England in Sri Lanka 2011-12

DRS to be used for Sri Lanka-England Tests

Sa'adi Thawfeeq

March 13, 2012

Comments: 49 | Text size: A | A

Andrew Strauss gestures to the umpire after a failed review, England v India, 2nd npower Test, Trent Bridge, 2nd day, July 30, 2011
England's recent Test series have seen some issues raised about the DRS © Getty Images
Enlarge

The Decision Review System (DRS) will be used for the upcoming two-Test series between Sri Lanka and England but the Hot Spot technology will not be available, leaving the Snickometer as the only tool to aid decisions on catches. The ball-tracking technology will be provided by Hawk-Eye, Sri Lanka Cricket secretary Nishantha Ranatunga has said.

The version of the DRS used in the series will be the same as the one used in Sri Lanka's previous home series, against Australia in August-September last year. There had been doubts before that series over whether SLC would be able to afford the technology required for the system, given their financial crunch, but the DRS was used then, though without the expensive Hot Spot, and will be used again for the series against England. The ICC, in October last year, removed the mandatory requirements for the DRS, leaving the decision of what technology to use to the participating boards in a series.

The last time the DRS was used in Sri Lanka, Hawk-Eye admitted there had been a tracking mistake that led to Phil Hughes being adjudged lbw during the first Test, in Galle. There was a visible discrepancy between Hawk-Eye's graphic and television replays for Hughes' dismissal, the umpires referred the incident to the ICC, and Hawk-Eye admitted there had been a mistake, mainly due to the small distance between where the ball pitched and the point of contact with the pad.

The absence of Hot Spot also became an issue during that series when, in the second Test, wicketkeeper Brad Haddin was convinced Tharanaga Paranavitana had gloved a ball down the leg side to him, but was denied due to a lack of evidence. "It's pretty hard with those ones in general for umpires where it comes off the glove or the hip or the bat. It's pretty hard with no Hot Spot as well; it's hard to make a decision. I was pretty confident then that we got some glove," Haddin had said of the incident.

England, though, have had issues with the Hot Spot technology. During their home series against India last summer, Stuart Broad suggested Hot Spot does not show faint edges, after England were convinced VVS Laxman had edged a ball but survived a referral, at Trent Bridge.

There were also a couple of flashpoints surrounding the DRS during England's recent Test series in Pakistan in the UAE. In the second Test, a not-out lbw decision against Mohammad Hafeez was overturned despite the fact that Hot Spot appeared to show a faint inside edge, and an lbw against Stuart Broad in the third Test, when he had got his front foot well down the pitch, raised the question of whether the DRS had swung things too much in favour of the bowlers.

While Hawk-Eye will be used in Sri Lanka, its rival ball-tracking provider Virtual Eye was called into question by South Africa's Jacques Kallis and New Zealand's Doug Bracewell after the Dunedin Test. Virtual Eye threatened to pull out of the series due to the criticism but were persuaded to stay on by the ICC.

Edited by Dustin Silgardo

RSS Feeds: Sa'adi Thawfeeq

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by JG2704 on (March 15, 2012, 22:04 GMT)

@zenboomerang on (March 15 2012, 15:06 PM GMT) - Great Grandchildren - seriously? Fair play to you if so. I just always have the image of most people being between 20 and 45 on these forums- don't know why. Anyway , agree with your comms. I remember India when they toured Eng did not want Hot Spot and got their way. Then I remember H Singh getting out to Broad to an LBW which he clearly got an inside edge on. From a neutral perspective could they not have a review system in place where a side can review such decisions without hot spot? IE for a bowling side appealing for a caught behind or a batsman saying he got an inside edge on an LBW and just go to the 3rd umpire who has slowed down replays to go on.Then if there is no clear evidence to suggest that the umpire made a blunder it stays with the umpires decision? If hot spot is controversial surely you could still use technology of the 3rd umpire with slowed down replays etc?

Posted by zenboomerang on (March 15, 2012, 15:06 GMT)

@JG2704... I am totally confused by the power of 1 nation over 2 other nations in sport... I guess money truely runs the modern world - I guess there never was a truely balanced playing field.... Luckily my great grandchildren quickly bring me back to reality... lol...

