The DRS is not the solution, it's part of the problem - Adam Gilchrist

[vvvslaxman]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/651695.html The DRS is not the solution, it's part of the problem Not only does the review system rob the game of spontaneity and drama, it does not get rid of the mistakes it was created to eradicate In a week of fantastic Test cricket filled with high drama and controversy, it was inevitable - given one of those controversies was over someone walking, or not walking - that I was drawn into the debate. That was exacerbated when an idiot who was pretending to be me on Twitter, under a fake account, started to be quoted in newspaper articles as me. To clarify: I have never had a Twitter account and still don't, so any accounts claiming to be me are fake. Despite the fact that I was a walker, I don't judge any player, past or present, who chooses a different approach. However, I believe the Trent Bridge Test focused the light clearly on the Decision Review System, and overall I think the game is poorer for its inclusion. The spontaneity and drama, the magic and intrigue that Test cricket always possessed has been lost. The reality and finality of seeing the umpire's finger raised has been erased, because everyone now looks to the batsman or fielding captain to see their response. Compare the way the Trent Bridge Test ended on Sunday with the memorable scenes at Edgbaston in 2005, when in a similar result Australia fell agonisingly short of the target. Michael Kasprowicz was the last man out, caught behind off Steve Harmison, and if the DRS had been in place, we would probably still be looking at the tape because I don't think anyone really knows even now whether it was out or not. That's fine: I have no problem with the decision that was made. I was part of the Australian team on that occasion and we, and the whole nation, ended up on the losing side in an incredible match. But what a magical finish it was for cricket. There was no possibility of that instant being lost, whereas now those split-second moments and the ensuing few seconds are quite different. The scenes that played out at Trent Bridge won't be remembered in the same way as those from Edgbaston. In my opinion, the game is poorer for that. I don't say that because the decision to give Brad Haddin out caught-behind cost Australia a Test match. I understand the proposed benefits of technology eradicating umpiring errors but this Test match, which was full of wonderful technique and skill and fight, showed quite glaringly that the errors are still occurring. I have always found it a frustration that under the DRS a player can question an umpire's decision. One of the strongest elements of the spirit of any sport is not questioning the umpires or referees. We now have a situation where players can do that, albeit limited times. That doesn't sit comfortably with me. Yes, technology is here, but perhaps a Test match like this has gone a long way to indicate that the umpires need to have full control as to when a decision is reviewed, rather than the players. For the first time, I'm starting to understand India's reluctance to go with the system. :cantstop:It's not a remedy that seems to have cured the problem. In fact, it may even have become more of a problem. Listening to Michael Clarke talk about using his reviews poorly, it has certainly become more of a headache for captains. It was an outstanding Test match, the kind of hard-fought Test I remember watching when I was growing up. But I feel technology took something away from the game, for both the teams and for the spectators. The only sport I've seen where technology has really enhanced the sport - and they're getting it right - is tennis. The review system in tennis is adding to the spectacle and the occasion. It's so quick, and in fact it has probably sped the game up because we don't have players spending time questioning the umpire's call. They just refer it and the decision is made quickly. But those are line decisions, like run-outs in cricket, not catches or lbws. Perhaps cricket's DRS needs to be put on the back-burner until a better system is found. Despite Australia's loss, there is plenty for the team to take from Trent Bridge into this week's Lord's Test. There was strong evidence the players were really united in their effort and were totally committed to doing whatever the team required. Those are good signs. It's going to be very tough, but I think what we saw there was the foundation of a group that has the potential to succeed. It was so refreshing to see Ashton Agar's approach to Test cricket. What spoke volumes, as much as the 98 runs and two wickets and his cool head, was his reaction on getting out: the disappointed smile and then his interaction with his family, apologising to them for not getting a hundred. It was a wonderful and uninhibited approach from a player who doesn't expect anything from the game, and I don't expect that will change just because of the way he played at Trent Bridge. Agar and the rest of the lower half of the order showed that if you watch the ball closely and occupy the crease, there will be runs on offer in this series. There's a position or two in the batting line-up that might come under scrutiny. I think Ed Cowan is the one who will feel the heat the most. But he has just been moved to a new position from anything else he's been asked to do in Test cricket, so one more opportunity at Lord's would allow him to feel he's had a fair crack at No. 3. The top six know they have to step up and be the predominant run scorers and not leave it to the bottom five. The Australians will be gutted but it's a good thing that there is such a quick turnaround between Tests. There has to be a binding effect for a group like that, to know they were so close to achieving success together. I wouldn't expect much change in the team for Lord's. Despite the result, they have built up a nice unit and there is a bit of momentum - a refreshing change from what we have seen recently.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

More people will understand the futility of DRS. Only somehow the English team and board profit from it. Sent from my GT-I9103 using Tapatalk 2

[G_B_]

that first ashes test was like one big propaganda tool for the bcci

[namasteji1]

DRS surely is going to be scrapped. Now more and more boards will oppose it. Finally something good and sensible happening rather than employing a technology which is flawed and used just for the sake of it.

[FischerTal]

gilly gilly gilly Oi Oi Oi :cheerleader:

[rkt.india]

DRS surely is going to be scrapped. Now more and more boards will oppose it. Finally something good and sensible happening rather than employing a technology which is flawed and used just for the sake of it.

