BCCI’s Opposition against the Decision Review System - an overview
Since their Test tour to http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Sri-Lanka-c758 in 2008, the Indian side has turned out to be a vocal critic against the then experimented, Umpire Decision Review System (UDRS), or simply DRS.
Indians lost that series against the hosts 1-2 and the Blue Shirts claimed that the review system fell hard on the team.
Through intervention by the Board of Control of Cricket in India (BCCI), in their recent four Test tour to England, team India managed to exclude the DRS. To this, the former http://www.senore.com/Cricket/India-c750 do not want it is
because it will favour our bowlers”.
Similarly, in the ongoing Test series against the West Indies, the Indian side has gone out with the same attitude against the use of DRS. Though the first match ended in the visitors’ favour, the team did regret barring the review system as the Indians
lost three doubtful wickets.
The DRS was officially launched by the International Cricket Council (ICC) in November 2009, during the first Test match between New Zealand and Pakistan. While in January 2011, it was first used in One Day Internationals (ODI), during England’s tour to
Australia.
The system uses ball tracking technology, developed in New Zealand, to review the on-field umpire’s decision.
The initiative was aimed at bringing technological advancement in the sport of cricket. The primary purpose of the DRS was to counter dubious decisions made by the on-field umpire.
As for how the DRS works, each team is allotted a maximum of two unsuccessful challenges per innings. The fielding side may challenge against a not out decision while the batting side may dispute an out decision. The players have few seconds to engage the
DRS a “T” gesture, either by the batsman or the captain of the fielding side.
Since its official launch, the review system has received a somewhat mixed response. Despite its appreciation by many players and coaches, the DRS has also received some criticism, mostly taken up by the BCCI.
Former Umpire http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Saeed-Ajmal-c87859 also condemned the DRS.
However, recently the Indian team, backed by their governing body, the BCCI, has stood out strong against the DRS, primarily after their loss at the Sri Lankan Test tour. The squad had DRS to blame for their defeat.
Currently, BCCI’s opposition against the technology has been making headlines quite now and then.
“We will oppose it at the Executive Board because the UDRS in its present form is unacceptable to us” said BCCI’s Secretary N. http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Srinivasan-c90829.
According to the Indian players, DRS is an ineffective method due to lack of hot spot cameras to detect fine edges.
Secondly, the Blue Shirts oppose the ICC not taking up ownership and the cost of the DRS system. The technology costs USD 6000 per day for a two-camera set up and USD 10000 per day for a four camera set up.
The BCCI, in response, has received criticism from teams and players of other nations for opposing the DRS. Currently many are in favour of the technology and believe that “the Indians should get with the program”.
It is very likely that the debate against the use of DRS might linger on. Being a technical product, ICC might have some refinements to do.
However, at the same time BCCI needs to come out with commendable arguments against the review system. The http://www.senore.com/Cricket/ICC-World-Cup-2011-c100625 World Cup Champions need not remain stagnant to their mere experience with the technology against the Sri Lankan tour.
Tags: