When, something relating to the game of cricket is being discussed in India, then it can’t be put out of the spotlight. So has been the case with the Umpire Decision Review System (UDRS), or better mentioned as the DRS. The whole cricketing fraternity is trying their best to implement this in the various tour programs that will played in the future. But the BCCI is being adamant about not implementing it. At the recently concluded ICC meeting to decide upon the DRS implementation, it was decided that the various sub-sections of the technology involved will be taken, sans the Hawk-eye technology. The Indian cricket board, BCCI, is against it, as it feels that the technology is not yet up with the standards.
But as of now, the condition is that, during a bilateral series, the DRS technologies can be used if both the participating countries agree to it. And the additional reason, why everyone is against the implementation of it, is because of the cost involved. In a bilateral tournament, the hosting country has to bear the cost of the DRS use. So for the economically-backward cricket boards across the world, it would be out-of-bounds to implement it.
But there are another perspectives to the whole topic of implementation of the DRS. One is the on the viewers side. But as far as they are ensured that what they are viewing is legitimate, they don’t be having a problem. Second, and the main part, is from the side of the players. They are the ones who are sweating it out on the fields, playing day in and day out, for their respective countries. So they must also be allowed to officially comment on the use of the DRS. As was recently seen in the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011, all the players were actually supportive of the review system, and there would have been scarcely any matches, where the allotted reviewing calls, were unused, given the chances. So the players will definitely go for it. And for ensuring the validity of the technology, its up to the technicians to decide upon it. They say that the Hawk-eye is not yet up to the mark. Well, if it is in fact the same thing that we people see during the television broadcasting replays, then I don’t think there is any problem in it, in viewing from a layman’s angle at least. And it actually tends to calculate the path of the ball appropriately well, than what would be visible to the naked eye of the umpire. After all, something is better than nothing. Till the technicians come up with a more advanced technology, the cricketing world can do with this. (This is just my opinion, the technicians may know more!).
As of now, the DRS techniques implemented, are just for the accidental-snick-of-the-ball type dismissals. DRS is more required to sort out the LBWs properly. The rest are not-so-common. More number of confusions come in the LBW decisions that are taken.
So it would be better if the respected officials come forth with a better solution (if they don’t intend to use the present techs at all). Otherwise, with Umpire faults getting more and more these days, it would be difficult for sincere cricket matches to happen!
Comments
Post a Comment