbow - the spirit of cricket only applies to Asian teams. Even during the test matches england appealed for every hit on the pad and whenever someone caught the ball before it bounced. If India had done the same they would have been teared apart by the commentators, press and all the ex players.

  • on September 4, 2011, 8:51 GMT

    3rd umpire did the violation of law..simple as that.. for the first time i am with India on this issue. Wrong decision by umpire

  • krici_lover on September 4, 2011, 8:48 GMT

    Wrong decisions are and have been part of the game but these acceptable from onfield umpire, who has to take the decision based on real time action. But if a third umpire with so many replays and time available to him, takes a baffeling decision like this then there is definitly something fishy.

  • on September 4, 2011, 8:45 GMT

    the basic purpose of bringing DRS was to remove howlers but i think its creating howlers and now but i thnk the umpires are giving benifit of doubt to english weather they are batting or bowling dravid dissmal oval and 1st odi sachin run out edbaston 2nd innigs and raina stumping in ova 1st inings i am not telling that is reason y we lost test series still it is a fact

  • on September 4, 2011, 8:14 GMT

    Dhoni is perfectly right and the English men who supported DRS should answer

  • CaughtAndBowled on September 4, 2011, 7:58 GMT

    It is absolutely ridiculous. This is the precise reason DRS is flawed. The benefit of doubt will always go in favour of players from certain countries over subcontinent players.

  • Tendulkars_Tennis_Elbow on September 4, 2011, 7:47 GMT

    Maybe Cook should've called him back.

  • on September 4, 2011, 7:46 GMT

    the noise was conclusive enough to give him out, if Dhoni thinks its not valid, then go and challenge it, take this to the top level rather than just saying it in a pathetic press conference for some 20 seconds.. decisions like this (assuming the snicko was not conclusive enough) and false LBWs have been nothing new to the cricket, so what if another decision is added to that list?

  • on September 4, 2011, 7:33 GMT

    Those who are calling DRS controversial should stop doing that because clearly the system was not responsible for this decision at the end of the day it was the on-field empires decision and third empire must have told him that he heard voice but nothing is clear so if you want to blame someone then go blame Billy Doctrove.

  • 5wombats on September 4, 2011, 7:26 GMT

    The wombats are getting SO tired of the bleating, crowing "conspiracy theory" garbage. Dravid was out, he was given out, snicko said he was out and @rahulcricket007 - you are talking rubbish. Also - turn your caps lock off. I can't wait for the end of this series.

  • rohanblue on September 4, 2011, 7:18 GMT

    although it was a pathetic decision bt still having drs is better fr the game..

  • Fluffykins on September 4, 2011, 6:55 GMT

    Its was a bad decision,but all teams have experienced this for and against, its a good system occasionally misinterpreted by umpires who do not use it correctly to overturn howlers.

    There is no conspiracy, favouritism or game plan by any one or any and to suggest there is is slanderous and childish.

    You will get more of this in DRS until used properly so just get over it and move on.

  • RogerC on September 4, 2011, 6:22 GMT

    The way things are going, DRS will kick the bucket within a year.

  • Gupta.Ankur on September 4, 2011, 6:07 GMT

    I think BCCI's stance against the DRS stands vindicated and all English players and commentators who were criticizing us should now be bold enough to criticize DRS....

    Its quite baffling that how come India's best batsman on this tour keeps getting wrong dismissals?

  • MysterioCharan on September 4, 2011, 6:02 GMT

    This is the most atrocious of all decisions. And how is it that every time India gets something right, the ENglish come up with some way to make sure they deny win to India?! There is some black magic involved here!!! Then even seem to be able to control rain!!!

  • peashcricket on September 4, 2011, 5:32 GMT

    Third umpire have to 100% sure to reverse on-field umpire decision. ICC have to look at that matter before it cause very much.On-form batsman Rahul Dravid given out without 100% evidence ,which can change the game around.I steel don't understand why third umpire made that decision to give Rahul Dravid out....it's really confusing.

  • rahulcricket007 on September 4, 2011, 5:23 GMT

    THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE SAYING THAT SNICKOMETER SHOWS SOME DISTRACTION WHEN BALL PASSES THE BAT SHOULD KNOW WHENEVER BALL PASSES VERY CLOSELY TO BAT (I M NOT SAYING EDGING THE BAT ) SNICKOMETER SHOWS SOME DISTRACTION . SO ON THAT BASIS BATSMEN SHOLUD NOT BE GIVEN OUT .

  • rsurya on September 4, 2011, 5:14 GMT

    Why don't Mr.Cook call back Dravid after given out wrongly so that he can join Dhoni for the fair play award. May be if we zoom the bat to a 400% then we may see a faint white mark to prove evident that he is out. but i think its not done....

  • rahulcricket007 on September 4, 2011, 5:11 GMT

    I M SURE IF INSTEAD OF DRAVID ANY ENGLISH BATSMEN WAS THERE THEN THIRD UMPIRE GIVE HIM NOT OUT BY SAYING THAT THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE . WHY THIS ALWAYS HAPPENS TO A SUBCONTINENT BATSMEN ? THIS IS RIDICULUOS .

  • ssenthil on September 4, 2011, 5:01 GMT

    DRS stands for Dravid Removal System. Great Spirit by England and South Africans

  • rhtdm302 on September 4, 2011, 4:57 GMT

    Muray Irasmus(i hope i got the name right) is from the former ruling community from South Africa. I suppose a bit of the vindictiveness and the bitterness of losing power of the former ruling class is showing through, It is SAD but TRUE! Please put him befor Truth and Reconcialtion Commission.

  • agam99 on September 4, 2011, 4:56 GMT

    When BCCI & Indian players were saying that DRSis not full proof and it requires correction then everyone was coming out for bashing them. Probably now after Dravid incident with Hotspot & Phil Hughes's case with Hawk Eye will make them realize what India said earlier was right.

  • Rezaul on September 4, 2011, 4:47 GMT

    I dont care whether it is Dravid or Sangakara or Shakib, seems to be benifit of doubt always go against them. Is it because they are from subcontinent? I cant remember an incidence when an Aussie or Eng batsman were given out having inconclusive evidence like that. Yes, Erasmus is being involved with quite a few similar decisions and all went against subcontinent players. Wake up ICC....!!

  • sweetspot on September 4, 2011, 4:43 GMT

    Now, all the hype over the DRS lies exposed and all of India's doubts have been vindicated. The technology is nowhere near perfect and the third umpires are making it worse. What kind of dumb decision making process is still keeping this nonsense in place? Let's throw this system out for now and rely on umpires till the technology and the usage system catches up.

  • on September 4, 2011, 4:38 GMT

    This is not a new story. Every time the Iindian batsman who is in great form, had been victim of poor umpiring. Earlier it used to be Sachin. This time Dravid is in great form thats why he was given out three times incorrectly.

  • on September 4, 2011, 4:33 GMT

    @Tom Haynes I don't know if it was out because I really didn't hear anything but even with your logic the batsman is always given the benefit of the doubt. Imagine if Jonathan Trott was given out in a similar fashion. The english would certainly be talking about it.

  • on September 4, 2011, 4:14 GMT

    Its rediculus ! if there is no fair evi dence to overule a decision,they why it is being reverse? & also snikometer is not used in DRS AS PER THE NEW ICC RULES OF DRS, IF ON FIELD UMPIRE NOT HEARING A SOUND,HOW CAN A 3RD UMPIRE GIVE IT ON VERBLE EVIDENCE?

  • Aravind_always on September 4, 2011, 4:04 GMT

    I still think UDRS is good,it has no problem.But the problem is with the umpires who uses it.I don't think someone like Aleem Dar would give that out. They should reverse the decision only when technology proves that 100%.Poor Dravid,always a victim of poor umpiring..

  • abhi_cricinfo on September 4, 2011, 4:01 GMT

    When commentator said 3rd umpire is Erasmus from South Africa , I knew decision will be in favor of England :)

  • on September 4, 2011, 4:01 GMT

    Well...I find no reason why everyone is so shocked about all this... It is a well known fact that only England can never win the match even against Ireland/India C(leave India, India A, India B sides)...they need a KP(from SA), Strauss(SA again), Prior(SA once more), Morgan(Ireland) to beat India A in tests.. And now in onedayers...they needed Stokes(NZ), Dernbach(SA) also..to loose with atleast a little bit of respect.. They needed about 6 wrong decisions to demoralize a half Indian attack..You are on cloud 9...be there have fun..but it is gonna be a really short stay...!!!

  • on September 4, 2011, 3:56 GMT

    England know it is difficult to out Rahul David so making some thing wrong including the third umpire.It is totally unfair...what is the use of Hot spot technology..Major decisions are favoring England this season..why is this so happening..The ICC must look on to this issue and take appropriate actions before it gets worse.

  • on September 4, 2011, 3:53 GMT

    snickometer evidence can not full proof although it was not involved in DRS in this series. if they are using unauthersised then what the use of making rules and paying such a huge amount of hot spot.snickometer evidence can not full proof although it was not involved in DRS in this series. if they are using unauthersised then what the use of making rules and paying such a huge amount of hot spot.

  • Vnott on September 4, 2011, 3:45 GMT

    As a process, it is quite baffling how a batsman can be given out without conclusive evidence. It is even more strange that is happening to the same batsman , Dravid in this case - though we can attribute that to a strange coincidence. 3rd Umpires have to be taught to learn common sense and not senseless interpretation. It is the acts of these umpires which makes DRS quite inconsistent. Clearly shows a need of umpires needing serious training to improve decision making.

  • rnarayan on September 4, 2011, 3:39 GMT

    Don't blame DRS alone. No amount of technology will help if the Umpire (the TV umpire in this case) makes a mistake.

  • on September 4, 2011, 3:39 GMT

    Cricket umpiring is a complete mess and we can thank the techno-freaks in cricket for all this. Get rid of all technology, get rid of bad umps like Erasmus, and work on introducing technology carefully using experts (aka not the vendors) and with full understanding of umps, players and countries. What is going on now is a an absolute circus led by the ICC as its ringmaster. BCCI has been right all along and all the others who supported DRS are looking impulsive. That is not cricket.

  • rajkumar002 on September 4, 2011, 3:27 GMT

    this DRS system is meant only to favor England wether it be Ian Bell against India or be Gary Wilson against West Indies (if he wasn't out then Ireland would have qualified instead of England. And its happening to Dravid in approximately each and every match of this series as getting him out otherwise will be a impossible task for England.

  • SanjivAwesome on September 4, 2011, 3:17 GMT

    DRS technology is owned by an English company. Figures.

  • Kunal-Talgeri on September 4, 2011, 3:16 GMT

    The cricket establishment has been very well-prepared to handle the tourists this season: the Andys, the cricketers, the support staff, the umpires, the Press, and the technologies. Hats off to the solidarity. It's rare when technology can evoke the Dark Ages of umpiring in cricket.

  • on September 4, 2011, 3:14 GMT

    english team was ganna get smashed today lucky for them it rained, bad luck for india continues. and its clearly obv that umpires are favoring the english, had the umpires been favoring the indians the english fans andmedia would have killed it by posting bias comments , i wonder y their all quit now? anyhow india is ganna kill india in odis thats for sure despite injuries, they still have better bench strainght then the english in odi's

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on September 4, 2011, 3:12 GMT

    @pom_don, how do you know the third umpire uses different pictures and sounds? He uses the same pictures, be it hotspot, or square angle for runouts, or slo-mos, and the high definitions. Moreover Snicko is not even part of it. Twice on each occasion different technologies were proved wrong by Dravid, he nicked once - no hotspot (part of DRS), he didn't nick this time - some sound through stump mic (part of DRS), noise on snicko (not part of DRS) and with no hotspot (part of DRS). So, there's no reliability and validity regarding the dubious technologies that are being offered, hotspot proven wrong the first time and stump mics/snicko proven wrong this time. People want this kind of a dubious snicko to be made available quickly and be incorporated in DRS! Hawk-eye is a joke. Let's not even go there. All this assuming that Dravid isn't a liar. But isn't that how we test the technology - the human says what he did and what he didn't? These are enough grounds to throw DRS in a trash bin.

