It seems nothing will convince India to re-evaluate its stance on the Decision Review System, judging by star opener Murali Vijay’s reaction to yet another howler.
India had few complaints after Vijay’s 144 steered the visitors to a strong 4-311 by stumps on day one of the second Test against a wilting Australia at a sweltering Gabba on Wednesday.
Not even umpire Ian Gould’s poor call to give Cheteshwar Pujara out caught behind for 18 could rile India.
The most emotion was shown by Pujara who lingered at the crease momentarily and trudged off the Gabba, shaking his head in disbelief.
Replays confirmed why – the ball clearly deflected off Pujara’s helmet with wicketkeeper Brad Haddin uninterested in appealing.
The closest India came to addressing the DRS’ return came at the post-day one press conference when a spirited Vijay debated with a reporter.
Initially he did not want to respond when asked about Pujara’s dismissal and DRS.
“I can’t comment on DRS,” he said.
When pressed, Vijay said: “My opinion, it was a bad decision.
“Humans are standing out there, so obviously mistakes do happen. It’s part of the game.”
When told less mistakes were made using DRS, Vijay interjected: “That’s your opinion.”
Clearly, recovering Australia skipper Michael Clarke was not impressed by Pujara’s dismissal.
“Not a great decision that one,” he tweeted.
It is the type of howler that led to the development of the DRS six years ago.
However, India mistrust the system and it will not be used in the ongoing four-Test series.
Gould raised the ire of Shikhar Dhawan in the first Test, raising his finger when a bouncer clipped the batsman’s arm en route to Haddin.
DRS could also have saved Ajinkya Rahane in the first Test, with the batsman incorrectly given out caught at short leg by umpire Marais Erasmus.
“Unless it’s 100 per cent accurate I don’t think (India) will change our take on it,” stand-in skipper Virat Kohli said prior to the first Test.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Enough with calling everything a "howler". The umpire giving a batsman out, where on a second look with a close-up slow-motion replay people were able to see that it definitely hit the helmet and were pretty sure it missed the glove, is hardly a howler. It's a decision that on closer inspection appeared to be an incorrect one. That's not a "howler"! Same with the wicket off the shoulder in Adelaide. The ball could have easily brushed the glove. On very close inspection, going over and over again in super slow-motion and using all the technology most people decided it didn't look like it flicked the glove on the way past. it's ridiculous to call such a thing a howler.