I dont think technology had much to do with what happened in the test. It is how is used is flawed. I will be happy if umpires and third umpires used it than the players With players using, it becomes tactical and come down to how well and accurately they can use it.

[vamos_rafa]

I dont think technology had much to do with what happened in the test. It is how is used is flawed. I will be happy if umpires and third umpires used it than the players With players using' date=' it becomes tactical and come down to how well and accurately they can use it.[/quote'] But when you give power to umpire, then how do you take out the possibilty of over turning a wrong decision? Like in the SFs of WC, umpire gave Sachin out, he reviewed and as it turned out he was NO. How would you avoid such situations now? I know Pakistani people have a different view but that was actually not out :winky:

[rkt.india]

But when you give power to umpire, then how do you take out the possibilty of over turning a wrong decision? Like in the SFs of WC, umpire gave Sachin out, he reviewed and as it turned out he was NO. How would you avoid such situations now? I know Pakistani people have a different view but that was actually not out :winky:

This is a situation too. Then we can have both together, not just one. For me, technology is satisfactory but its use left a lot to be desired.

[vamos_rafa]

This is a situation too. Then we can have both together' date=' not just one. For me, technology is satisfactory but its use left a lot to be desired.[/quote'] It's too subjective IMO. Would take a lot of time before all ends can meet.

[IKnowU]

BS India had no good reason to not use it. You all just jockeyed BCCI's decision without any proper explanation and now lapping it up because of the uproar. Mob mentality at it's best.

[adi B]

DRS is fine(couple of flaws),it still will eliminate the howlers considering how incompetent some umpires are

[India-KXIP fan]

DRS is fine, Broad got lucky because of no DRS. Also DRS was correct in that match, for Haddin and for Clarke. Only controversy was Trott, but that wasn't DRS's fault. Watto's lb was dodgy but the ump gave it anyway. People just Bs' ing about it being wrong, it wasn't. /thread

[G_B_]

DRS is fine, Broad got lucky because of no DRS. Also DRS was correct in that match, for Haddin and for Clarke. Only controversy was Trott, but that wasn't DRS's fault. Watto's lb was dodgy but the ump gave it anyway. People just Bs' ing about it being wrong, it wasn't. /thread

and what about Phil hughes LBW in the second innings? That ball imo clearly pitched outside the line of the stumps. Yet DRS showed it was 51% in. and how was Trott dismissal now the DRS's fault? It is a limitation in technology that only one set of images can be loaded or recorded on the camera. Considering the broadcaster is responsible for the DRS there will always be a tension in the replays and having hot spot. Its time to view the DRS as a critical system. I work in the defence industry and you just cannot take such high odds of human error as this DRS system has. Enough of saying that its not the fault of the DRS. The fact is different systems use different degrees of human input. Maybe its time to develop DRS with a bit more of AI in it.

[vamos_rafa]

and what about Phil hughes LBW in the second innings? That ball imo clearly pitched outside the line of the stumps. Yet DRS showed it was 51% in. and how was Trott dismissal now the DRS's fault? It is a limitation in technology that only one set of images can be loaded or recorded on the camera. Considering the broadcaster is responsible for the DRS there will always be a tension in the replays and having hot spot. Its time to view the DRS as a critical system. I work in the defence industry and you just cannot take such high odds of human error as this DRS system has. Enough of saying that its not the fault of the DRS. The fact is different systems use different degrees of human input. Maybe its time to develop DRS with a bit more of AI in it.

No one is questioning the usage of DRS. Yes it is important so as to eradicate the howlers. The challenege is to find a breaking ground so that it can be used effectively and (if possible) not with players feeling hard done by. The reason India opposed it is they felt hard done by it in the SL tour.

[Clarke]

The technology, the process and the people using it all need improvement. Its not something that can be fully scrapped in favor of the below par umpiring we have these days.

[adi B]

Isn't the second match today, why is there nothing on cricinfo :protest: I thought it was starting in 20 mins from now... wtf is going on.

its starting tomorrow :giggle:

[namasteji1]

Isn't the second match today, why is there nothing on cricinfo :protest: I thought it was starting in 20 mins from now... wtf is going on.

:hysterical::haha:

[G_B_]

No one is questioning the usage of DRS. Yes it is important so as to eradicate the howlers. The challenege is to find a breaking ground so that it can be used effectively and (if possible) not with players feeling hard done by. The reason India opposed it is they felt hard done by it in the SL tour.

just use slow motion replays for the howlers (something which is obvious at first site) and let the 50/50 calls like Haddin and Clarke be with the umpire. You dont need all this fancy technology for that. The aim of the DRS should be to eliminate howlers. That is it.

[rkt.india]

BS India had no good reason to not use it. You all just jockeyed BCCI's decision without any proper explanation and now lapping it up because of the uproar. Mob mentality at it's best.

They had. They were the first team to use DRS in SL in test series and everything went against them as the did not have any clue about it as it has been about effective tactical use rather than an effort to get right decisions and then in England series in 2011, there were again controversies surrounding DRS.

[GolGappe]

Chappell makes a good point. Take it away from players and let 3rd umpire use it to prevent howlers.