  • mjanjua on September 4, 2011, 2:59 GMT

    It seems like India is paying the price for Tendulkar's lbw decision which was given not out in the World Cup!

  • sarosh_siddiqui on September 4, 2011, 2:54 GMT

    India was lucky because of weather, otherwise England won that match easily. Please don't cry, concentrate on cricket.

  • hp32 on September 4, 2011, 2:54 GMT

    Once again England's best players(umpires) have screwed India. On the last tour of England, Tendulkar was targeted and now its Dravid's time. No surprise here. Broad acts like a little kid when a decision goes against him but never gets punished. Praveen Kumar does the same and he gets fined. No surprise here at all to see decisions going in favor of England.

  • InswingingToeCrusher on September 4, 2011, 2:53 GMT

    @Pom_Don Tennis does not use DRS for predective technology. It uses it to judge where the ball actually landed. DRS for cricket is much more complex (especially predicting the path of the ball), hence these are not apples for apples. Even the best umpires are questioning it now. We must give BCCI credit in taking leadership on the issue and bringing on a discussion which will ultimately benifit cricket and DRS technology. Personally, I believe it should be used where we can increase the accurary of decisions. However, it should be icc controlled and for a more limited purpose. It MUST also be independently tested. It must be implemented in domestic first (where it is cost prohibitive though) to test. That is how most cricket is tested before coming to international stage.

    In the noise against a particular board and country, we should not undermine crickets interest. Why does the DRS not publish its research, have the acedemics look at it.

  • Palaash on September 4, 2011, 2:30 GMT

    What if it was an LBW appeal and Dravid was given out. Had he reviewed it, saying he had edged it, would it have been reversed based on just the audible click?

  • phoenixsteve on September 4, 2011, 2:23 GMT

    As much as I hate to agree with MSD (i'm kinda tired of Indian whining and lame excuses) on this occasion HE IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!!! OK- Dravid may have been out following snicko evidence, but on the agreed evidence such as Hotspot and multiple camera replays, the Umpires decision should NOT have been reversed. On behalf of like minded English cricket supporters "SORRY Mr Dravid and sorry to all Indian followers" this was wrong and just not 'cricket'........

  • NumberXI on September 4, 2011, 2:17 GMT

    The most amusing part is people declaring "Dravid was out" as if it were fact when all the evidence does conclusively show that. I think people like that (Trickstar, Dravid-smashed-it- gloves71, et al) realize that when technology makes the whole thing look a bit shambolic, passing off opinion, or worse, bias, as fact is one very effective way of keeping a lid on it. I think the issue here isn't whether Dravid was out - there was enough doubt among the commentators on that count - David Lloyd felt there was no nick, Bhogle felt there was. The issue is whether the technology which is being used to have a go at Indian cricketers, fans and BCCI is reliable at all. So far, it has proven to be as reliable as a lie detector test - and to blame the umpire for the outcome is an admission that technology doesn't have the best answers. Over a space of three days - HawkEye in Sri Lanka and HotSpot yesterday, cricket's much-touted techno-panacea has looked incomplete, if not downright pathetic.

  • Jazz_Indiasupporter on September 4, 2011, 2:07 GMT

    well let me just say that when i was watching that 2day and saw that wicket being given, i was extremely vexed. that type of thing should be out of the question!

  • on September 4, 2011, 2:06 GMT

    Throughout the series this has gone on.in lord's kp's original out decision was reversed despite no evidence as benefit of doubt went to the batsman.the same benefit seems to go to the bowlers when india are batting.now we are helpless.later in the year when they come here,we can make our presence felt.

  • ramab on September 4, 2011, 1:48 GMT

    @jonanthonjosephs - Why does the freak dismissal or incorrect dismissal always given to Indian batsmen and not English? Is this a coincidence or a pattern? To name a few - Dravid 3 times (2 in tests and 1 in ODI so far), Harbajhan lbw (off inside edge) - looks like Erasmus is involved in all of these. Now Simon Tafuel is raising questions about Hawk eye in Aus-SL test (but nothing about the supposed inside edge in Oval test - I believe he was the umpire there).

  • Vishal_07 on September 4, 2011, 1:46 GMT

    I don't think these wrong decisions cost India the series, however, it is very suspicious that all the wrong decisions have been against Indian batsmen. Didn't the MCC make a rule that benefit of doubt should go with the batsman.

  • RogerC on September 4, 2011, 1:45 GMT

    DRS = Dravid Removal System. Well said. When South Africa tours England, will it be called KRS?

  • on September 4, 2011, 1:41 GMT

    why dravid only dravid only given out all the time in the in this tour...... small kid also know the answer..... in the past aussies did...now its eng turn.... they want to win at any means.....

  • on September 4, 2011, 1:37 GMT

    i think this is also the game plan of english team with umpires......

  • Prasad38 on September 4, 2011, 1:33 GMT

    Mr Jonathanjospeh . . . . . We are not crying for what happened !!!! Jus waking them and making not to do that again.

  • KjM4trix on September 4, 2011, 1:25 GMT

    A batsman should be given out only when there is conclusive evidence that he is out. If there is doubt, the benefit of the doubt should go to the batsman.

  • BnH1985Fan on September 4, 2011, 1:23 GMT

    Come on -- if India was on the winning side there would be no talk about DRS or umps

  • TheUltimateTruth on September 4, 2011, 1:22 GMT

    Snicko is rightly not part of DRS because it's not a tool that can be reliably used to overturn the on field umpire's call. Simultaneous noise can come from many sources other than bat striking ball. That's why we need Hot Spot. If there is no evidence on Hot Spot it's not out. Those who say "Indians should stop complaining and start playing better cricket," are clearly showing their inability to come up with a convincing response to the valid point raised by the Indians. Forget about how well they are or should be playing and respond to the concern being raised!! The third umpire has made a very poor call -- indefensible since it was not even an on field call.

