The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Why doesn't cricket trust the DRS?

29th November, 2015
Advertisement
Usman Khawaja's contentious dismissal in the 2013 Ashes series was a prime example of the pitfalls of the DRS.
Roar Guru
29th November, 2015
22
1018 Reads

How many contentious decisions must be played out at the highest level before cricket realises that accuracy should be valued over tradition?

In every sport other than cricket the word of Hawkeye technology is treated as gospel. When tennis players refer to their version of the ‘Decision Review System’ a ball which lands even a millimetre outside the court is considered out.

However, on the cricket field, when more than half the ball is shown to be missing the stumps on, the decision shown is ‘umpire’s call.’ This essentially means that the outcome of the review is potentially fundamentally incorrect.

When a ball connects even slightly with any individual stump and the bails are dislodged, that constitutes a dismissal. End of story.

Nevertheless, for some odd reason the word of the umpire is, in situations of this type, treated as more highly prised than that of a piece of technology which is, in essence, incapable of making an incorrect decision.

I propose that cricket should abandon ‘umpire’s call’ when it comes to reviews. The sport would benefit more from correct decisions than the controversy an incorrect decision which fails to be overturned brings. In turn, this move would alleviate the collective sighs of cricket fans when the umpire’s incorrect decision is honoured despite the ability to overturn it.

Multiple examples of the flaws in the current utilisation of the DRS were on-show in the third Test between Australia and New Zealand in Adelaide alone. In Australia’s second innings, Aussie skipper Steve Smith was given out LBW, despite the ball hitting his pad at a dubious height, and after consulting his batting partner decided to review the decision.

The ball was shown to be just clipping the top of off stump and thus the umpire’s call was upheld. However, had the umpire failed to raise his finger initially, Smith would have been free to continue at the crease.

Advertisement

This inconsistency in the rules should not exist. The DRS has the ability to rid the game of such ridiculous discrepancies, so why should cricket fans stand-by as their side is liable to be punished for the International Cricket Council’s lack of faith in the technology?

Put simply, they shouldn’t have to. Alternatively, another option which could be explored could be the removal of player input into the DRS altogether. Perhaps, the umpire could be in charge of when a review is necessary and refer the decision directly to Hawkeye. This would, for all intents and purposes, remove all forms of human error.

Essentially, cricket remains a sport for traditionalists, but shouldn’t be trapped in the past – now is the time to bring the game into the 21st century.

The ICC should start by embracing the Decision Review System, despite the reservations of the Indian Cricket Board. Now is the time for a greater value on accuracy and a move away from the constraints of tradition.

close