ICC defends umpires, DRS

[StriKe]

The ICC has defended the performance of the umpires and the DRS after criticism following the Trent Bridge Test between England and Australia, whilst also admitting to errors in cases involving Jonathan Trott and Stuart Broad. The ICC has taken the unusual step of revealing its assessment of the umpires and the DRS analysis from the Test, arguing that the figures vindicate both. Some mitigation was provided for the errors that did occur, the ICC suggesting the "added intensity" of a first Ashes Test had increased pressure on the officials. According to the ICC, the umpires made a total of 72 decisions, which is well above the average (49) for a DRS Test match. The umpiring team, made up of Aleem Dar, Kumar Dharmasena and Marais Erasmus, was assessed to have made seven errors during the match, out of which three were uncorrected decisions and four decisions corrected using the DRS. As such, the correct decision percentage before reviews stood at 90.3% but climbed to 95.8% as a result of the use of the DRS. This represented an increase of 5.5% in correct decisions, which was the average increase from DRS Test matches in 2012-13. The three decisions that were marked as uncorrected errors included one against Trott when a correct lbw decision (not out against the bowling of Mitchell Starc) was overturned. The others involved Broad, both the edge that carried to slip via Brad Haddin's gloves and a leg-before shout where he did not offer a stroke, but neither but these could be corrected as Australia had no reviews available. "When coupled with the conditions, with reverse swing and spin playing an important role, and the added intensity of the first Ashes Test, it was a difficult match to umpire," read the ICC statement. The ICC's chief executive, David Richardson, added: "The umpires did a good job under difficult conditions. This reflects the calibre of umpires Dar, Dharmasena and Erasmus who have consistently performed at a high level. Like the players, umpires can also have good and bad days but we all know that the umpire's decision, right or wrong, is final and must be accepted. "While the ICC has complete faith in the ability of its umpires, our confidence in technology is also strengthened by the fact that there was an increase in the number of correct decisions in the Trent Bridge Test through the use of the DRS. "Technology was introduced with the objective of eradicating the obvious umpiring errors, and to get as many correct decisions as possible. If it can help increase the correct decisions by 5.5 percent, then it is a good outcome, but we must continue to strive to improve umpiring and the performance of the DRS."

Source

[G_B_]

These are meaningless statistics really. Some of the England and Aussie appeals were so bad in this ashes test that even a lay man would give them not out. Now a days in test matches people appeal every time something hits the pad. Especially the keeper when upto the spinner. How many 50-50 calls and blatent out/not out did the umpires get wrong? The DRS is also not a cheap system. You have about 5% improvement for nearly £50,000 spent per test match. While Aus and England can easily afford it, surely cash strapped boards cannot afford to throw money away like this for so little improvement. Sort of explains why Pak v WI has no DRS.

[StriKe]

Sort of explains why Pak v WI has no DRS.

Commies said it was not available for 1st ODI.

[G_B_]

Commies said it was not available for 1st ODI.

so todays ODI has DRS?

[StriKe]

so todays ODI has DRS?

no..Have no idea why it takes so long to setup

There had been talk suggesting the DRS would be in use for today's game, but the organisers couldn't put it in place in time for the second ODI either

[G_B_]

I see this game boards are playing. DRS needs to be booked months ahead and cant be last min. these boards want to save money as they dont want to shell out £10,000 per day. So they tell the DRS companies they want them set up last min knowing full and well that they wont arrive in time and they wont have to pay.....

[Ram]

Half of ICC’s problems are because of the gross mis-handling of the reviews by batsmen, who despite knowing that they have edged a ball, hope that hot-spot does not catch the edge. I have no idea what business Michael Clarke had, reviewing his edge in the 2nd innings. Plus, every time a batsmen is given not out and the fielding captain reviews it and the decision is over-turned, the batsmen reacts as if a gross injustice has just been committee. It is not the on-field umpire’s fault If the third umpire chooses to overturn a decision made on the field. Just accept the decision and get on with it.

[G_B_]

Half of ICC’s problems are because of the gross mis-handling of the reviews by batsmen' date=' who despite knowing that they have edged a ball, hope that hot-spot does not catch the edge. I have no idea what business Michael Clarke had, reviewing his edge in the 2nd innings. Plus, every time a batsmen is given not out and the fielding captain reviews it and the decision is over-turned, the batsmen reacts as if a gross injustice has just been committee. It is not the on-field umpire’s fault If the third umpire chooses to overturn a decision made on the field. Just accept the decision and get on with it.[/quote'] do the batsman really know if its a faint edge? Some of the decisions had really faint edges.

[Ram]

do the batsman really know if its a faint edge? Some of the decisions had really faint edges.

I have played cricket with the hard-ball at an amateur level. Unless it is bat/pad/glove all mixed up with each other, 95/100 times, you know when you have edged ball. DRS was meant to be used when know for sure that there has been a unacceptable howler, not when you would like to review marginal 50/50 calls. Unfortunately, as you’d expect, the circumstance of the game seems to dictate the use (or lack thereof) of the reviews, than the actual magnitude of the umpiring error. One way the ICC can address the situation somewhat is by having 4 combined reviews – 2 each for catches and lbws.

[Prakat]

The reason we have DRS is because England - Australia tests are umpired by officials who are not home-trained. Both boards believe having a system that over-rides the on-field umpires is essential for a well-officiated match.