  • Redbacks_Bite on September 4, 2011, 1:18 GMT

    @Rano Gill, We all have seen how England Media react. In such incident, Egland media would have been up on the roof and slaming ICC and umpires. It would have been national issue for England. We have seen all these during Pakistan series in England last year..

  • on September 4, 2011, 1:16 GMT

    @pm_don

    If it is made mandatory then India will have to accept it and live with it. But till such time, like every one else, India will have an opinion and every one else should learn to respect it. If the ICC makes it mandatory, we will be having a different discussion.

  • Swamin on September 4, 2011, 1:09 GMT

    If this has happened to England they would have been crying in the field. All the players would have went to the umpire.The coach & the captain will go to opposite captain to reverse the decision.POOR INDIA.CLEVER ENGLAND.

  • pkhunter on September 4, 2011, 1:04 GMT

    @johnathonjosephs, the idea is not to lament this decision and cry over it. India has clearly "moved on". The idea is to learn from the idiocy shown by the Third Umpire Inc in this case and avoid it in the future. Believe it or not, and this might be difficult for you, but this is the way adaptive learning occurs.

  • Fijicricket on September 4, 2011, 1:02 GMT

    Is this video ref Eramus in any way related to a STEVE BUCKNOR? They have similar brains

  • indiaworldchamps2011 on September 4, 2011, 0:59 GMT

    @trikstar...how can u say that dravid was out wen he himself said tht he was not out... and mind u he said he was out last time even though according to DRS he was not out so we cannot question his words... n as far as the sound is concerned it cud be anything.. basic point here was that there was no evidence to overturn the decision.. so y use the technology wen u r goin to ignore it.. n wen we think abt peterson's decision it looks more n more fishy.. this selective use of technology is not goin to help.. there shud be set protocols for each umpire...

  • on September 4, 2011, 0:55 GMT

    @jonathonjosephs Dravid deserves to get out for not tying his shoe and Bell deserves to be not out for being an idiot? Ah, The English hypocrisy. You guys are gonna fall soon and when you do we'll be there.

  • on September 4, 2011, 0:46 GMT

    "I still exactly don't know how he was given out," said Dhoni. "Whether the audio technician gave him out"......LOL

  • criclover999 on September 4, 2011, 0:40 GMT

    gerardpereira20 absolutely spot on tht deciion changed the whole test .

  • on September 4, 2011, 0:36 GMT

    i am like hell perturbed by the comment of these english hypocrites and please post my comment...to all english fans you are just too lucky if you accept it,,you get wrong decisions your way in crucial situations and as a result you are shouting,,Why does ICC not take any action against this bloody mirasmas,,and english you know rain saved you today...

  • on September 4, 2011, 0:36 GMT

    i am like hell perturbed by the comment of these english hypocrites and please post my comment...to all english fans you are just too lucky if you accept it,,you get wrong decisions your way in crucial situations and as a result you are shouting,,Why does ICC not take any action against this bloody mirasmas,,and english you know rain saved you today...

  • on September 4, 2011, 0:32 GMT

    Indian cricketers are payed tons of money. If they surrender their wicket they will listen to the music. However if given out in such circumstance some one needs to be accountable. The Indian fans are right in going after the umpires scalp. Let the cricketers dig their own grave. Otherwise we cant hold these cricketers accountable when they can easily pass on the blame to the DRS. Third umpires were helpful in deciding the run outs. LBW is a controversial decision any day no matter who gives it. The best way is to codify a standard technology that can remove the human error and decisions are fair for all. The computer decides if it is an LB or not based on the set algorithm. For nicks use the large screen for the ground umpires to decide rather than let a TV umpire decide. This gives the captain a chance to withdraw such appeal in the interest of fair cricket. I am sure Cook would have withdrawn that appeal.

  • SanjivAwesome on September 4, 2011, 0:30 GMT

    Thank goodness that they stress-test all aircraft technology before it is allowed to be used in the real world, before passengers board the aircraft with their children to go for a summer vacation. The bumbling ICC is quite happy to allow us to board their aircraft with the motto "In God we trust, technology well she'll be right, mate!"

  • rahulkmc on September 4, 2011, 0:24 GMT

    Let the same happen to any English or Australian, I am pretty sure they would take it in the stride. Not recently did the English escalate the matter that 'hot -spot' didnt pick up a snick they heard!, if that were Indians, they would have to just deal with it, if its from these two countries, then there should a full inquisition. Just give up guys, its no good fighting over it, it always goes England and Australia's way :). We have all witnessed all the bullshit hot spot and ball tracking systems have shown in the recent/ongoing series. Do we really want to spend so much money to get these and make 'australian' companies richer?

  • Vinod on September 4, 2011, 0:14 GMT

    If any English player had been given out in this fashion, they would have cried like babies! Why two different set of rules for India and England ?

  • pruffhill on September 4, 2011, 0:11 GMT

    DRS is stupid. it is a fail. I do not know why there is a 2.5 meter rule for lbws. If the technology says its hitting then hes out. before the technology you could say a batsman was forward and couldnt give him out based on that as you dont know whether it'll be hitting. Now you have technology to say its hitting and you can be saved by being 2.5meters forward. They never showed us or even mentioned how forward sachin tendulkar was when he was given on 91. All nasser said was good decision. It was a terrible decision from the naked eye. when laxman was given not out the english believe the technology has a fault, when it happens to an indian people say move on and dont cry. india have had a bad series, the only bad series in 2 years. England you aint number one, it wont last as you are a lack lustre bunch who will suffer in asian conditions.

  • here2rock on September 4, 2011, 0:04 GMT

    It is a plot to beat India.

  • on September 3, 2011, 23:52 GMT

    some people say that these are excuses.......let me remind why people in stadium cried in stadium for bellĀ“s careless way and initially got out......just by fit players and local conditions feel that england is top.....in months time.....they will come down from cloud 9......today luck (rain ) saved them.....lets see in next matches .....even after players non regular players making good scores......tough task ahead.......

