India captain MS Dhoni believes his side are getting the raw end of the deal from umpires as payback for the team’s ongoing refusal to use the Decision Review System.
The powerful Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) are continuing to block the use of DRS in any games involving India – and it’s starting to hurt.
Australian batsman George Bailey should have been out for a golden duck in Tuesday’s ODI at the WACA when he gloved a delivery through to the wicketkeeper.
Hot spot showed the ball tickled Bailey’s glove on the way through, and snicko strengthened the evidence.
But with the umpire giving Bailey not out – and no DRS available for the game – India simply had to accept the decision.
Had Bailey been given out, Australia would have been in all sorts of trouble at 3-21.
Instead, Bailey went on to make 112 in a 242-run stand with Steve Smith (149) to lift Australia to a five-wicket win.
When asked whether his position on DRS had changed, Dhoni replied: “Are you indirectly saying that we don’t get decisions in our favour because we don’t use DRS?”
“We need to push the umpires to take the right decision.
“You have to see how many 50-50 decisions don’t go in our favour.”
When asked whether he felt his team might not be getting the 50-50 calls in their favour because of their stance on the DRS, Dhoni replied: “I may agree with you.”
Dhoni said the variables on DRS were simply too great, with too much emphasis being placed on the umpire’s original decision.
For example, if a batsman is given not out fallowing an appeal for lbw, the decision can only be overturned if DRS shows more than 50 per cent of the ball is hitting the stumps.
But if the original decision was out, then even one per cent of the ball hitting the stumps is enough for the batsman to be dismissed.
“DRS shouldn’t be umpire’s decision justification system,” Dhoni said.
“In tennis there is nothing which says, ‘The umpire has given it out, and half the ball needs to pitch inside the line, and if he has given it not out, then the scenario is different’.
“The rules need to be plain and simple.
“It (shouldn’t) matter whether you are given out or not (by the umpire).”
Bailey broke out into a grin when asked whether he had gotten any glove to the ball.
“It just caught the thigh guard a little bit I reckon,” Bailey said.
“It would have been interesting on DRS to have a look at that, wouldn’t it.”
Don Freo
Guest
I think we should just admit the conspiracy and keep giving dud decisions against India until they wake up. Silly buggers.
Andrew
Guest
If India don't like DRS then too bad. If they don't feel they're getting a fair go with umpires, fall into line (which they should) and accept DRS or shut up. Simple
Phantom
Roar Rookie
Didn't the DRS get used in the word cup. If India played in that is that not tacit acceptance of the process
Clavers
Guest
Is Dhoni aware that all the umpires appointed for Test matches come from "neutral" countries? Does he think that all these neutral umpires have a bias against India?
Forest Gimp
Guest
I expect Dhoni to be fielding in either silly mid grassy knoll or deep square area 51 for the rest of the tour. I'm sure his foil hat will put George's yellow one to shame.
JGK
Roar Guru
171* is the 4th highest losing score ever. Last night was the first time a team had a 170+ and a 90+ and still lost although Dilshan (160) and Sanga (106) came close in Hobart against India a couple of years ago.
Jameswm
Guest
How often does someone score 170 (or even 150+), and another 90 in the same innings, and you lose?
felix
Guest
Indian cricket team is funny,no they are not a joke but I find them really amusing. :-D How funny was Rohit making a run a ball 150 just so he could prove he can make 150 against an average Aussy bowling line up,that was for himself and he's record but at no point after he got to 100 did I think he was playing for the team.
The Bush
Roar Guru
That's gambler;s fallacy. The "odds" start over each time - you simply have a 50% chance each time, what has happened before is irrelevant.
Osmond
Guest
That's the spuds talking, Bargearse.
The lazy Phoenix
Roar Pro
Poor diddums...
Don Freo
Guest
Sorry Andy. When we say a decision is 50/50, we mean it could go either way. We don't mean it is India's turn or it is Australia's turn. It is not maths. It is language.
Jameswm
Guest
Who doesn't like the Indians? We don't like how they carry on, or play the victim. It's their behaviour (some of the time) that we don't like. You might want to be a bit more careful how you write that next time.
Andy
Guest
That is actually exactly what it means though. If there are 50-50 calls then you will get 50% of them over enough time, its maths.
Andy
Guest
How does it not make sense to you? His two positions are not related, they exclude each other. He either wants a system where the umpires decision is everything or where the umpires decision, if questioned, carries no weight. I get that we dont like the Indians on here but everything he has said has been said many times before on here, even the 'wahh we dont get the 50/50 calls' the only difference is that we complain about Australia not getting them.
BargeArse
Guest
That is a classic and well-worn trick, to divert attention from losses. Like that contentious Sydney test when the Indians accused Australia of bad sportsmanship to cover the fact they had lost three wickets in one over to Michael Clarke to lose the test.
Jameswm
Guest
My recollection is that it all seems to stem back to Sachin not liking the DRS – anyone know if that's true? My take was that Sachin realised his aura could intimidate an umpire, but not a computer.
MJB
Guest
I just wish someone would tell all sportspeople that 50-50 does not mean that you get 50% of decisions in your favour.
Jameswm
Guest
Sorry I posted this on another thread - point 2 has of course been commented on by Cantab... One classic comment from Dhoni: “We need to push the umpires to take the right decision”. – what exactly does he mean here? Appeal harder? Argue with them so they get it right? Of course, we all know that only the Indians on the field know what the correct decision is. That is a completely absurd comment. Dhoni said the Indians don’t like it going back to umpire’s call if <50% of the ball is hitting the stumps. This raises two basic points: 1. Why not use it for caughts and just not for LBWs? 2. Dhoni doesn't like it going to umpire's call. This means no DRS for India games. This means it is ALWAYS umpire's call. So Dhoni doesn't like it occasionally reverting to umpire's call (if it is a <50%er), so he is relying on umpire's call all the time. Does he not see the flaw in his reasoning here?
Ken
Guest
There's never been a great deal of logic in the BCCI position. They wanted a different implementation originally and their defences are now too dug in to change their mind.