DRS is utter nonsense.

[rkt.india]

Pujara's dismissal last match and now Jaddu proves that DRS is shit.

[rkt.india]

11 minutes ago, Stumped said:

No it doesn't, if anything it proves that India are poor at using DRS.

that is the problem "using." It should not depend on using. Why cannot third umpire declare Jaddu not out now and let him come to bat after the wicket goes down?

[fineleg]

Dude rkt!!! That is not DRS problem! It is idiots in Indian team who did not review Jaddu/ChePu decision (Vijay and Ash, they were sleeping)

[kosingh]

India just needs to get better at using DRS. 

[fineleg]

DRS is fine, India needs to have brains

[beetle]

We are not good with referrals. The team management should be able to make the referrals if the batsmen are not smart enough.

[kubrickian]

I think it will take some time to get used to DRS as well. Cook didnt review a decision in first test which was not out and England team is more used to DRS than any other team.

 

Sometimes on the field you go with your gut instinct and decide not to waste a review and you only have maybe a minute to decide. We just have the benefit of replays and it looks dumb in hindsight.

[MCcricket]

My problem with DRS who do we only have 2 referrals per 80 innings, if not successful, even outs given not out are deemed as back to umpires call so? Yes it keeps umpires honest but still DRS should not be a ploy but a measure to give correct decisions, Dave Richards was saying 98% , my foot I would say in this test alone we will have 3 or 4 decisions like Jadeja, so we are talking lower percentage

[Lannister]

Third umpire should have the power to overturn 'incorrect' LBW decisions. If an on-field umpire can not judge it properly, it's unfair to blame it on batsmen by saying they 'should've' used it. DRS (especially 'LBW' decisions), at it's current stage is still an incomplete product. 

Edited November 18, 2016 by Lannister

[moniker]

that is the problem "using." It should not depend on using. Why cannot third umpire declare Jaddu not out now and let him come to bat after the wicket goes down?

It is not a review system if you are not "using". Third umpire right now is someone you escalate to, so the onus is on the players to escalate to him .

The fact that we still have on field umpires shows that technology is not good enough to replace them outright. That's why DRS was introduced to eliminate howlers, not each and every decision.

If the player feels he has received a howler, he should review. It's quite simple really. Everyone is over complicating DRS when it's purpose is actually very simple.

[chewy]

The non-striker has to be aware now and help out 

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Disagree RKT.DRS saved Pujara at Rajkot.

[Lannister]

What they should do is any on-field 'out' decisions should be re-checked irrespective of the availability of referrals. There is no need to give referrals to the batting side as they won't be needing it, giving 2-3 referrals only to fielding sides will be enough. 

[Texan]

1 hour ago, rkt.india said:

that is the problem "using." It should not depend on using. Why cannot third umpire declare Jaddu not out now and let him come to bat after the wicket goes down?

That will slow down the entire match in a sport already considered to be slow. The point is if you don't believe that you are out, you appeal.

[Cricketics]

RKT you are answeing yourself here and talking about two different things.

 

Even without DRS there should be a common sense that a bad decision by an on field umpre should be reverted by tv umpire, regardless of DRS being available or not. 

 

 

1 hour ago, rkt.india said:

that is the problem "using." It should not depend on using. Why cannot third umpire declare Jaddu not out now and let him come to bat after the wicket goes down?

 

[kubrickian]

10 minutes ago, Texan said:

That will slow down the entire match in a sport already considered to be slow. The point is if you don't believe that you are out, you appeal.

Perhaps not every decision, but there is a case for overturning a howler such as an lbw where ball is missing stumps or if there is an inside edge or in case of catches where it turns out there is nothing on snicko. A howler should be overturned irrespective of how many referrals are available.

 

[rkt.india]

3 hours ago, Lannister said:

Third umpire should have the power to overturn 'incorrect' LBW decisions. If an on-field umpire can not judge it properly, it's unfair to blame it on batsmen by saying they 'should've' used it. DRS (especially 'LBW' decisions), at it's current stage is still an incomplete product. 

absolutely agree.

[rkt.india]

2 hours ago, Texan said:

That will slow down the entire match in a sport already considered to be slow. The point is if you don't believe that you are out, you appeal.

how will it slow down the match? Like a batsman when gets retired hurt and can come back later to bat. Same way a batsman is given out by on-field umpire. Third umpire can later review that decision and it is not out on DRS, he should come back to bat later again once a wicket falls. 

[philcric]

3 hours ago, Lannister said:

What they should do is any on-field 'out' decisions should be re-checked irrespective of the availability of referrals. There is no need to give referrals to the batting side as they won't be needing it, giving 2-3 referrals only to fielding sides will be enough. 

This is a brilliant idea. This way at least batsmen won't be declared out incorrectly almost 100%.

 

There will be some subjectivity and strategy of using DRS from the bowling side's perspective which I guess can't be avoided, as every appeal from the bowling side cannot be reviewed by the 3rd umpire. Having 3 reviews instead of 2 every 80 overs for the bowling team can help a bit in this regard.

 

I feel this is the best solution so far ..

 

Batting team - 0 Reviews - All OUT decisions to be reviewed by the 3rd umpire.

Bowling team - 3 Reviews every 80 overs.

 

[Lannister]

28 minutes ago, philcric said:

This is a brilliant idea. This way at least batsmen won't be declared out incorrectly almost 100%.

 

There will be some subjectivity and strategy of using DRS from the bowling side's perspective which I guess can't be avoided, as every appeal from the bowling side cannot be reviewed by the 3rd umpire. Having 3 reviews instead of 2 every 80 overs for the bowling team can help a bit in this regard.

 

I feel this is the best solution so far ..

 

Batting team - 0 Reviews - All OUT decisions to be reviewed by the 3rd umpire.

Bowling team - 3 Reviews every 80 overs.

 

But this way there will be a huge pressure on 'on-filed' umpires , especially the likes of Dharmasena will have mental break-downs seeing how sh!t they are. The matches should be officiated by 2 set of umpires, each set to look after every 50 overs and rotated.