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.

Posted by   on (March 5, 2011, 4:58 GMT)

come on Canada. the only way for you guys to win is not with the help of flawed umpiring. improve your cricket instead . wish you and other associates good luck

Posted by SanjivAwesome on (March 5, 2011, 4:09 GMT)

Technology should not be used unless it has been perfected. It doesn't matter what Ponting is saying. In medicine and in aerospace, engineers test and re-test technology before it is allowed to be used by humans. I cannot believe the ICC is rushing to implement an uproven technology. Personally, I think the tech can probably be improved. But ICC's mishandling will, I am afraid, create serious credibility issues for what might well ultimately turn out to be good technology. It is all too late, with the BCCI undoubtedly getting more deeply entrenched in its views. What a mess, ICC. You guys should learn about how to take people along first to achieve change.

Posted by bharath74 on (March 5, 2011, 2:15 GMT)

Just look a the number of flaws in the system, if the technology is not 100% , let the umpires take the decisions.

Posted by IrvineXI on (March 4, 2011, 23:55 GMT)

Afridi - "I think the number of referrals allowed should be raised to four from two, because two are not proving enough." Well going by your referrals in the Sri Lanka match even 4 would not be enough. Use the referrals sensibly and after other's opinion.

Posted by   on (March 4, 2011, 22:22 GMT)

Harper had a terrible day in the field. He did not award plumb LBWs during Pakistan's bowling. Had there been no DRS, Pakistan could lose the match due to bad umpiring decisions.

Posted by Tansah on (March 4, 2011, 21:45 GMT)

The UDRS is good but as stated in the article it isn't perfect but more right decisions will be made. Number of reviews should stay at 2 because the players should use their judgement as to whether the on-field umpire's decision is right or not right, and if the number was higher then the whole idea of on-field umpire authority and influence would be messed up.

Posted by   on (March 4, 2011, 21:04 GMT)

LBW decisions have always been subjective but the "powers that be" are trying to remove that, hence the ridiculous decision with Ian Bell. If the TV umpire had been allowed to use common sense in his judgement he would have given it out. The rule that a batsman who is more than 2.5 metres from the stumps can't be out LBW is wrong. The distance from the stumps can only ever be used as guide, that can add to uncertainty, that can then mean a batsman gets the benefit of the doubt.

I'll finish on a pedantic point: Canada lost by 46 runs, not 43 runs.

Posted by carbandpunk on (March 4, 2011, 18:49 GMT)

The number of referrals should not be increased, that would just make it a waste of time since players like afridi always wanna use it. I think its the right decision to use the review system though... the only teams that complain about it are the ones who don't know how to use it... by this i mean india

Posted by kharsoom on (March 4, 2011, 18:39 GMT)

I think DRS is wondefull; however I agree that without hot spot you can't get full benefit of the system. Those who are against the system must understand that most of the decisions which got reversed were straight forward and a good umpire shouldn't make that kind of decision in first place but due to inconsistency in the quality of umpiring DRS provide some control to the player to get the correct decision. Teams obviously don't have control in umpire selection.

Posted by Alexk400 on (March 4, 2011, 18:17 GMT)

DRS is fine. But i am against players using it. I rather see coaches appeal not on field players.

Posted by   on (March 4, 2011, 18:10 GMT)

Bagai cannot expect to win on the back of inaccurate umpiring...the expectation of some players to do so is the best argument in favor of a UDRS!

Posted by D-Train on (March 4, 2011, 14:28 GMT)

Gunasekera clearly edged the ball before it hit his pads. How a decision review system got it so wrong shows that there are serious flaws in the system.

Posted by phenix on (March 4, 2011, 14:08 GMT)

and again the team that the drs decisions went against is complaining.... how the hell can the Canadian captain complain?? all the reviews used showed that the wrong decision was made by the umpire on the field.... so i gues end of the day the rule is if it goes against u complain otherwise its a great system

Posted by khurramsch on (March 4, 2011, 13:41 GMT)

i dont know why BAGAI is reacting like this. there were 5 reverse decision 3 pakistans & 2 of canada. so canda get benifit from DRS also. & this match clearly shows that this system needs to b in. the way harper was giving deceisions is realy wired. & perfect advertsiement for DRS. yes some changes needed for rules.

Posted by drlimpel on (March 4, 2011, 13:41 GMT)

Wow he has got a lot nerve criticizing the DRS, after he used it so shamelessly to give himself a reprieve yesterday. I wonder if he had done the same thing without being prompted by the dressing room.... But unsurprisingly he doesn't mention that at all, instead what peeves him the most is the overturning of the INCORRECT decisions which were going in Canada's favor. Do us a favor chum, try to make yourself known on the cricketing field like the Irish did, otherwise get over with your matches and be on your way, you are lucky enough to be here in the first place.

Posted by   on (March 4, 2011, 13:15 GMT)

The system is fine; the umpiring in the above game was beyond poor!! It seems the umpires are not paying much attention during the game anymore, and plumb LBW decisions have been given not out...and vice versa. The umpires will become lazier over time as the URS becomes mainstream, and soon the only reason for the umpire to be on the pitch will be to stop a fight!! Without URS in the above game, Canada may have won; Daryl harper got 4 easy decisions wrong??!?

Posted by   on (March 4, 2011, 13:03 GMT)

Its good players are pointing out the problems for DRS. Thats the only way to improve the system. I still don't agree with Ian Bell giving not out. There was no doubt that the ball is going to hit the wicket. Thanks to DRS, Pakistan and Canada match we saw a lot of decisions were overturned and were corrected.

Posted by Blaster_Razi on (March 4, 2011, 12:59 GMT)

DRS is great of course ten times better with sniko and hotspot and u cant just scrap this beneficial tool just because you have been wrong majority of time or missed out on chances

Posted by chronike on (March 4, 2011, 12:32 GMT)

well i think canada should be glad that the field umpire did not over rule the udrs review after the batsmen looked onto the pavilion for assistance, that is plain unethical and against cricketing laws. action should have been taken there.

Posted by   on (March 4, 2011, 12:17 GMT)

even though its not perfect, but at least it will be of some help...there will not be much regret on the players part, as blatantly wrong decision can be appealed against and get reversed...

Posted by talha_91 on (March 4, 2011, 11:42 GMT)

Thanks to DRS. The umpiring wasn't upto the mark.

Posted by   on (March 4, 2011, 11:28 GMT)

A bad workman blames his tools. As an engineer this blind criticism of hapless technology caused by misuse by the HUMANS who use it, is extremely frustrating.

Posted by Fast_Track_Bully on (March 4, 2011, 11:28 GMT)

Now more players against UDRS!. Who will tell it is just the matter of India?

Posted by   on (March 4, 2011, 11:17 GMT)

Raising the number from two to four would be most sensible when Daryl Harper is umpiring. Unless of course he is in the video umpire booth, in which case I suggest removing them altogether is the safest bet.

Posted by p0lly on (March 4, 2011, 11:13 GMT)

Unbelievable is this, that this guy was playing in the same game as the one I watched on TV. Justice was done on all of those decisions. Anyhow he needs to learn how to not be a sour loser and also needs to tell his dugout to not signal to the players whether to take or not take review.

Posted by Jim1207 on (March 4, 2011, 11:09 GMT)

I love it. With all our trust on technology, we are still in confused state. looks like this is going to be a everlasting issue for generations to come!

Posted by LALITHKURUWITA on (March 4, 2011, 11:06 GMT)

I think DRS system should be there and try to improve further by having hot spot etc. No of referrals should be increased to 3.

Posted by   on (March 4, 2011, 10:55 GMT)

It is good for good result of the match because some time umpire also goes out of form and fail to give correct dicision ,but to refrl is not enough five must is necessory,and she spot camra should be provided to make the perfect.

Posted by indianzen on (March 4, 2011, 10:51 GMT)

It doesnt make sense to review LB decisions and particularly without a snicko and hot spot.

Posted by sanath007 on (March 4, 2011, 10:45 GMT)

surkari was given out without properly looking whether there was an inside edge. from what i saw there was an inside edge and the original decision of not out should have been upheld. it's third umpires fault

Posted by   on (March 4, 2011, 10:36 GMT)

To me the use of technology is good for the game i.e. it clarifies if there is any human error or doubt in the mind of players. However, no hotspot in World Cup is astonishing.

Posted by Umair_umair on (March 4, 2011, 10:35 GMT)

UDRS does more goods, than bads. Its a common sense.

Posted by popcorn on (March 4, 2011, 10:34 GMT)

Ricky Ponting who has the most experience as a cricketer amongst the current lot of world cricketers,and could well be regarded as the elder statesman of cricket,quite sagely expresses the need for the UDRS,in his words,"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." Mind you, he's experienced his fair share of controversial decisions too.I wish BCCI and the Indian Captain could be as mature.

Posted by venkyheros on (March 4, 2011, 10:32 GMT)

ricky u have to understand one thing becaz of UDRS austrlia is the first team loose the benfit

Posted by Shaikh-s on (March 4, 2011, 10:32 GMT)

It was always obious that pakistan will cruise home since they bowlers like Umer Afridi and ajmal i think each is capable of winning the match single handedly against any opposition on this score as well

Posted by waqaslone on (March 4, 2011, 10:28 GMT)

Time will bring improvements to URDS. URDS with Hot spots is the way to go - At least more accurate decisions shall be made!

Posted by AndyZaltzmannsHair on (March 4, 2011, 10:25 GMT)

The article seems to paint UDRS in a slightly negative light, when the match showed the system at its best. The umpires had a shocker and UDRS came to the rescue. Bagai is just disappointed that he lost, he should do well to remember that the system reprieved a couple of Canadian batsmen who were adjudged lbw, when UDRS showed the balls to be bouncing over. You can't criticize the system on some decisions and then be happy to accept the ones that go for you. That's called hypocrisy.

Posted by Abbasia on (March 4, 2011, 10:23 GMT)

what is there to be bogged by? Umpires made mistakes and correct decisions were given. How can you be boggled when correct decision is given? A few decisions were in favor of Canada so I don't know whats so boggling. Its probably boggling that umpires got that many decisions wrong.

Posted by   on (March 4, 2011, 10:17 GMT)

i think the system is working pretty fine .it should not be that just you lost match .you start blaming the system and try to hide your own bad form like canada are doing.

Posted by hinajawad on (March 4, 2011, 10:17 GMT)

So now canada comes to the rescue of anti-UDRS campaign.By the way, this game was a perfect example why UDRS should be there coz umpires were having a shocker.

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

Dhoni takes India home

Dhoni takes India home
03:52 | Nov 4, 2014
Yuvi steers India clear

Yuvi steers India clear
03:58 | Nov 4, 2014
Dhoni takes India home

Dhoni takes India home
04:48 | Nov 4, 2014
... and that's that

... and that's that
13:40 | Apr 11, 2011