angryangy
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2004
omg yes, sponsorship logos that are only visible in infrared!
Do you think DRS will become mandatory?
- Thread starter Owzat
- Start date
Just kerpluck the BCCI. Bloody ******* don't understand that this will benefit not only international cricket, but even Indian cricket. What happened was just twice, once vs Sri Lanka and once in the World Cup. I'm really mad at them for not passing it through since forever. Although I'm from India, I still don't like the BCCI imposing their rule over world cricket.
Last edited by a moderator:
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
ICC news: Tony Greig has yorked himself over DRS | Opinion | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo
Potentially this is the most articulate defense of the BCCI and the DRS yet. But i'm struggling to pick out the sense in Mr.Crowe's argument here.
Potentially this is the most articulate defense of the BCCI and the DRS yet. But i'm struggling to pick out the sense in Mr.Crowe's argument here.
I read the other day that Scotland and Ireland are to be given ?320k a year extra, so the ICC must have money to spend - yet not to provide DRS.
BBC Sport - Ireland and Scotland to get extra ICC funding
If they could buy the expensive equipment, and I doubt there'd be more than four games going in any one week, then surely that could cut the money factor out of it.
I have to assume one obstacle is that even the countries who want DRS don't want to pay for it, and I doubt the ICC has the balls to say to S*y "you cover the games, you provide it/co-fund it"
I wonder if the BCCI would object so loudly if it was just replays and only obvious wrong decisions are over-turned. I don't have full faith in the gimmick technology, but I'm also not paranoid that the machines are out to get the BCCI either. Replays would clear up goal-line decisions in football as much as is possible, why do the authorities have to have a "yes/no" machine approach to what is a piddlingly small problem compared to offside, penalties and decisions involving fouls.................? We could easily see a goal given by technology that might not have been by the ref, and two penalties that should have gone to the other team not given that should have been so they lose 0-1 when they should have won 2-1.......................
BBC Sport - Ireland and Scotland to get extra ICC funding
If they could buy the expensive equipment, and I doubt there'd be more than four games going in any one week, then surely that could cut the money factor out of it.
I have to assume one obstacle is that even the countries who want DRS don't want to pay for it, and I doubt the ICC has the balls to say to S*y "you cover the games, you provide it/co-fund it"
I wonder if the BCCI would object so loudly if it was just replays and only obvious wrong decisions are over-turned. I don't have full faith in the gimmick technology, but I'm also not paranoid that the machines are out to get the BCCI either. Replays would clear up goal-line decisions in football as much as is possible, why do the authorities have to have a "yes/no" machine approach to what is a piddlingly small problem compared to offside, penalties and decisions involving fouls.................? We could easily see a goal given by technology that might not have been by the ref, and two penalties that should have gone to the other team not given that should have been so they lose 0-1 when they should have won 2-1.......................
Nonsense, there is no reason not to have a system in place that helps get decisions right, even if it isn't perfect.
In fact there is more reason to make it mandatory because if you have one series with DRS because the boards agree it, and another without, then there's no consistency. Would UEFA/FIFA impliment goal-line technology only in some tournaments, in some countries, in some matches....................? During the testing phase there is reason not to make it mandatory, to show doubters it does improve decisions while not subscribing them to it before it is tested.
I wonder if the principle reason the BCCI object mightn't be to do with spin, perhaps not trusting dorkeye to maintain their home advantage.
Suck it up BCCI, majority rules.