  • indianpunter on September 3, 2011, 23:42 GMT

    Technology is only as good as the people interpreting it. This interpretation is baffling, to say the least. Completely agree with serious am i. Snicko is not part of DRS. In the first test, Pietersen was given out by the on field ump, but the decision was overturned due to lack of a "hot spot" and here again, the on field not out is overturned, and there isnt anything on "hot spot". Blanket application of DRS without its veracity being ascertained is only going to fuel the fire. We know whats happened in SL with ball tracker

  • on September 3, 2011, 23:39 GMT

    I love the long line of excuses India makes for incompetency. If every other country in the world is satisfied with taking on the UDRS system because it assists umpires and has the ability to change the face of the game I wonder why India object so strongly. Oh yeah because they have no bowlers and only have batsmen how blasphemous a creation to have been incorporated into cricket only because it gives benefits to bowlers. It levels the game, it makes mistakes just like real umpires do. At the end of the day its still the umpires (including the third umpire) who make the decisions. Really sucks for Dravid and since he's my favorite Indian player that was sucky to me too but whatever life goes on.

  • pom_don on September 3, 2011, 23:33 GMT

    I bet if this decision (Dravid's CORRECT decision) had been given against an England player the Indian fans would have been over the moon.....just accept what the rest of the world teams accept!

  • johnathonjosephs on September 3, 2011, 23:29 GMT

    God, people bringing up Snicko and the "Shoelace" incident. Dravid deserved to be out for not knowing how to tie his own shoe laces properly. Probably would have tripped on them and got run out next ball anyways Freak dismissals always occur, but MOVE ON and STOP CRYING ABOUT IT.

  • on September 3, 2011, 23:16 GMT

    For once, I have to admit that the BCCI ( perhaps for the wrong reasons, but whatever) got it right in opposing the introduction of the DRS. Hawkeye produced shambolic images in the Galle Test match between Sri Lanka and Australia, and Hotspot has definitely hit a very cold spot. For those who are accusing the Indians of being "crybabies", remember that England complained long and hard when Laxman was given not out in the Test series because Hotspot did not show any contact (and that third umpire was sensible enough to abide by the technology), and then their ex-captain, Michael Vaughan, infamously accused Laxman of using vaseline.

  • Rajesh.jk on September 3, 2011, 23:09 GMT

    Its not about Indians crying about DRS. Sometimes its good to leave it to the judgement of a human who is qualified to do that. In the Test Match between Australia and Sri Lanka the tracking was questioned even by the umpires. People behind the technology may not have the same ethics and knowledge or unbiased judgmental capabilities of a Qualified Umpire. Hot Spot looks faultless. Snickometer should show a reading if the ball is too close to the bat ie, really close. Use the technology to Judge the Umpires. No If's But's May be's or anything it should be 100% clear to give anything out. And if its not conclusive benefit of the doubt must go to the batsman.

  • samincolumbia on September 3, 2011, 23:06 GMT

    How come India has to live with the incompetence of these umpires? Where is the ICC to monitor the umpire's performance? I am sure if this had happened to an english/aussie player, the press, fans and players would be up in arms doing their favorite thing - blame the BCCI!!

  • kumarcoolbuddy on September 3, 2011, 23:04 GMT

    @luqman255, answer for your question is why is it always Indians especially Dravid as victim of this senseless DRS. Dhoni is just raising a genuine question on DRS with clear evidence. if you donno the difference between crying and raising a concern please go back and see how Andy Flower, Broad, Michael Vaghuan, Ian Botham behaved and cried at DRS regarding LBWs and edges in 2nd test. That is called crying at DRS. They made it as very big issue and necessarily insulted Indian players without any reason just because of DRS.

  • gerardpereira20 on September 3, 2011, 22:53 GMT

    The problem is not DRS it is Erasmus. The Guy gave Pietersen not out when caught by Dravid on 49 and Pietersen goes on to get 200 and now he gives Dravid out when doubts remain as to wether he nicked the ball. Is Erasmus the new Bucknor. The BCCI should step on this guy before he does more damage to Indian cricket.

  • serious-am-i on September 3, 2011, 22:50 GMT

    some are repeating like morons snicko got it right, snicko got it right, snicko got Dravid out in the shoe lace incident. Snicko doesn't give u proof that its bat only & for the records snicko is not part of UDRS, so stop blabbering and supporting a faulty technology. @luqman: That's because India has been on the wrong side of DRS decisions from the very first decision it made in SriLanka where sehwag was given out.

  • on September 3, 2011, 22:47 GMT

    BCCI seems to be vindicated by this extremely controversial decision. ICC has to clean up its act in bringing a strict code for DRS. If there is a loud noise, logically there should be a hot spot and/or a deflection. Marais Erasmus, you owe an explanation to a billion fan who indeed pay your wages. I can understand if the ground umpires erred in the heat of moment. But surely not the third umpire.

  • pom_don on September 3, 2011, 22:46 GMT

    BTW what the third umpire sees or HEARS is not the same as we see or hear & he was convinced Dravid was out....which he was as Snicko clearly showed afterwards so HE GOT IT RIGHT! If the same had gone against England I would accept it every time why not

  • pom_don on September 3, 2011, 22:43 GMT

    Nothing wrong with DRS, it needs honing & this will only be done by using it......it gets more of the decisions right than just the umpires on their own...it is very obvious that the Indians will/would not benefit from it's use for LBW decisions....all I can say is TOUGH....just learn to play properly (i.e. play the ball) & you will be OK, why does every other team accept it & not India I think that they should be read the rules...play with it or don't play it's not for them to make the rules it is for them to obey them! Tennis uses the system & it works well there!

  • gloves71 on September 3, 2011, 22:40 GMT

    Agree totally with landl47 - I fail to understand why referrals were brought in in the first place. Oh, and by the way, Dravid smashed it. Stop your moaning and concentrate on playing better cricket.

