For well over 100 years, cricket survived and prospered on one ideal: that when the umpire gave you out you were out. In today’s cricketing landscape, this ideal still exists, but it seems to suddenly need the addition of technological wizardry.
Love it or hate it, the Decision Review System is now in existence.
It apparantly leads to better decisions and umpires feeling more secure in making them. More importantly it eliminates those odd occasions when the umpires make total mistakes. However, as with any system, it is not 100 percent accurate.
This is where India come in. They don’t believe in DRS for a variety of reasons. They prefer an umpire to do his job correctly and make the decision in regards to how he saw it, not how a tracking system perceived it.
The point to be made here is the hysteria over not using the DRS is over the top. India are simply making cricket an old fashioned game again. A game in which an umpire views a situation as it happens and makes a decision. If it’s given out, then it’s out.
More importantly, if it’s given not out, they respect the decision and move on. It is true that Inda may not have always done this in the past, but their stance against technology demands respect for the umpire’s decision, and India seem ready to abide by that demand.
For those who do complain about the non use of the system, remember India did actually have to use it against the West Indies earlier in the year. The problem was that the system failed in the dismissal of the Indian captain, reinforcing India’s stance against it.
Cricket will survive India’s disagreement with technology. It may even prosper under that key law: that the umpire’s decision is final.
Jimbo
Guest
I find it absurd India on the one hand are unwilling to use the DRS, yet have the gall to use the no ball review in the case of dismissals. At least in the case of the DRS, you can have an idea if an LBW hit you outside the line, or you missed a nick, but the batsman could surely have no idea if a ball was a no ball or not.
Superd
This refusal to use the DRS is all about India's willingness to use their power at all costs. I, personally, have no problem with not using technology. However, I am not of the view that India (or, the BCCI to be more precise) have altruistic reasons for refusing to use the DRS. The ICC should, independently, have the power to decide how international cricket is run. If nine out of ten Test playing nations want to use the DRS then it should be used for all series. And the ICC should pay for its use and ensure that the best technology is used.
Stam
Guest
If a test series has been agreed (or disagreed) that the drs will not be in use, should then the broadcaster stop from showing us replays that will only infuriate tv viewers? These replays are not fairly showing us how the umpire came to his decision and can only really lead to viewer frustration at the umpire.