In Defence of the BCCI

[Sachinism]

Kilometres of newsprint, days of television, and millions and millions of kilobytes of material have been used up attacking the BCCI's "money-mindedness". The English press, former cricketers, all seem to be obsessed with talking about UDRS and the BCCI's staunch refusal to accept Hawkeye. Not a single person has bothered to counter argue. I shall now make an effort to do so. The thing is nobody disagrees with the fact that the BCCI is indeed a money making enterprise, and nobody should, because that is a fact. What is also a fact (that the foreign media love to forget) is that the ICC and it's members are equally money-obsessed. Fact number 1: The ICC has not bothered to stand up to the BCCI Why do you think that is? The BCCI is like a white elephant. As much as the rest of the world's bodies might despise them, the BCCI are the ones that bring in the majority of the moolah. So when the world says so much about the BCCI's money power, it must also be pointed out that the world refuses to act. Fact Number 2: T20 Internationals When the matter of having international T20 games came up, the BCCI were dead set against it. Even in one or two games that they did play, they refused to take them seriously. When the voting came up to establish the T20 world cup, the voting went 8-1 for it. Who voted against it? The BCCI. It is amazing how the world seems to have forgotten this. The ones that established the T20 format, are the ones who are now calling it a death knell for cricket. Hypocrisy. Fact Number 3: Domestic T20 One again most of the world displays a significant amount of selective amnesia. England created the T20 game at the county level to try and draw back the grounds and make money. The counties even had a handful of foreign players. The ICL, IPL all came later. But when the IPL boomed, the English Press were the first to express their disgust at it. The English who pretend to be high and mighty and most importantly abov and against leagues like the IPL created the 1st T20 league in the world. FACT. Now lets come to UDRS, and more specifically Hawkeye. I am not going to spend any time talking about whether there are technical failings or not, because frankly, I have no idea. The problem with the majority of the people in support of Hawkeye, is that they either work for them, have a slight idea or have absolutely no idea. The ICC Technical committee that approved UDRS and Hawkeye contains mostly former cricketers. No physicists. No mathematicians. Nobody who can truly grasp what the Hawkeye manufacturers are saying when they make their presentations. How can the ICC make a decision without understanding the finer details, and knowing what questions to ask, what errors could possibly occur. Of course, to be fair, Hawkeye has been willing to undergo an independent assessment along with competitors like Virtual Eye. Has it been done? No. Has the ICC pushed for it? No. Tell me how can they be absolutely certain that Hawkeye is infallible. Another problem with Hawkeye that not enough people talk about, is the nature of the errors that Hawkeye can potentially make. Even omitting to discuss the 2.5 m rule and the 40 cm rules. My problem isn't with the margin of error. Any system designed will always have a certain margin of error. To me the bigger concern is the massive goofs. When Sachin escaped being out LBW Saeed Ajmal in the WC SemiFinal. India rejoiced. But to every fan's naked eye, that looked out. Except to Hawkeye. After the game Ajmal was astounded. He had bowled a doosra, yet Hawkeye showed it drifting away down leg. Now by I all means I am indeed willing to accept that maybe my eyes were deceiving me. Maybe Hawkeye was right. But when the majority of the cricketing world doubts that decision? What do you do? Hence we come to what I feel is the main issue with Hawkeye. The trust factor. A scientifically unverified Hawkeye is an immense danger to the whole reliability of UDRS. We cannot trust a system that might make 1 massive mistake in even a million. As long as all mistake are within the 3mm range it's fine. But when there's even a miniscule chance of a mistake larger than that happening, everybody from players to umpires to fans will doubt every decision. Only we won't have anyway of conclusively saying if a decision was right or not. Why? Because all our eggs will be in Hawkeye's basket. Would I be ok with a well verified and scientifically accepted HawkEye? Yes. And I am certain the BCCI will be too. Until then, I will remain as skeptical as ever. So dear English media, before you jealously pounce on the Board of Control for Cricket in India, and indeed anybody else who has taken a dig at them, please look up the facts, before you attack. Thank you. EDIT: As @Chandan3 (on twitter) reminded me, The BCCI along with the SriLankan Board, were the first boards willing to trial the system. http://view-from-the-stands.blogspot.com/2011/07/in-defence-of-bcci.html

[ganeshran]

When you want to hate someone, you dont really need a valid reason, its always easy to invent one. Its the same thing against BCCI now. Many (not all) of those hating on it are jealous of its clout in International cricket today. UDRS is simply one reason. If BCCI accept UDRS, then haters will find some other reason. BCCI is no angel in the cricketing world, but is also in no way deserve to be demonised as much as it is.