  • on September 3, 2011, 22:37 GMT

    India' stand on drs was right all along.Let see when umpire will give England' batsmens out like that how will english media reacts

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on September 3, 2011, 22:24 GMT

    DRS = Dravid Removal System; DRS = Dump the Ridiculous System; anymore apt abbreviations? Wait a minute folks! Who is to gain with this money? To whom does this technology belong to? I think, I know the answers. It's the Companies that produce this garbage that are making millions. It's a ghastly site in cricket to see a Dravid or a Sachin question the umpires. And what we get at the end of it? Garbage!

  • on September 3, 2011, 22:23 GMT

    I do not think problem is with technology. But application of it. The human interruption is not correct. The benefit of doubt should have without conclusive evidence. For that when the regeral was made why did not check whether the keeper caught it cleanly. Nosie could have come due to various other factors as explained by commentators. So even if you have technology 100% correct the incompetency of human umpires can not be ruled out. So do not blame DRS or technology for human interpretations

  • luqman255 on September 3, 2011, 22:21 GMT

    why is it always Indians or their fans crying about DRS?

  • on September 3, 2011, 22:15 GMT

    i do admit with Dravid_Gravitas: respect umpire and respect the cricket. no DRS RUBBISH, people get confused.

  • mudd on September 3, 2011, 22:11 GMT

    this time rahul was ruled out bcoz it was broad who asked for review...guess!!! DRS is not only about technology...but also about who is handling it and against whom....Indians should never agree for DRS

  • Shan156 on September 3, 2011, 22:09 GMT

    There is no pleasing Indians - earlier when they lost, it was because the umpires were biased and the whole world was conspiring against them. Now, we use technology, none of the umpires involved are English and if one of two decisions go against them, again they sing the same tune. I agree there were a few howlers in the test series but quite a few went against England too. Regarding Dravid's two controversial dismissals, first the shoelace - Dravid had an option to review it. Is it England's fault that he didn't review it?. In case of the second dismissal, he himself admitted to a thin edge.

    Now some Indian fans claim that we should respect the umpire's decision and admit that they will make mistakes. Sydney 2008 anyone?

  • on September 3, 2011, 22:06 GMT

    absolute nonsense - Dravid given out when he was not by DRS......... no wonder BCCI and Dhoni & co doesn't want it.... we have seen what had happened.......

    time to Dump the Ridiculous System!

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on September 3, 2011, 22:03 GMT

    Nobody needs a broken technology at such a high price. Waste of millions of dollars of cricket crazy public money. It is proved that snicko/stump mics, hotspot (in case of Dravid) and hawkeye (Lolll...in Sri Lanka) are garbage. Scrap DRS and learn to respect umpire and Cricket, if you will.

  • on September 3, 2011, 22:01 GMT

    give me caught behind the wicket, i m from INDIA!!

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on September 3, 2011, 21:59 GMT

    @Sudarshan Charkravarthy, I too thought on similar lines. Yes the two technologies proved wrong with the two successive dismissals of Dravid and hawk-eye is the biggest joker in technology. Otherthing DRS = Dravid Removal System was hillarious but how apt! He was wrongly adjudged out twice in two innings.

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on September 3, 2011, 21:55 GMT

    Assuming that Dravid isn't lying, last time Dravid said he THOUGHT he nicked - nothing showed up on hot spot - so hotspot is wrong. This time he said he DIDN'T nick it, snicko showed some noise today, so snicko is wrong. hawkeye proved to be laughing stock in Sri Lanka. So bottomline, Dravid's two dismissals prove beyond a reasonable doubt that hotspot and snicko are unreliable and the whole unbiased world knows that hawk-eye is a piece of garbage. Scrap this broken technology if it such a junk. Respect the umpires and go out with your heads held high. What a shame! After questioning the heritage and authority of the umpires, we are being dished out junk decisions.

  • Mcgrath-Dravid-Flintoff on September 3, 2011, 21:50 GMT

    DRS stands for Dravid Removal system

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on September 3, 2011, 21:49 GMT

    What is baffling is the inconsistency Are they using hotspot? or stump mics or what is it that they are using to deciiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide? Let ICC tell us what is being used to decide to change the on-field umpire's caaaaaaaallllllllllllll................

  • on September 3, 2011, 21:48 GMT

    I fail to understand why England, and more specifically the ever more controversial Nasser Hussain feel India's position on the UDRS is a disgrace. It goes all the way back to the start. Against Sri Lanka, the system was appalling. In the World Cup, the decision against Bell was dreadful. In the test series, it somehow found a way of getting worse. And then today was the most inexplicable decision of all. I personally loved the system and didn't understand the BCCI stance on it. Now, I increasingly do.

  • on September 3, 2011, 21:47 GMT

    Surprising why Dravid is always the victim, is it cause he denies to get out without a good performance?

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on September 3, 2011, 21:44 GMT

    That was a poor decision against Dravid. Without any conclusive evidence how can the decision be changed? This is appalling. Everything pertaining to cricket is being thrown in the trash bins. Umpires are being questioned by players. OK agreed, the days have changed and all. But after questioning them, what's the point in getting the decision changed without conclusive evidence? This is appalling. Dravid himself said he didn't touch it. Hotspot didn't show it either. Where's the evidence to change the decision?

  • on September 3, 2011, 21:44 GMT

    stop moaning India and get on with it.

  • Alexk400 on September 3, 2011, 21:40 GMT

    This time Dhoni is correct. UMPIRES ARE CONFUSED how to apply the rule. Have to simplify the rules. Too many rule make anyoe head roll.

  • landl47 on September 3, 2011, 21:37 GMT

    Snicko strongly suggested the third umpire got it right and he was out. However, as long as this referral nonsense is in place these issues are always going to arise. The players should appeal, the field umpires and the third umpire should confer and the decision should be issued. No referrals and no overturning of decisions- just one decision using whatever technology is available to assist the 3 umpires. The umpires regain complete control of the game and there are more correct decisions. Parthiv should have been given out LBW, but because of the foolish DRS rules governing this tour he wasn't. Under the rules I have suggested, the right decision would have been reached. The umpires really need to take a stand on this, the ICC is undermining their authority when it is not necessary to do so. Leave the umpires in charge, just make it three of them instead of two.

