Big Boss Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 (edited) http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/651695.html For the first time, I'm starting to understand India's reluctance to go with the system. It's not a remedy that seems to have cured the problem. In fact, it may even have become more of a problem. Listening to Michael Clarke talk about using his reviews poorly, it has certainly become more of a headache for captains. http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2013/content/story/651755.html So people slowly starting to agree that current implementation of DRS is actually a part of the problem. BCCI must be feeling good. Edited July 17, 2013 by Rock Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg man Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 (edited) http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/651695.html http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2013/content/story/651755.html So people slowly starting to agree that current implementation of DRS is actually a part of the problem. BCCI must be feeling good. He needs this i guess [NSFW] Edited July 17, 2013 by egg man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godspeed4476 Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 Morons all of them. The purpose of the system is to reduce the error's. No system is fool proof. Australia was complete a*s wipe in using the system. Look how England benefited by its use and so did india in CT. BCCI are biggest GKL's they made a fool of themselves, acted like drama queens in Australia, they begged for the system. And now when its in place those piece of turds don't want it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 ^^ repped. captains and boards should understand that drs is not mandatory to take. Look at cook's venture, he used it when he was most confident. You are not supposed to use it at 30% chance, and it is no crime if it is left over. Think of it this way, if drs were not there would the umpiring errors be reduced ? was it drs that made Dar do a brain fart at broad's edge ? No. Drs just gives you a chance to challenge at blatantly wrong decisions, or ones where you feel you have been done wrong. The captain should consult players at important positions in the field before going for a review. Similarly, both the batsmen should have a talk before one of them asks for a review. captains are over-thinking on drs. It is just a referral, even if you run out of them early, the match is still left to play, a game of bat and ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtheK Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 Three reason BCCI did not like DRS: Sehwag(He just wanted a replay of everything, biggest a**hole ever), Sourav Ganguly(Did not know how to use it), Sachin Tendulkar(Conservative). At that time BCCI was voice of these three plus Dravid. Look at Dhoni he has been amazing with DRS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hope Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 Dhoni is the only person who can reach or can reach close enough to the popularity of tendulkar. His attitude is same as tendulkar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godspeed4476 Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 Three reason BCCI did not like DRS: Sehwag(He just wanted a replay of everything, biggest a**hole ever), Sourav Ganguly(Did not know how to use it), Sachin Tendulkar(Conservative). At that time BCCI was voice of these three plus Dravid. Look at Dhoni he has been amazing with DRS. Sehwag was master. He never consulted with the non striker. If umpire gave him lbw, directly go for drs. The day was not far when he would have taken it for bowled as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mshingore Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 The reason why BCCI and now Ozs are against DRS is pretty much the same.. In the India SL series when India got raped, the DRS went 1-11 I think against India. India couldn't use the system properly whereas SL could. Indian players played cry babies and BCCI pampered them by banishing the DRS. Ozs were literal choots while using the DRS. Michael Clarke idiot used it for his own edge. How can anyone be so stupid? Even Nalasopara XI ka 11th batsman can tell u if the ball he played was edged by him or not, however faint it may be. Taking a chance against technology is just illiteracy. Ozs have no right to complain. They suffered on account of their own stupidity and over zealousness. The sooner they learn how to use DRS the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mshingore Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 That being said I think Trott was the most unlucky player though. I don't know how Erasmus missed the edge which was visible in the slow mo; hotspot be damned. Secondly as per unwritten convention, shouldn't the benefit of the technical snag too should have gone in favour of the batsman? (And in this case more so the umpire) That was just a pure blunder and I think Erasmus should be punished for such a huge mistake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Boss Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 Their point is DRS is not adding to the playing aspect. It is not enhancing the sport. Whenever a wicket falls, the opposition cant even celebrate properly. That is a big downer. As everyone is saying, let umpires use it whenever they want. Keep it in the hands of the umpires. And hawkeye is a f**king joke. That software doesn't take into account reverse swing and pitch conditions at all. Using it is really stupid. Snicko takes too much time and hotspot can go bonkers when needed the most. Remember Trott's dismissal? Side angle hotspot got glitched and wrong decision was given. The edge was clearly visible by naked eye. So if these things aren't