Ultimate_Game Posted July 14, 2013 Author Posted July 14, 2013 DRS has not been so controversial till this match. Part of the blame is on the third umpire. How can he imagine that the sound might be because of a nick? That's where the problem is. Without snicko how did the 3rd umpire know for sure it was out? Where's the consistency? What about the underlying principle of 3rd ump over-ruling on field decision only in case of irrefutable evidence? In this test, 3rd ump over-ruled on field decisions based on flimsy evidence and in some cases those decisions were not even howlers but merely line decisions which should have stayed with the on field call. To compound matters the one howler we saw in the match (Broad edging to slips), DRS was of no help :omg: Surely ICC has to work on tightening the DRS and take a fresh look at the way it needs to be implemented. Right now there's no consistency in the way DRS is used and you really don't know what the DRS decision will be.
indiefan Posted July 14, 2013 Posted July 14, 2013 That's where the problem is. Without snicko how did the 3rd umpire know for sure it was out? Where's the consistency? What about the underlying principle of 3rd ump over-ruling on field decision only in case of irrefutable evidence? In this test, 3rd ump over-ruled on field decisions based on flimsy evidence and in some cases those decisions were not even howlers but merely line decisions which should have stayed with the on field call. To compound matters the one howler we saw in the match (Broad edging to slips), DRS was of no help :omg: Surely ICC has to work on tightening the DRS and take a fresh look at the way it needs to be implemented. Right now there's no consistency in the way DRS is used and you really don't know what the DRS decision will be. The lbws where the ball hits the outer part of the stump is another one that should be corrected. It should simply be taken as "not out", instead of going ahead with umpire's decision which makes it a 50-50 call. I still support DRS for removing howlers.
adi B Posted July 14, 2013 Posted July 14, 2013 I dont know why Indian fans are seething about this? Just how big is your hatred? u folllow 2 teams,why cant indians follow aus this series.. u urself know there was`nt any evidence to overturn the umpire`s decision which was not out..he might have nicked it but following the steps of DRS procedure,surely he cant be given out.. about dar,i have vouched my opinion on him years back that he is highly incompetent
Ultimate_Game Posted July 14, 2013 Author Posted July 14, 2013 I dont know why Indian fans are seething about this? Just how big is your hatred? What hatred are you talking about? As a cricket fan I feel disappointed that such a great game was influenced due to inconsistency of a half baked system (DRS). In North America there's a phrase people use all the time "Let the players play and decide the game". In this game the umpires, with help from DRS, did the opposite. They didn't let the players play and influenced the game applying DRS inconsistently. This is why most fans are outraged. Nothing about hatred as we don't have "skin in the game" so to speak but as cricket fans this wasn't what we expected.
Ultimate_Game Posted July 14, 2013 Author Posted July 14, 2013 The lbws where the ball hits the outer part of the stump is another one that should be corrected. It should simply be taken as "not out", instead of going ahead with umpire's decision which makes it a 50-50 call. I still support DRS for removing howlers. LBWs is another grey area. They have to move away from "umpire's call" to either benefit of doubt given to batsman or the bowler. You can't have the same event (ball shaving the stumps) having two separate results. Either it's out in both the cases or in neither.
CG Posted July 14, 2013 Posted July 14, 2013 Haddin was clearly out there was a edge and haddin instantly turned back to see if prior took the catch.Later snicko proved it.Australia have only themselves to blame for not using drs well only for howlers like broad.L.b.w will always be debated,i would like to use only the mat and not the hawkeye .
indiefan Posted July 14, 2013 Posted July 14, 2013 They are playing right into the hands of Sreenivasan and Co. Don't think we will have DRS in india's test matches any time soon.
SLICKR392 Posted July 14, 2013 Posted July 14, 2013 Snicko confirmed it man. and say what you want the sound was pretty conclusive. What else could the sound have been? Then why use hotspot? Why use DRS at all if it gives you the precise result after the decesion is made?
Deleted_User_1 Posted July 14, 2013 Posted July 14, 2013 That's where the problem is. Without snicko how did the 3rd umpire know for sure it was out? Where's the consistency? What about the underlying principle of 3rd ump over-ruling on field decision only in case of irrefutable evidence? In this test, 3rd ump over-ruled on field decisions based on flimsy evidence and in some cases those decisions were not even howlers but merely line decisions which should have stayed with the on field call. To compound matters the one howler we saw in the match (Broad edging to slips), DRS was of no help :omg: Surely ICC has to work on tightening the DRS and take a fresh look at the way it needs to be implemented. Right now there's no consistency in the way DRS is used and you really don't know what the DRS decision will be. I agree with you. I think it was lucky that the final decision turned out to be correct, the way they got there was totally flawed. Just because the right outcome happened does not mean that the process is OK. Also England won by a handful of runs. With's Broad's shocker and a few of the marginal decisions that went the Poms way, England can hardly rejoice, they basically got lucky in this game thanks to the fecking Dar!!!
Crookbond Posted July 14, 2013 Posted July 14, 2013 Given the context of the rules set, Erasmus was well within his rights to give the batsmen OUT. Now, ICC and the public in general may make Erasmus the scapegoat but the precedent was already set way back when the DRS was pushed to "eliminate howlers" but used by teams all over for "tactical reviews". The proponents of the technology at that time once again went that X% better LBWs, Y% better catches etc. etc. but like I have always maintained that was just pure propaganda as there is lack of publicly available evaluation benchmarks.
Vilander Posted July 14, 2013 Posted July 14, 2013 They are playing right into the hands of Sreenivasan and Co. Don't think we will have DRS in india's test matches any time soon. who are playing ? if DRS is flawed its flawed no body is playing into anybodys hands...
IKnowU Posted July 14, 2013 Posted July 14, 2013 If there was no hotspot mark on the bat, it would be inconclusive by definition. But everything supporting it that it was is suddenly somehow not good enough :facepalm:
Sachin=GOD Posted August 1, 2013 Posted August 1, 2013 ESPNcricinfo @ESPNcricinfo James Sutherland, Cricket Australia CEO, to seek "an explanation" from the ICC over the dismissal of Usman Khawaja #theashes
zep1706 Posted August 1, 2013 Posted August 1, 2013 ESPNcricinfo @ESPNcricinfo James Sutherland, Cricket Australia CEO, to seek "an explanation" from the ICC over the dismissal of Usman Khawaja #theashes And the regular response of "yes we have made a mistake" will follow.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now