3rd Test: England v Australia at Old Trafford Aug 1-5, 2013

[barmyarmy]

Real-time snicko will help. I personally don't see what is better than DRS though.

 

[dancingmongoose]

^ Umpires who can use it

 

[barmyarmy]

Possibly specialists who aren't umpires. Guys who understand how to interpret the pictures.

 

[dancingmongoose]

Mm yeah, someone just put that up on the cricinfo scorecard too. Good idea

 

[zimrahil]

The biggest problem with DRS has always been human error.

100% spot on

Nothing wrong with DRS itself, it's the people who use it.

Unless ICC can get better umpires in charge situation will never improve.

 

[cricket_icon]

100% spot on

Nothing wrong with DRS itself, it's the people who use it.

Unless ICC can get better umpires in charge situation will never improve.

Agreed, the DRS is a brilliant system but the people using it don't seem to have a clue

 

[angryangy]

The problem is actually the system in this case. The third umpire can't disagree with the lbw referral process, but catches are often buggered up. There needs to be a bulletproof system for reviewing a thin or absent edge, because currently finding no evidence of an edge results in an inconclusive review.

 

[barmyarmy]

In other words you can't tell therefore you can't overturn.

 

[midgetwars]

100% spot on

Nothing wrong with DRS itself, it's the people who use it.

Unless ICC can get better umpires in charge situation will never improve.

Well, depending on what they mean by DRS, the umpires may or may not be part of DRS.

 

[cricket_icon]

Possibly specialists who aren't umpires. Guys who understand how to interpret the pictures.

Umpires have used the system very well in the past I think the problem may be the mixed messages that the ICC is sending out. Is the DRS there to give the right decision or support the umpire even when they're wrong but there isn't "enough" doubt.

 

[midgetwars]

The problem is actually the system in this case. The third umpire can't disagree with the lbw referral process, but catches are often buggered up. There needs to be a bulletproof system for reviewing a thin or absent edge, because currently finding no evidence of an edge results in an inconclusive review.

Umm...

Haddin and Agar.

 

[MattW]

In other words you can't tell therefore you can't overturn.

Which is why there should be a third option besides out/not out - the equivalent of the white light from the third umpire in the past - if the third umpire upholds because of doubt that technology can't solve, or because of inconclusive evidence - it should be as if the review never happened - the team who reviewed gets it back and the on field umpire's decision stands.

They also desperately need some 4k slow motion cameras.

 

[LiveLoveABD]

Take DRS out and the decision is still wrong. What's your solution?

Your post makes very little sense.

First off, I'm in favour of DRS. But, when a board bears the cost of DRS, you want the right decision. You're paying for the technology to eliminate human error. The Khawaja decision was apparently, inconclusive for Dharmasena, and so he went with the on field ruling. What you're saying is, the decision would have been wrong either way. Fair enough, but then you're not spending millions of pounds for the technology, trusting on field umpires to the fullest and not taking any of the drama away.

I'm sorry, there's just no excuse for what just happened. DRS isn't to be blamed. It was a howler, but the third umpire stuck with the howler and in my opinion there's no reason that justifies it well enough. There are careers on the line for god's sake. The ICC needs to do something, and do something now.

Kumar Dharmasena is apparently the current umpire of the year.

 

[barmyarmy]

Your post makes very little sense.

No DRS = umpire's call = out. Simple enough?

Even with the mistakes the % of correct decisions is far higher than by just relying on umpires.

 

[midgetwars]

Okay, problem. If this was inconclusive then so was Agar's last game and Haddin the one before. If we were to say this wasn't clear and was inconclusive then so then would the others as well.

NO DECISION went with the on field umpire. NONE.