BCCI Annual General Meeting 2011 September 19, 2011

BCCI opposed to DRS once again

ESPNcricinfo staff

The BCCI has reverted to its stance against the use of the Decision Review System, with the new board president N Srinivasan saying the current technology was simply not good enough after Hot Spot, which was made mandatory at the last ICC meeting on the urging of the BCCI, proved inconclusive on a few occasions during India's tour of England.

"We did not believe in the ball-tracking technology at all. But the BCCI is not averse to technology," Srinivasan said after the annual general meeting in Mumbai. "So therefore, at the last meeting of the ICC in Hong Kong, we agreed to a minimum usage of DRS including Hot Spot.

"At the time, we were under the impression that Hot Spot was very good. It is not necessary for me to dwell on the accuracy of Hot Spot, it was there for everybody to see. The BCCI will, at the next ICC meeting, raise the issue. We want to revisit it because we feel that Hot Spot is insufficient. We do not wish to use the DRS in its present form, even in its minimum standard."

During the tour of England, India's captain MS Dhoni again voiced his displeasure at the handling of the DRS on more than one occasion, with Rahul Dravid in particular falling victim to three controversial dismissals. The last dismissal took place during the first ODI, with Dravid initially being given not out by umpire Billy Doctrove.

Stuart 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. Yet the decision was overturned and Dravid was given out apparently because there was a sound as ball passed bat.

During the ICC annual conference in Hong Kong in July, the BCCI, along with other member boards, had agreed to a compromise wherein Hot Spot was made mandatory for DRS while the use of ball-tracking technology was made optional.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Dummy4 on September 21, 2011, 14:47 GMT

    @haasan yasin - we have always opposed drs we won wc benifitted from ot still we oppose till the rng tour i had faith in system not now

  • Dummy4 on September 21, 2011, 14:36 GMT

    No one is against technology if it improves the decision making. The concern should be on how much the boards spend for the technology per match. The argument on the percentage of bad decisions overruled using DRS can be stressed, however why spend insane amount of money if the technology is not foolproof??? Test the technology to the fullest before making it mandatory. People complaining about BCCI clout need to understand that boards like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe cant afford to use this technology during their home matches. So will ICC pay for all matches hosted in those countries...???

  • Oliver on September 21, 2011, 10:07 GMT

    I think most people accept there are problems with the DRS as it stands, but I would argue it's mostly to do with how it is used and how the evidence is interpreted. I think what annoys people about BCCI is that it is bullying ICC into accepting their terms for their series - surely the rules should be the same for everyone? So of course it's fair enough for BCCI or anyone else to raise concerns - in England we all saw problems with the system (both against India and England, incidentally) - but then these should be considered by ICC and then a decision made that applies to ALL countries/series. I would suggest that it should be kept, but hotspot excluded for now until it can be shown to be more accurate, and that really clear rules are given to 3rd umpires about overruling - including giving benefit of any remaining doubt to the batsman.

  • Sachin on September 20, 2011, 23:20 GMT

    Wow the comments here blow me away. Talk about people changing colors just when BCCI opposes it. Some weeks back even australians had doubt about hotspot..i remember all the comments on that article supporting the australian view. Its been proven recently in mutliple episodes that hotspot can be wrong (not detecting nicks when everyone heard it) and also ball tracking (one episode where the tracking predicted it going left when the ball actually went right!). These are not minor errors but big blunders and in these scenarios if the batsmen appeals using drs (even when the umpire has given out and everybody knws its out)....the drs ruling would be upheld and batsmen goes scott free! Let me give you guys an analogy....Would a company use a buggy hiring CRM software to replace their hiring HR team however slow and inefficient they might be! To err is human but i am sorry that doesnt apply to technology!

  • Navneet on September 20, 2011, 18:09 GMT

    bobmartin who are you fooling mate? Who has independently verified accuracy of hawkeye except for hawkeye themselves? Why do English fans come here and spread lies just because they hate anything to do with Indian cricket

  • Dummy4 on September 20, 2011, 16:40 GMT

    Since the umpires are not perfect either, why not scrap them as well? Batsmen get finger injury despite wearing gloves - why not stop wearing gloves? BCCI is already isolated in the cricketing world for its obduracy, bull-headedness and arrogance. Their stand on DRS is ridiculous - you cannot have a technology that is 100% perfect. That doesn't mean that you don't use technology. Technology may have flaws, but it helps reduce errors. Cricket should be decided on players' abilities and not on umpires' incompetence.

  • Irfan on September 20, 2011, 16:28 GMT

    Defeat with DRS & Victory without DRS then why DRS? Yes BCCI is correct :-)

  • kumar on September 20, 2011, 14:49 GMT

    Hhmm looks like there is some communication gap. let me ask one question India clearly had many wrong decisions (by DRS and umpires) in ENG series. How many people accept this? I see so many people are coming forward to criticize BCCI/India but how many times your country had suffered from wrong decisions? Even if BCCI is using it's financial power it is only to save itself from being victims. @landl47, it is not the point of error rate but in general any one team is suffering because of inconsistent technology. Recently AUS also voiced it's opinion on inconsistent technology. Next some other country. It is always easy to criticize but tough to understand the pain.

  • Dummy4 on September 20, 2011, 14:42 GMT

    People here are missing the point. The question is not whether DRS is good or bad. The question is whether we know how to use it best in its current form. Everyone including the English commentators agreed that the DRS use cases in the recent series was totally flawed. It was meant to rid of the howler, but for some reason the howlers stayed (Harbhajan's lbw and Broad's fake hat-trick) while correct edge decisions were overturned by the the whims of some incompetent umpires. I am all for DRS, but using it in a way that makes sense, and the way it was handled recently, didn't.

  • Dummy4 on September 20, 2011, 14:05 GMT

    Dilution of technology with human thinking is the issue. I think the DRS should have strict guidelines. If more than half of the ball is predicted to hit the stumps or bail, the decision should be OUT with no decision being left to the on-field or third umpire's call. This way all decisions will be UNIFORM. The third umpire could be replaced by technicians who will be responsible for showing the justification of decision at the time of decision. Instead of overworking elite umpires, a larger panel of umpires could be used.

  • No featured comments at the moment.