[achilles]

This guy writes like me.

[pinkfreud]

That was a very good read, thanks.

[rkt.india]

I did not understand the Ajmal part. He said that was a doosra, but I do not think that was a doosra. Off spinning delivery when hitting on the pad in front of middle stump can easily go down leg.

[deepak_sach]

I did not understand the Ajmal part. He said that was a doosra' date=' but I do not think that was a doosra. Off spinning delivery when hitting on the pad in front of middle stump can easily go down leg.[/quote'] No.It was an intended doosra,but due to more rotations on the ball,it hit the pitch and turned a little bit.However I felt it would have hit leg stump.

[rkt.india]

No.It was an intended doosra' date='but due to more rotations on the ball,it hit the pitch and turned a little bit.However I felt it would have hit leg stump.[/quote'] No see the vidoes...it was not a doosra at all...doosra will never turn off spin and also the angle with which Ajmal delivers the ball was wide. we cant see the how much ball turned straight away because it pitch very close to the pad and hit low.

[deepak_sach]

No see the vidoes...it was not a doosra at all...doosra will never turn off spin and also the angle with which Ajmal delivers the ball was wide. we cant see the how much ball turned straight away because it pitch very close to the pad and hit low.

No.You could see a puff of dust on the ground when the ball hit it.So it turned more than Saeed Ajmal had wanted it too.It was more like hitting-the-rough-patch

[rkt.india]

No.You could see a puff of dust on the ground when the ball hit it.So it turned more than Saeed Ajmal had wanted it too.It was more like hitting-the-rough-patch

but it was turning off spin, not doosra...

[Aaku]

:two_thumbs_up::two_thumbs_up: I BCCI ! :P

[vamos_rafa]

No see the vidoes...it was not a doosra at all...doosra will never turn off spin and also the angle with which Ajmal delivers the ball was wide. we cant see the how much ball turned straight away because it pitch very close to the pad and hit low.

Agreed. It wasn't a doosra for sure. He bowled the normal off spinning delivery. You are spot on with the angle of Ajmal's bowling as well. And to the naked eye,I felt it was going down leg side. But that's pretty debatable. But, speaking of technology, how come can anyone explain KP's reprieve against MSD? Their clearly was a woody noise and the hot spot could not pick it. And if that's not at all, how to answer Morgan's refusal to review his caught behind dismissal in the first innings at Lord's? The Hot spot didn't pick a nick then as well but Morgan said he did not review as he knew that he had nicked it.

[someone]

When you want to hate someone, you dont really need a valid reason, its always easy to invent one. Its the same thing against BCCI now. Many (not all) of those hating on it are jealous of its clout in International cricket today. UDRS is simply one reason. If BCCI accept UDRS, then haters will find some other reason. BCCI is no angel in the cricketing world, but is also in no way deserve to be demonised as much as it is.

Agree, And this just sums up everything wrong with the world where people are inventing new reasons for hate just because they are jeolous

[Crookbond]

Agreed. It wasn't a doosra for sure. He bowled the normal off spinning delivery. You are spot on with the angle of Ajmal's bowling as well. And to the naked eye,I felt it was going down leg side. But that's pretty debatable. But, speaking of technology, how come can anyone explain KP's reprieve against MSD? Their clearly was a woody noise and the hot spot could not pick it. And if that's not at all, how to answer Morgan's refusal to review his caught behind dismissal in the first innings at Lord's? The Hot spot didn't pick a nick then as well but Morgan said he did not review as he knew that he had nicked it.

These are the reasons to wait before jumping on the DRS. I have seen people claiming it's better than the umpires. Both of these instances show that DRS has a problem at : execution and accuracy.

[vamos_rafa]

These are the reasons to wait before jumping on the DRS. I have seen people claiming it's better than the umpires. Both of these instances show that DRS has a problem at : execution and accuracy.

Thats's true. But then, the whole world sees it as a conspiracy by the BCCI to not to use technology. But I m pretty sure most of the whiners themselves know that it isn't fool proof. And noone cares to look at the fact that the DRS aided us the most in the WC but still we stand up against it as we feel it ain't fool proof. Its not as if we took a U-turn in our stand after the WC. We have maintained on our stand over it. It may sound crappy to people that we don't want to use it but its a fact that technology still is not fool proof. And mind you, we are talking of hot spot, which has been accepted by one and all!!!