reliable, keep it entirely on umpire's judgement who will use it to remove howlers rather than captains using it strategically to beat the system like Clarke tried. At least the players and crowd can celebrate after final decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piper Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 IMO, do away with DRS. Field umpires can consult 3rd umpire at their own discretion if they have doubt. But DRS appeal system should be revoked. The human judgement factor adds an intriguing element to every sport. Imagine if offside in football was DRSed with technology (it can be). Would take a certain element out of the game then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godspeed4476 Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 IMO, do away with DRS. Field umpires can consult 3rd umpire at their own discretion if they have doubt. But DRS appeal system should be revoked. The human judgement factor adds an intriguing element to every sport. Imagine if offside in football was DRSed with technology (it can be). Would take a certain element out of the game then. Leaving DRS on umpire's is not fool proof either. Remember steve bucknor refusing to consult 3rd umpire for Australian tests. It will only deteriorate the quality of umpiring. Take for example the 3rd umpire for run outs. It has become a joke. Even clear run outs are being referred to 3rd umpire. The same might happen with DRS.Also, pakistani umpires will become kharbopati with the new system, khule mein fixing karenge chor log Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silentassassin Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 DRS is introduced to avoid blunders not small mistakes... Its part of every game.. Ausies were using it like headless chickens.. I will not believe if a batsman wont know if he edged the ball or not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Boss Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 I will not believe if a batsman wont know if he edged the ball or not... Rahul Dravid said he was not sure if he edge the ball or not on England tour when he was given out by DRS in that shoe lace incident which was the catalyst in BCCI's opposition to DRS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 The human judgement factor adds an intriguing element to every sport. Imagine if offside in football was DRSed with technology (it can be). Would take a certain element out of the game then. Not a fair comparison. Offside in football is a very common occurrence, can happen 5 times in 5 mins. So it will kill the game, and what if the ref was wrong in calling offside, how will you recreate the exact same situation as it was before the ref's call to compensate for the wrong call. A better analogy would be using drs only for contentious goals, like checking if a player was offside or not and whether the ball crossed the line. This should be the way to go. In tennis after a long shor sharaba they are using the challenge/drs for a while now and no one has complained about it. People are actually glad. Human element is nice but it should not end up affecting the result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewie Posted July 18, 2013 Report Share Posted July 18, 2013 (edited) so what if crowd & players cant celebrate immediately & have to wait for drs. i'm sure players & crowd would rather have the Correct decision than a quick one. so also this thing that it takes up time... big deal there are 100 other things where time is wasted. but the hawkeye thing i'm not sure of. recently there was a jadeja delivery on a low pitch where even short balls were keeping below waist & hawkeye showed a good length jadeja delivery as going over stumps. they should've DRS with 4 or 5 challenges, no hotspot & no hawkeye since both have been proven to be unreliable. just snicko (since thats now available real time & is reliable) & slow mo replays. that'll take away all the 50/50 doubts & we should now opt for it Edited July 18, 2013 by filmguy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Boss Posted July 18, 2013 Report Share Posted July 18, 2013 Snicko is NOT available real time. It takes 5-10 minutes to generate and is not part of DRS tools. All snickos shown in current series were after decisions were taken. And it is useless when ball passes the bat and bat touches pad or ground at same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mshingore Posted July 18, 2013 Report Share Posted July 18, 2013 Snicko is NOT available real time. It takes 5-10 minutes to generate and is not part of DRS tools. All snickos shown in current series were after decisions were taken. And it is useless when ball passes the bat and bat touches pad or ground at same time. It doesn't take 5-10 mins but yes it does take a little while. The problem with snicko is that it's just an indicator. It only indicates that there was a sound. Sound can be from bat-ball, bat-pad, pad-ground etc. the only differentiator between these sounds is wood-ball has 'high peaks' That's not fool proof at all. There needs to be a correct definition of the frequency of the wavelengths that CLEARLY separate wood - ball from anything else. Only then can it be used Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mshingore Posted July 18, 2013 Report Share Posted July 18, 2013 And yes the objective of the DRS is to remove howlers. Then we can talk about celebrations from crowd and players (which does happen when the right decision is made) so that is not a huge issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dranjithk Posted July 18, 2013 Report Share Posted July 18, 2013 I will not believe if a batsman wont know if he edged the ball or not... Ofcourse they know when they nick it. They just want to take a gamble with snicko/hotspot's inaccuracy at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts