ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 / News

Canada v Pakistan, Group A, World Cup 2011, Colombo

Canada 'boggled' by DRS decisions

Osman Samiuddin at the Premadasa Stadium

March 4, 2011

Comments: 50 | Text size: A | A

Shahid Afridi asks for a review, Canada v Pakistan, Group A, World Cup 2011, Colombo, March 3, 2011
The DRS was relied on heavily during the Canada-Pakistan game © AFP
Enlarge

Ashish Bagai, the Canada captain, was "boggled" by some of the decisions made by the DRS (Decision Review System) in his side's tense 43-run loss to Pakistan at the Premadasa on Thursday. Bagai experienced the best and worst of the system; reprieved once after being given out and sent back later after being given not out.

Those two calls were part of a total of five referrals in Canada's chase in which the on-field umpires' decisions were eventually reversed. Bagai was first given out leg-before to Umar Gul in the 8th over. He asked for a referral - prompted by signals from the dressing room to do so, which was spotted by Pakistani fielders - before replays showed the ball to be going comfortably over leg-stump. Later, he was given not out by Daryl Harper off Shahid Afridi on another leg-before shout, only for Pakistan to refer the decision and be awarded.

Three other decisions, against Ravindu Gunasekera and Zubin Surkari, also prompted decision-changing referrals, rounding off a bad day at the office for Harper and Nigel Llong. Bagai was asked about the decisions and indicated his displeasure with the system. "I'm not sure I can answer that before I speak with the umpires today," said Bagai. "There was a bit of controversy over the use of it. Some go your way, some don't. They've [ICC] kept a mantra of relying on technology blindly and that is their decision. We got a couple today that we were boggled with but that's what they've chosen, we can't do anything about that now."

Pakistan's own experiences with the DRS have been hit and miss. Against Sri Lanka last week, they wasted two reviews in the field on decisions that, to the naked eye, seemed not out, including one for an edge. But Afridi insisted there were benefits from its use. "I think it is good because one decision can change the match, a not out or an out," he said.

Perhaps flippantly, he added, "it should be there and I think the number of referrals allowed should be raised to four from two, because two are not proving enough."

In the wake of the Ian Bell incident in the Bangalore tie with India, much of the focus has been on one particular clause of the system, the 2.5m rule. Earlier in the tournament, however, Mahela Jayawardene had raised the issue of the capacity of a DRS without Hot Spot technology. During his opening game century in Hambantota, against Canada incidentally, Jayawardene survived two appeals and fielding referrals for caught-behind decisions, when slo-mo cameras couldn't provide a definitive assessment.

The same concern was raised by Ricky Ponting ahead of Saturday's clash with Sri Lanka at the Premadasa, though Ponting did give broad support to technology. "I was a bit surprised at the start of the tournament when we found out we were using the DRS without Hot Spot, that was a bit of a shock to me because Hot Spot part of it is probably as big a part of the system as anything," Ponting said.

"At the end of the day, players always have to understand that it's not going to be perfect. But we're still going to be getting more correct decisions at the end of a game, which is obviously beneficial for the game. It's like it's been used in Test cricket, you can walk off at the end of the day and feel you've been aggrieved by a couple of decisions that have gone either for you or against you in that game, but as long as you're getting more correct decisions then it's got to be good for the game."

Osman Samiuddin is Pakistan editor of ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Osman Samiuddin

© ESPN EMEA Ltd.

Comments: 50 
Posted by   on (March 6, 2011, 20:05 GMT)

If one reads and understands the rules by using his brains then there is no controversy. As far as I understand all the rules are shown to the cricket boards of the participating teams before the start of a tournament and implemented after their approval. If somebody is making fuss about them now then he is terribly wrong. These rules and technology has exposed the incompetence of some of the umpires. They used to get away with some very outrageous decisions but now it is not possible for them to influence the result of a match or ruin the career of a player through their wrong decisions. It has also become easier for the ICC to rate them. Of courcse there is always room for the improvement and I am sure that use of technology will be more beneficial in future.

Posted by yorkslanka on (March 5, 2011, 12:58 GMT)

the canadians are missing the point- dont blame the system if you dont know how to use it...the teams that have problems with the udrs generally refer ridiculous decisions that are never going to be reversed...

Posted by Jerukhan on (March 5, 2011, 11:45 GMT)

This is hilarious, Bagai is complaining because the drs displayed the inept umpiring in this match. Without the drs Canada might have got closer to victory. I hope Harper impoves his performance otherwise he should not get any matches to umpire after the group matches.

Posted by KhuMir on (March 5, 2011, 10:44 GMT)

The funny thing is, Bhagai didn't mind using DRS... He only minds the other team using it 'eh'?

Posted by AmerMalik on (March 5, 2011, 7:42 GMT)

Canada boggled by DRS. The fans are boggled by their performance.

Posted by cricpolitics on (March 5, 2011, 6:50 GMT)

It's becoming a lame excuse for the losing captains now to blame their defeat on the DRS. All the decisions were reversed becasue umpires had made error in judgement. I'm not sure what is this Canadian captain complaining about. You can not achieve 100% accuracy with anything but DRS are proving to be effective and are reducing number of errors made by umpires.

Posted by   on (March 5, 2011, 6:50 GMT)

I m surprised why people are so crictic for UDRS, This system is stil new and is experiencing the variety even at its early stages. There might not be any discussion about it after a few years, when the things would have been settled. Status-co, as Dhoni and Co. think, might be heading the game towards its end. Its all about the new Ideas, and Experiments to attract the people towards it. ICC should make it mandatory for all forms of the game.

Posted by   on (March 5, 2011, 5:35 GMT)

Evolution of UDRS is good but it is certainly hurting the standard of on field umpiring, Harper failed to provided straight forward decision, other umpire making blunders with their call. i guess at the end of the day it will hurt the umpiring standards.. Either ICC has to implement with full kit of technology including sniko (wood) meter and hot spot, or to over ruled the UDRS system .. I am expecting many more umpiring blunders as the WC progresses.

Posted by   on (March 5, 2011, 5:22 GMT)

Agree with most here, why is he complaining?? If so many of these players are having trouble understanding the DRS then maybe the ICC needs to have a workshop and sit down and teach them. Leaving players to read up on the rules themselves is clearly not working and the DRS is suffering as a result from these stupid comments from players. @ Alexk400 - I'd agree with you on that, the coaches should be made to signal for a review and not the players. This will leave players to concentrate on the game and not have to worry about whether they'll be letting down the team if they get it wrong.

Posted by enigma77543 on (March 5, 2011, 5:06 GMT)

DRS has very little improvement to the decision-making process, the technologies used are way off the mark from being good enough so players & supporters will still feel aggrieved at the end of many matches but now they'll feel so due to DRS as opposed on-field-umpires. 2.5m-rule is the biggest joke! ICC should either go the whole hog with the technology or not use it at all & most of it extremely inconclusive at the moment & won't help at all & matches will still turn due to bad DRS decisions. So far as LBW goes, as Hawk-eye can't always predict the correct path of the ball, either it shouldn't be used at all or only its conclusive aspect should be used such as to determine where the ball had pitched & where it'd hit.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Osman SamiuddinClose
Osman Samiuddin Osman spent the first half of his life pretending he discovered reverse swing with a tennis ball half-covered with electrical tape. The second half of his life was spent trying, and failing, to find spiritual fulfillment in the world of Pakistani advertising and marketing. The third half of his life will be devoted to convincing people that he did discover reverse swing. And occasionally writing about cricket. And learning mathematics.
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days
  • ESPN Cricinfo

World Cup Videos