[wobblydoggy]

Many good points were made in the OP in relation to the nay saying of other organisations and outsiders in relation to the BCCI Perception is not everything, just because people speak out against a particular decision of the BCCI they do not necessarily 'hate' them as many use that word here. I have made points in relation to the English and Australian position within the game pre ICC and even early on in the ICC's creation. They largely were a benign influence wanting to see cricket grow for all at a sensible and sustainable pace. The reasons that many in other countries speak out about the BCCI's influence is that it is most definately not being used benignly or for the benefit of all concerned, but most definately for them and them alone. The super group of test playing nations is one such example. Of course we would all like to see SA Vrs India rather than say SA Vrs Bangladesh. If we allow that to rarely occur though because all the supposedly big teams play each other more, is that fair on the small fry like Australia (Joke) WI is a case in point, their decline has seen them becoming a less desirable fixture, that could happen to you when all your best players retire soon. How would you feel if you were ousted out of the super group and of course it could happen to any team. I don't think the BCCI's thinking is clear on that Now what about Hawkeye etc. All the other nations have approved it, that should be enough

[Chandan]

I've replied to your points regarding the super group in the other thread too. As for HE, even you know the moment BCCI will be outvoted in any voting issue,it will be approved. Perhaps you forgot T20 WC event. Even then BCCI was against it but other nations approved it and hence it went forward. Likewise if everyone is approving HE, as you are saying, it should have gone ahead too. The matter it not as clear as media is making it out to be. Some more countries must have been opposing it along with BCCI and hence it is not going forward.

[Sachinism]

Many good points were made in the OP in relation to the nay saying of other organisations and outsiders in relation to the BCCI Perception is not everything, just because people speak out against a particular decision of the BCCI they do not necessarily 'hate' them as many use that word here. I have made points in relation to the English and Australian position within the game pre ICC and even early on in the ICC's creation. They largely were a benign influence wanting to see cricket grow for all at a sensible and sustainable pace. The reasons that many in other countries speak out about the BCCI's influence is that it is most definately not being used benignly or for the benefit of all concerned, but most definately for them and them alone. The super group of test playing nations is one such example. Of course we would all like to see SA Vrs India rather than say SA Vrs Bangladesh. If we allow that to rarely occur though because all the supposedly big teams play each other more, is that fair on the small fry like Australia (Joke) WI is a case in point, their decline has seen them becoming a less desirable fixture, that could happen to you when all your best players retire soon. How would you feel if you were ousted out of the super group and of course it could happen to any team. I don't think the BCCI's thinking is clear on that Now what about Hawkeye etc. All the other nations have approved it, that should be enough

I always :giggle: when I hear an Englishman or Aussie use this argument

[wobblydoggy]

I always :giggle: when I hear an Englishman or Aussie use this argument

Laugh all you like, you would not be playing the game at all if England had not invented it and England and Australia had not pioneered test cricket in its earliest form. I know for a fact that England has for many many years nurtured cricket around the world and still do. Surely our status as the Home of cricket gives us the right to express opinion about our baby, even if ultimately the decision goes against us.

[wobblydoggy]

I've replied to your points regarding the super group in the other thread too. As for HE, even you know the moment BCCI will be outvoted in any voting issue,it will be approved. Perhaps you forgot T20 WC event. Even then BCCI was against it but other nations approved it and hence it went forward. Likewise if everyone is approving HE, as you are saying, it should have gone ahead too. The matter it not as clear as media is making it out to be. Some more countries must have been opposing it along with BCCI and hence it is not going forward.[/QUOTE] I see the ICC's management being as much at fault here. The players want it of all the other nations, but the ICC are deaf to them and only hear the BCCI. Therefore we have this ridiculous halfway house for each series of sometimes using HE sometimes not. It can lead to confusion in appeals and what can and cannot be reviewed, it is quite frankly ridiculous. It should be all or nothing. But who want to go back to umpiring abominations, certainly not the players

[Sachinism]

Laugh all you like, you would not be playing the game at all if England had not invented it and England and Australia had not pioneered test cricket in its earliest form. I know for a fact that England has for many many years nurtured cricket around the world and still do. Surely our status as the Home of cricket gives us the right to express opinion about our baby, even if ultimately the decision goes against us.

You wouldn't be playing it if we weren't funding the game. No as home of cricket you have no right to express anything. We've seen the results of you having your way, now get back in the corner and carry on being our b!tch (directed at ECB)