No Hawk-eye for India - England series after DRS made mandatory

[Ollie_H]

Decision Review System: DRS technology expensive, unreliable - Niranjan Shah | India Cricket News | ESPN Cricinfo

"You have to look at the economics. Every board is not making money out of Test matches and ODIs. The system requires about $60,000 per match," Shah told DNA. "Last year, about 65 Tests and 170 ODIs were played around the world. Multiply those numbers with $60,000. It would be a staggering amount for one or two decisions in a match.

Invalid arguement. The BCCI are the only ones rejecting it's use and the most financially well of board as one other article quipped; 'the BCCI could be the global sponsors of DRS technologies, their logo popping up on TV screens around the world during a referral.'

One more India vs DRS articles: Let's talk about the DRS - This is probably the best article I have read about the whole debacle and actually clearly outlines each opinion and goes into rather more depth than the BCCI over their disagreement with the system.

 

[SaiSrini]

Now at least the edges, LBW's where the batsman thinks he edged the ball, the close catches, etc will be referred and we can avoid howlers there. Sometime in the future, BCCI will surely accept Hawk Eye or any new and better technology for the LBW decisions. For now, its a good forward step

 

[Themer]

For now, its a good forward step

This isn't a good step forward at all. This issue has highlighted how the BCCI holds way too much sway over the decision making of the ICC.

It should be all in, not a half measure like this.

 

[Fenil]

It will make the DRS system better and will help umpires take correct decisions more than before due to Hot spot technique.

 

[mohit_dude10]

So basically its just hotspot and on-field microphones which will be used in DRS? Its quite surprising they've left out hawk-eye, its been used for so long and more often than not its right. Very few times there are doubts over its accuracy.

 

[SaiSrini]

This isn't a good step forward at all. This issue has highlighted how the BCCI holds way too much sway over the decision making of the ICC.

It should be all in, not a half measure like this.

Just because the BCCI has a problem with ball tracking, why should the usage of Hot Spot and audio tracking be kept out of international cricket? Now with the usage of Hot Spot and audio tracking, decisions on edges, close catches, inside edge on LBW's, etc will be referred and possibly reversed. Remember that the BCCI was also wary of the costs of using Hot Spot (it costs big per match), but now that they have agreed to it, their main issue is only the ball tracking technology and its reliability. This is a step taken forward by the ICC, and eventually ball tracking will also be implemented. Its not as if the absence of ball tracking is going to dilute the DRS.

 

[Ollie_H]

So basically its just hotspot and on-field microphones which will be used in DRS? Its quite surprising they've left out hawk-eye, its been used for so long and more often than not its right. Very few times there are doubts over its accuracy.

No, they are the only MANDATORY instruments used. It will now be hawkeye that is agreed on a bilateral series basis. Hawkeye will be used if both sides agree.

The ICC have basically gone half way between everyone's desires. I'm not sure you can fully blame the ICC for bowing down to the BCCI because I think any governing body would have done it. Unfortunately, minority's can have a big influence on decisions.

 

[cricket_icon]

The use of hotspot has to be applauded but hawk eye is the oldest and most refined of all the technologies in use today. why is the BCCI against it? and am I correct in presuming the BCCI has dictated once again to the ICC that hawk eye can't be used or is it all just conjecture? Can the other boards not unite on this issue or have they been bought out?

 

[Papa_Smurf]

Its not as if the absence of ball tracking is going to dilute the DRS.

It is you moron. I can't believe you think this a positive step. This has to be one of the most retarted decisions to have been implemented in a sport. Ever.

Hawk-eye is far more important than HotSpot. If you're going to make the DRS mandatory, and not make all the devices compulsory, then you choose the one that is the more used. LBW's get reffered way more than edges do. And hawk-eye has become a staple for TV coverage anyway.

I just can't believe this decision was made. Seriously, the BCCI can go fearsome tweak themselves. Most selfish board ever.

 

[Ollie_H]

Fun fact of the day, the person who first suggested the use of a form of review system is now coach of the Indian cricket team.

 

[cricket_icon]

It is you moron. I can't believe you think this a positive step. This has to be one of the most retarted decisions to have been implemented in a sport. Ever.

Hawk-eye is far more important than HotSpot. If you're going to make the DRS mandatory, and not make all the devices compulsory, then you choose the one that is the more used. LBW's get reffered way more than edges do. And hawk-eye has become a staple for TV coverage anyway.

I just can't believe this decision was made. Seriously, the BCCI can go fried chicken themselves. Most selfish board ever.

yes yes yes. sad day for cricket and common sense

----------

haha Ollie

 

[War]

it is you moron. I can't believe you think this a positive step. This has to be one of the most retarted decisions to have been implemented in a sport. Ever.

Hawk-eye is far more important than hotspot. If you're going to make the drs mandatory, and not make all the devices compulsory, then you choose the one that is the more used. Lbw's get reffered way more than edges do. And hawk-eye has become a staple for tv coverage anyway.

I just can't believe this decision was made. Seriously, the bcci can go fried chicken themselves. Most selfish board ever.

amennn!!

 

[SaiSrini]

It is you moron. I can't believe you think this a positive step. This has to be one of the most retarted decisions to have been implemented in a sport. Ever.

Hawk-eye is far more important than HotSpot. If you're going to make the DRS mandatory, and not make all the devices compulsory, then you choose the one that is the more used. LBW's get reffered way more than edges do. And hawk-eye has become a staple for TV coverage anyway.

I just can't believe this decision was made. Seriously, the BCCI can go fried chicken themselves. Most selfish board ever.

Something is better than nothing. Are you guys so insecure that Swann might not get as many wickets now that the Hawk Eye isnt available? I know the Hawk Eye is the refined technology, but the BCCI dont agree with the usage of the Hawk Eye. Till now because of their objection, the entire DRS was not to be used. Now the Hot Spot and the audio tracking will be used. If this is not a forward step, what else is?

P.s: Stop getting personal. I dont need to say everything that most people say here.

 

[angryangy]

decisions on edges, close catches, inside edge on LBW's, etc will be referred and possibly reversed

The lbw review system is more or less foolproof and it doesn't matter who is the third umpire. The critical points are given as fact, not opinion and yet with a lot of tolerance for the standing umpire's decision.

However, when it comes to catches, the results vary a lot. It appears that more nicks will make an audible sound than will leave a visible IR signature. So Hotspot is most useful in showing which of bat or pad was first to the ball, but least useful in mediating appeals for caught behind.

So when it comes to those edges and close catches, all you've really got to rely on is that awful digital zoom and the sound, neither of which have really helped to produce conclusive evidence in the past and are not aided by a number of apparently deaf umpires. Snicko could maybe help them out, but that's not yet relevant.

If anyone is not yet satisfied with what Hawkeye does, I'm not sure how they will be convinced in the future and especially not sure how they will be convinced if it's not used. Without the more functional elements, it seems ideal for opponents of the system to set up a straw man to which they can point at and declare the entire system to be a complete failure.

 

[shravi]

Hawkeye isn't 100% accurate but I would think that that whole 50% of the ball rule would cover for that margin of error.

It is a step forwards in that all series not involving India will presumably use the full DRS. However, it's also 2 steps backwards in that India are involved in some of the most watched rivalries in cricket and these series' could now possibly be marred by controversies of poor umpiring when it could have been avoided (to an extent) with the use of the full DRS system.