  • on September 3, 2011, 21:18 GMT

    it was poor decison again against india , realy cheap decison when lan beel was called back from indian team every english player was on about we would have done same?but y dont their players talk now that DRS given india bad decisons y cant the b honest and talk about that now??and if u really c lan bell was that day out but dravid was nt all 3 times but no english player is saying any thing now

  • ShyCric on September 3, 2011, 21:09 GMT

    I feel Dhoni is absolutely right. The decision is inconclusive and clearly the Umpires made a mistake. What is the use of technology then. Seems all international umpires need to attend a workshop with Case studies from all the technologies used. How can there be inconsitency between Snicko and Hot Spot ? All softwares need validations.

  • on September 3, 2011, 21:01 GMT

    "He said he had not edged it," Dhoni said. //

    i am waiting for this sentence...then DRS is in big trouble....that means that snicko meter is wrong...!! In the last innings of the test match, hot spot didn't show anything...but he said he nicked it...!! Now nicko showed something, he is saying that he didn't nick it...!!

    So Dravid proved two vital technologies wrong, which r used in DRS with his last two dismissals.

    With hughes dismissal it is proved that ball tracker is also wrong...n what ever the path it shown was really absurd...So All the three technoligies r proven wrong in a span of 15 days..!!

    then...BYE BYE DRS- Dravid Removal system..!!

  • SagirParkar on September 3, 2011, 21:00 GMT

    i agree with Dhoni... even with DRS there have been so many inconsistencies... there is no problem in having DRS... the problem lies in its execution and the inconsistency with which it is implemented from one series to another...

  • serious-am-i on September 3, 2011, 20:43 GMT

    now where are the English fans to counter attack Dhoni and support DRS. DRS is becoming into a farce, come on suspend it and improve the technology. Just few days back the horror decisions came for Phil Hughes when u can see the ball spinning but hawk-eye stated it was going on straight, even Sachin's lbw escape against Ajmal in the WC could be raised over here

  • Trickstar on September 3, 2011, 20:43 GMT

    This is getting ridiculous from the Indians, the first point is, Dravid was out simple as that, the right call was made, Snicko proved that he edged it, secondly the 3rd umpire uses these new high quality stump mics and it's that what he gave Dravid out on. At the end of the day alot of umpires give caught behinds off sound and so why can't the 3rd umpire, when just recently the stump mics have been upgraded to ones that are far better. The funny thing is, it was the Indians that wanted the hotspot rather than Hawkeye, even though those that had used both said Hawkeye was the better of the 2 technologies. Like that has been said from the very beginning and which the Indians fail to gasp, you need to all the technology at hand to make the best calls, so imo it's really dishonest to moaning all the time, when it was them that pushed fore this hybrid UDRS. Us all the technology and stop this nonsense.

  • A_Vacant_Slip on September 3, 2011, 20:27 GMT

    "Dhoni questions DRS handling" - shouldn't this read; "Competent Wicket Keepers question Dhoni's handling"? LOL.

  • AussiDesi on September 3, 2011, 20:26 GMT

    I commend Dhoni for not being afraid to raise this issue. In my view India should continue to lead the debate against DRS. In the recent past it seems India was trying to avoid being tagged as 'bully' and loosening up their opposition but I think they shouldn't give up, this is a good fight that will end up benefiting batsmen across the world. It is worth clarifying that India is not against technology but rightfully questions broken technology. It is unfortunate that people from other cricket playing countries who don't like India being a dominant market have started to use the 'bully' argument to quickly dismiss legitimate debates. Be fair, question the technology until it is perfected.

  • on September 3, 2011, 20:25 GMT

    The latest Suspense of cricket is UDRS.............

  • Baundele on September 3, 2011, 20:15 GMT

    I see it as a sabotage against the UDRS. On all three occasions, Dravid was clearly not out as per the technology. However, these guys are giving decisions AGAINST the technology's suggestion; but they will blame the technology at the end of the day. Incompetent umpires want to avoid UDRS, as it shows their deficiencies.

  • EVH316 on September 3, 2011, 20:13 GMT

    It`ll take somebody a long, long time if they`re trying to find the passage in the laws of the game that states about the benefit of the doubt going to the batsman...it ain`t there. I thought this was a fairly average piece of decision making though. There simply wasn`t enough evidence to overturn the decision, based on the technology that the UDRS permits.

  • on September 3, 2011, 20:12 GMT

    After all India is coming out on the right side in this whole DRS conflict. I never liked BCCI approach towards some aspects of Cricket Management but I was always in favour of getting these technologies checked.This man and machine partnership is always going to be faulty. Only those technologies that is being shown to audience should be used for decision making and vice versa so that there is no controversy. If umpire takes decision due to prejudices which may be correct at times but will mostly lead to corruption of whole system. Super slo mo was much better.

  • yashm95 on September 3, 2011, 20:10 GMT

    DRS was the only thing that could have got Dravid Out

  • criclover999 on September 3, 2011, 20:10 GMT

    Have to say rahul dravud decision was harsh its true everyone is trying to bring indian team down .

  • Trickstar on September 3, 2011, 19:59 GMT

    This is getting ridiculous from the Indians, the first point is, Dravid was out simple as that, the right call was made, Snicko proved that he edged it, secondly the 3rd umpire uses these new high quality stump mics and it's that what he gave Dravid out on. At the end of the day alot of umpires give caught behinds off sound and so why can't the 3rd umpire, when just recently the stump mics have been upgraded to ones that are far better. The funny thing is, it was the Indians that wanted the hotspot rather than Hawkeye, even though those that had used both said Hawkeye was the better of the 2 technologies. Like that has been said from the very beginning and which the Indians fail to gasp, you need to all the technology at hand to make the best calls, so imo it's really dishonest to moaning all the time, when it was them that pushed fore this hybrid UDRS. Us all the technology and stop this nonsense.

