India / News
- India home
- |
- News
- |
- Features
- |
- Photos
- |
- Video/Audio
- |
- Fixtures
- |
- Results
- |
- Domestic Competitions
- |
- IPL
- |
- ICL
- |
- Players
- |
- Grounds
- |
- Records
- |
- Domestic History
|
India v Australia, 2010
UDRS technology available in India irrespective of BCCI stand
Sharda Ugra
August 12, 2010
|
|||
|
Related Links
News : No UDRS for India-Australia Tests
News : Hawk-eye inventor aims to dispel Indian concerns Ian Chappell : UDRS: Use it or lose it Harsha Bhogle : Whose responsibilty is the UDRS? In Focus:
Technology in cricket
Series/Tournaments:
Australia tour of India [Sep-Oct 2010]
|
|||
When Australia tour India for a two-Test, three-ODI series this October, all the technology required for the controversial Umpire Decision Review System (UDRS) will be in place at every venue. In all likelihood, however, given the BCCI's reluctance to use UDRS, its beneficiaries will not be the cricketers or the umpires, but the television audience.
Under the ICC's current regulations, the mandatory requirements needed for the UDRS system are, the ball-tracking technology, Super Slo-Mo and a 'clear' stump mike, all of which are available to and will be used by the Neo Sports production team that broadcasts India's home matches. A Neo executive confirmed to Cricinfo that if the BCCI were to suddenly alter their hard stance on the UDRS, the system could be put into place at short notice.
Yet, the chances of the technology being used are extremely slender, despite Cricket Australia's (CA) enthusiasm and support for UDRS. Regardless of the BCCI's consistent resistance to the new practice which has been welcomed across the world, Cricket Australia will push the UDRS as one of its early suggestions in the Memorandum of Understanding with the BCCI for the series. According to CA spokesman Peter Young, CA's head of cricket Michael Brown who will head the MoU disussions is "hopeful that they will be interested in our view."
Young said CA acknowledged, "there are some practical issues: cost, consistent technology. But the principle is clear, let's now pursue that principle by trying to address the practical issues." Australia's interest behind the UDRS for the forthcoming series will be dependant not merely on the strength of their case but on the BCCI's quite trenchant view. The MoU between two teams is usually finalised around two-three months before a series. The BCCI's stand that "the decision of the host country is important," would considerably reduce Australia's chances to drum any enthusiasm from the Indians over the UDRS.
CA's support for the system is driven from the top by CEO James Sutherland and is backed, Young said, by the data produced from its early experiments. At the start of this year, ICC general manager Dave Richardson announced that in the 13 southern-hemisphere Tests that had included the UDRS, it was estimated that 97 percent of umpiring decisions under UDRS had been proved to be accurate as compared to 92 percent without the UDRS.
India's allergy to the new system comes accompanied by mixed signals: that the senior players are not impressed by or believe in the technology that accompanies it and that the only technology they have any faith in, Hot Spot, is too expensive to be used at home games.
The ball-tracking technology which is now central to the UDRS refers to the Hawkeye / Virtual Eye technology which simulates the path of a ball from the bowler's hand to passing the stumps. It was given the cold shoulder by India captain MS Dhoni and Sachin Tendulkar but the company behind it has entered into a three-year agreement with the BCCI to form part of television coverage of matches played in India. The inventor of Hawkeye, Paul Hawkins told Cricinfo, "We are going to be there (in India) anyway. We are contracted to do all cricket in India with the BCCI, for three years." About the UDRS, Hawkins said, "Our understanding is that India don't want to do it".
BCCI secretary N Srinivasan refused to comment on the CA move saying that the discussion between the two boards about the UDRS was about a "privacy of process."
Sharda Ugra is senior editor at Cricinfo
Feeds: Sharda Ugra
© ESPN EMEA Ltd.
| Comments have now been closed for this article |
||||||
TopE-mail
Feedback
Print
Sharda Ugra
Country Fixtures
Country Results
1st unofficial Test: W. Indies A v India A at Bridgetown
Jun 2-5, 2012 (10:00 local | 14:00 GMT | 10:00 EDT | 09:00 CDT | 07:00 PDT)
Jun 2-5, 2012 (10:00 local | 14:00 GMT | 10:00 EDT | 09:00 CDT | 07:00 PDT)
2nd unofficial Test: W. Indies A v India A at Kingstown
Jun 9-12, 2012 (10:00 local | 14:00 GMT | 10:00 EDT | 09:00 CDT | 07:00 PDT)
Jun 9-12, 2012 (10:00 local | 14:00 GMT | 10:00 EDT | 09:00 CDT | 07:00 PDT)
3rd unofficial Test: W. Indies A v India A at Gros Islet
Jun 16-19, 2012 (10:00 local | 14:00 GMT | 10:00 EDT | 09:00 CDT | 07:00 PDT)
Jun 16-19, 2012 (10:00 local | 14:00 GMT | 10:00 EDT | 09:00 CDT | 07:00 PDT)
1st unofficial T20I: W. Indies A v India A at Port of Spain
Jun 23, 2012
Jun 23, 2012
2nd unofficial T20I: W. Indies A v India A at Port of Spain
Jun 24, 2012
Complete fixtures »
| Download Fixtures »
Jun 24, 2012
Sponsored Links
Watch Bollywood movies for free
Citibank NRI Account, Fast Reliable & Secure Way to
Transfer Money. Apply Online Now!
Access your Indian Rupee earnings from anywhere in the world.
ICICI Bank Money2India brings " locked exchange rate" and a free gift
on registering and transfer of USD 250 and above.
BUY England 2012 official Test & ODI kit
Available now at Cricshop
sachin is a great player and no one could admire him as a person and a player than me....i hav been followin his cricket since his debut in 89.....but sachin is not the one who can dictate where the game would go...am sorry but he and india is rong and its embarrasing for me as am an Indian tooo...the ICC needs to step in and make it mandatory in all formats...
Posted by AsherCA on (August 14 2010, 21:20 PM GMT)Common Sense states that you should allow your umpires the benefit of the same technology that proves them incompetent. However, BCCI is the only board found looking for excuses to not implement the technologies, even after India have lost a test it would have won with good technology & honest umpiring at Sydney. BCCI Can't affort b**t. Possibilities that come to light - match fixing through so-called human errors.
Posted by abhi20034 on (August 14 2010, 19:22 PM GMT)i don't believe that hwakeye works 100% right. if haweye don't work accurate then how we are thinking that udrs is ok. sachin sir also against UDRS , so if sachin sir is against then how can we apply.
Posted by SridharKalyan on (August 14 2010, 12:35 PM GMT)Is the BCCI worried about the 'air-time' lost during the UDRS referrals? Why is it refusing to use the technology? Excuses such as Dhoni and Tendulkar not being comfortable with the Technology has no room in the effort to eliminate the human error in umpiring. The use of technology in Wimbledon and the other Grand Slam tournaments is there for all to see. BCCI should immediately invest the necessary effort and resources in not only introducing the UDRS in India for international fixtures, but should cover the domestic fixtures too, to get the players used to the system and learn to use the same effectively.
Posted byThese fellas will start crying for this again once something like THE SYDNEY TEST happens again, and now i wish it happens!
Posted by rnarayan on (August 14 2010, 07:49 AM GMT)There are two issues here. If there is doubt as to predictive technology, fine, don't use the prediction bit. But surely the umpire has the right to information as to fact, as to what actually has happened: Where the ball pitched, where it struck the pad, whether there was a nick, etc. Otherwise the poor Ump is the one who looks a fool, only because he doesn't have the information everybody else has. There have been comments by some well known personalities about it detracting from the "human element". Sorry, but that's rubbish. The human element is for players, not umpires. Similarly comment that referrals don't result in "100% accuracy". Well nothing does, but any improvement is better than none.
Posted by chaithan on (August 14 2010, 07:40 AM GMT)Why can't the ICC sponsor all the technology required for UDRS? After all, they have enough money to sponsor a 2 Test series.
Posted by Mojac on (August 14 2010, 04:03 AM GMT)Its a pity that BCCI and senior players are against UDRS while almost all other test playing nations are using it. It might not be perfect yet, but its still far better to have it in its current format then not to have it at all. India has been at the receiving end of some of the most dubious decisions in recent past and are also the one's who make the biggest noise at the bad decisions they get. So really can't understand why India can't accept the UDRS.
Posted byCant believe any technology stuff is costly for rich BCCI.Where is all the money going ? how come the other countries with smaller boards than BCCI can handle it and not BCCI.
Posted by asif2311 on (August 14 2010, 02:42 AM GMT)hi mayank and everyone....I was one of the ardent critic of UDRS untill i followed the technology closely in the ongoing end pak series ..... mayank a batsman gets the benifit of doubt if the ball is either clipping the bails, kissing the off or leg stump or is pitched not completely on the stumps on the leg side....the rules from 2008 has been tweeked a bit and is next to perfect for me.....If the ball is clipping the stumps the decision remains with the on field umpires...hence i believe UDRS is the best thing to have happened to cricket since the advent of third umpire. Now about BCCI, they will never agree to it because no matter how much money the boardhas, it is as miser as anyone and will not shed a single penny...although ICC is dead as a dodo and for me is spineless, but i sincerley hope that it makes UDRS mandatory for all tests worldwide.... also i do not think this system can be implemented in the cwc 2011 as BCCI may not agree.....