Posted by JG2704 on (March 15, 2012, 10:11 GMT)

@ zenboomerang on (March 14 2012, 13:56 PM GMT) Must admit it seems a bit unfair that Oz and SL wanted DRS and India didn't and India got their way - esp as they weren't even the host country.

Posted by yorkshire-86 on (March 14, 2012, 17:27 GMT)

The odd slight howler by DRS is nothing compared to the repeated howlers umpires have made over the last 100 years in letting batsmen off with lbw because they were 'well forward', somehow forgetting that if the ball is straight (and low enough) it WILL hit the stumps and therefore should be OUT - whether the leg wearing the pad is practically on top of the stumps or half way down the pitch does not change that. This ugly monstrosity that the 'batsmen gets the benefit of the doubt' is the reason cricket is a Stone Age sport when all other sports are in the Digital Age and anything that helps eliminate doubt, even if it (DRS) makes the odd error, should be welcomed with open arms and made mandatory. The pad is there to protect your shins, not your stumps.

Posted by zenboomerang on (March 14, 2012, 13:57 GMT)

@FreddyForPrimeMinister... Agree that border line decisions should not affect the number of appeals i.e. 60% of the ball missing the stumps... Still, while there isn't consensus nothing will progress to make the decision making processes better while India stalls on this issue... No debate = no improvements to the system of governance...

Posted by zenboomerang on (March 14, 2012, 13:56 GMT)

@Nutcutlet :- "neither side has the right to shout 'We waz done!' later in the piece"... It doesn't work that way - Oz & SL wanted DRS but India refused in the tri-nations series... 2 for & 1 against yet India told Oz & SL bad luck you have to play the way we want to play... Well as it turned out India was the loser both in the series & there for lost appeals that could have changed games & got them into the finals...

Posted by 2.14istherunrate on (March 14, 2012, 13:14 GMT)

Not having hotspot is a bit mad...I do not think that one or two mistakes with it rule out it's overall usefulness such as in regard to the ball brushing various things. If using vaseline is a fear, then all the umpires have to do is feel the surface of the bats every now and again. There will always be a few who will try to bend the rules but mostly i think Test players have a sense of honour and fair play and are above trying to seek minor advantages through sleight of hand. Overall i think that the whole appeal process needs speeding up so that the interruptions in play are kept short. The last NZ/SA test was an example of how not to let appeals stretch out.If 15 secs is the max then please ENFORCE, umps. Overall the wo5rk of the third umpire needs to speed up in general and some referalls for run outs are just ridiculous. Technology does not mean the on field umpires stop working things out for themselves.

Posted by bonaku on (March 14, 2012, 13:09 GMT)

Why are we still persisting with these faulty technologies ? It makes so sense to use them, when we know that it is flawed.

Posted by zenboomerang on (March 14, 2012, 12:53 GMT)

@satish619chandar... Thanks & agree in return :) ... The DRS howlers have left me hollow... Governance is a major stumbling block to which we need to address before we move on...

Posted by satish619chandar on (March 14, 2012, 11:53 GMT)

@zenboomerang : Perfectly agree.. But still, a umpire howler is now turned into a DRS howler.. I think for marginal decisions, we have a UMPIRE DECISION stay in case of LBW.. Is there anything called UMPIRE DECISION STAY for hotspot or other decision making tech? Then we dont need a umpire decision stay for LBW too.. DRS do need to be reliable mate.. No use in spending 5000$ per day for camera's which ll be blocked by closein fielders or out of range.. Can't the minimum technology in replay and pitch map eradicate the howlers? I guess the 100% correct decision by DRS can be easily done by a replay with pitch map..

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Sa'adi ThawfeeqClose
Tour Results
Sri Lanka v England at Colombo (PSS) - Apr 3-7, 2012
England won by 8 wickets
Sri Lanka v England at Galle - Mar 26-29, 2012
Sri Lanka won by 75 runs
SLC Dev XI v England XI at Colombo (SSC) - Mar 20-22, 2012
England XI won by 4 wickets
SL Board XI v England XI at Colombo (RPS) - Mar 15-17, 2012
England XI won by an innings and 15 runs
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days