  • on September 3, 2011, 19:56 GMT

    seriously baffling....how on earth can that be given out???? serious reviews need to be done...finally we viewers are made to look stupid...why frame rules make billions follow & understand and finally not follow it...

  • kitten on September 3, 2011, 19:53 GMT

    'Dravid Removal System, as very rightly stated by one newspaper. Dravid has suffered too many times for comfort, and because of this India has suffered. Can you for one moment imagine the hue and cry if this had happened to England's best bastman time and again? This DRS system seems stupid to all onlookers, Dhoni is absolutely right that when there is no mark on the snickometer or there is substantial doubt, the benefit goes to the batsman. I remember Pietersen, in the first test, when he was given out, and he appealed, and because there was no mark appearing, the decision was overturned. As someone remarked, whenever major decisions are made by the umpires, inevitably, the decisions favour the stronger team, and in this case England. They should do away with this DRS system and only reinstall it once it is 100% or near perfect. India lost Dravid when he was batting beautifully in the tests, and India paid the penalty. Something should be done soon if cricket has to have credibility.

  • CricketChat on September 3, 2011, 19:49 GMT

    Dhoni has lost quite a bit of his aura during this Eng tour. Instead of complaining about DRS or HotSpot which more often than not help the decision making, he is trying to divert attention from the real issue here, India's abysmal performance. He should make attempts to redeem that.

  • on September 3, 2011, 19:45 GMT

    You could hear the nick without snicko, the bat was away from the pad. It was a very brave call, but he was out.

  • sportsfan on September 3, 2011, 19:44 GMT

    the on field umpire said dravid was not out. there was no clear evidence on the slow motion replay or the hot spot to overturn that decision. it should be mandatory for the umpires to explain why an on-field decision is over turned. otherwise it doesn't make sense to have a review system in place. again, any doubt should go in favour of the batsman. the third umpire's decision is wrong in this instance, period. and i would hate to think that BCCI is right when it comes to DRS and technology. but, may be they are.

  • on September 3, 2011, 19:44 GMT

    Surely there was no evidence for hotspot.If the umpire is inconclusive,the why can't they given out and also there was no evidence from the deviation also.This is 3 rd time in one month that too again for the in-form batsman Rahul Dravid.It is really embrasssssing!Time to cange the UDRS or drop it

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • on September 3, 2011, 19:44 GMT

    Surely there was no evidence for hotspot.If the umpire is inconclusive,the why can't they given out and also there was no evidence from the deviation also.This is 3 rd time in one month that too again for the in-form batsman Rahul Dravid.It is really embrasssssing!Time to cange the UDRS or drop it

  • sportsfan on September 3, 2011, 19:44 GMT

    the on field umpire said dravid was not out. there was no clear evidence on the slow motion replay or the hot spot to overturn that decision. it should be mandatory for the umpires to explain why an on-field decision is over turned. otherwise it doesn't make sense to have a review system in place. again, any doubt should go in favour of the batsman. the third umpire's decision is wrong in this instance, period. and i would hate to think that BCCI is right when it comes to DRS and technology. but, may be they are.

  • on September 3, 2011, 19:45 GMT

    You could hear the nick without snicko, the bat was away from the pad. It was a very brave call, but he was out.

  • CricketChat on September 3, 2011, 19:49 GMT

    Dhoni has lost quite a bit of his aura during this Eng tour. Instead of complaining about DRS or HotSpot which more often than not help the decision making, he is trying to divert attention from the real issue here, India's abysmal performance. He should make attempts to redeem that.

  • kitten on September 3, 2011, 19:53 GMT

    'Dravid Removal System, as very rightly stated by one newspaper. Dravid has suffered too many times for comfort, and because of this India has suffered. Can you for one moment imagine the hue and cry if this had happened to England's best bastman time and again? This DRS system seems stupid to all onlookers, Dhoni is absolutely right that when there is no mark on the snickometer or there is substantial doubt, the benefit goes to the batsman. I remember Pietersen, in the first test, when he was given out, and he appealed, and because there was no mark appearing, the decision was overturned. As someone remarked, whenever major decisions are made by the umpires, inevitably, the decisions favour the stronger team, and in this case England. They should do away with this DRS system and only reinstall it once it is 100% or near perfect. India lost Dravid when he was batting beautifully in the tests, and India paid the penalty. Something should be done soon if cricket has to have credibility.

  • on September 3, 2011, 19:56 GMT

    seriously baffling....how on earth can that be given out???? serious reviews need to be done...finally we viewers are made to look stupid...why frame rules make billions follow & understand and finally not follow it...

  • Trickstar on September 3, 2011, 19:59 GMT

    This is getting ridiculous from the Indians, the first point is, Dravid was out simple as that, the right call was made, Snicko proved that he edged it, secondly the 3rd umpire uses these new high quality stump mics and it's that what he gave Dravid out on. At the end of the day alot of umpires give caught behinds off sound and so why can't the 3rd umpire, when just recently the stump mics have been upgraded to ones that are far better. The funny thing is, it was the Indians that wanted the hotspot rather than Hawkeye, even though those that had used both said Hawkeye was the better of the 2 technologies. Like that has been said from the very beginning and which the Indians fail to gasp, you need to all the technology at hand to make the best calls, so imo it's really dishonest to moaning all the time, when it was them that pushed fore this hybrid UDRS. Us all the technology and stop this nonsense.

  • criclover999 on September 3, 2011, 20:10 GMT

    Have to say rahul dravud decision was harsh its true everyone is trying to bring indian team down .

  • yashm95 on September 3, 2011, 20:10 GMT

    DRS was the only thing that could have got Dravid Out

  • on September 3, 2011, 20:12 GMT

    After all India is coming out on the right side in this whole DRS conflict. I never liked BCCI approach towards some aspects of Cricket Management but I was always in favour of getting these technologies checked.This man and machine partnership is always going to be faulty. Only those technologies that is being shown to audience should be used for decision making and vice versa so that there is no controversy. If umpire takes decision due to prejudices which may be correct at times but will mostly lead to corruption of whole system. Super slo mo was much better.