Why tinker with the DRS?

The ICC [previously] came up with a system where the third umpire could only answer the question put to him by the on-field umpire. I remember one lbw decision where Steve Bucknor decided to ask the third umpire, David Orchard, whether the ball would have gone on to hit the stumps. Orchard agreed that it would have, but pointed out that the batsman had also got an inside edge on the ball. But because that was not what Bucknor had asked him about, the lbw decision was upheld. That was a good example of how stupid some of the thinking has been, and continues to be.

If the ball is going to hit the stumps and it falls within the laws, you are out. It is as simple as that … This 2.5m guideline is designed to allow for the inaccuracies in the Hawk-Eye system. By trying to allow for that smaller margin of error it [the ICC] is jeopardising the entire UDRS system by fuelling the BCCI's argument that the technology cannot be trusted.