Take DRS off players' hands - Haddin

13 replies [Last post]
User offline. Last seen 40 weeks 6 days ago. Offline
Top Contributor (click for details)
Joined: 28 Mar 2012
Runs: 2339

The drawbacks of a review system used by the players became clear at Trent Bridge, as the one most obvious errors was left to have a huge bearing on the result while a string of other more marginal calls were debated over due to the players' instincts to review anything they thought was out. As wicketkeeper, Haddin was a key man in Australia's flawed use of the system during the match, and said it was a consistent challenge to take emotion out of decision referrals.

Read More >>>

User offline. Last seen 40 weeks 6 days ago. Offline
Top Contributor (click for details)
Joined: 28 Mar 2012
Runs: 2339
DRS a trash

DRS a trash

User offline. Last seen 1 hour 2 min ago. Offline
StaffTop Contributor (click for details)
Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Runs: 22672
If you really think about it,

If you really think about it, the DRS is a review system meant to review an umpire's call/judgement and correct bad decisions. If it's taken out of the players' hands, are we expecting umpires to scrutinise their own decisions? I don't think that's the way to go either.

User offline. Last seen 1 hour 2 min ago. Offline
StaffTop Contributor (click for details)
Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Runs: 22672
ICC Press Release July 16, 2013

ICC reveals umpire assessment from Trent Bridge Test

ICC confirms support for umpires going forward

The International Cricket Council (ICC) today revealed the assessment of the umpires, including the Decision Review System (DRS) analysis, from the Trent Bridge Test between England and Australia.

The umpires made a total of 72 decisions, which is well above the average (49) for a DRS Test match. The umpiring team was assessed to have made seven errors during the match, out of which three were uncorrected decisions and four decisions were corrected using the DRS.

As such, the correct decision percentage before reviews stood at 90.3 per cent but climbed to 95.8 per cent as a result of the use of the DRS. This represented an increase of 5.5 per cent in correct decisions, which was the average increase from DRS Test matches in 2012-13.

The three decisions that were marked as uncorrected errors included one against Jonathan Trott when a correct LBW decision was overturned. The other involved Stuart Broad (catch at slip and LBW not offering a shot) but these couldn’t be corrected as Australia had no reviews available.

When coupled with the conditions, with reverse swing and spin playing an important role, and the added intensity of the first Ashes Test, it was a difficult match to umpire.

Reflecting on the assessment, ICC Chief Executive David Richardson said: “The umpires did a good job under difficult conditions. This reflects the caliber of umpires Dar, Dharmasena and Erasmus who have consistently performed at a high level.

“However, like the players, umpires can also have good and bad days but we all know that the umpire’s decision, right or wrong, is final and must be accepted.

“While the ICC has complete faith in the ability of its umpires, our confidence in technology is also strengthened by the fact that there was an increase in the number of correct decisions in the Trent Bridge Test through the use of the DRS.

“Technology was introduced with the objective of eradicating the obvious umpiring errors, and to get as many correct decisions as possible. If it can help increase the correct decisions by 5.5 per cent, then it is a good outcome, but we must continue to strive to improve umpiring and the performance of the DRS.”

The statistics from Trent Bridge Test are:

Total umpire decisions
72

Correct decision % before review
90.3%

Correct decision % after review
95.8%

% increase in correct decisions using DRS
+5.5%

DRS - Reviews by countries

Team Reviews Successful Unsuccessful

England 4 3 1

Australia 9 *2 7

Total 13 5 8

*Of the two successful decisions, Australia had one incorrectly reversed by the TV Umpire.

User offline. Last seen 2 years 4 weeks ago. Offline
Top Contributor (click for details)
Joined: 19 Oct 2011
Runs: 5830
mr. Sakthivel just got OWNED

mr. Sakthivel just got OWNED by Hilal! :D)))))))

no umpire is going to admit that he has made an error and go upstairs especially in the heat of the moment.

User offline. Last seen 40 weeks 6 days ago. Offline
Top Contributor (click for details)
Joined: 28 Mar 2012
Runs: 2339
I too dont support giving DRS

I too dont support giving DRS to Umpires because I dont want it in first place. Also I have no issues with umpire giving 10 wrong decisions but I cant accept DRS giving one wrong decision. Human error are tend to happen, but how come a hotspot cant pick a nick there or tech is flawed, why should my player get penalized because some useless tech on place.

How much correct the decision is not at all the issue how many error it gives is the real issue, say if DRS is 90% correct, how you are going correct that 10%.Any player going for a review who knows he is not out should keep in mind that he can be screwed by 10% of chance. I think simply leave it to Umpires they can handle that. No DRS required , that's my view.

User offline. Last seen 1 hour 2 min ago. Offline
StaffTop Contributor (click for details)
Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Runs: 22672
Then you must have issues

Then you must have issues with the use of third-umpires when run outs are referred? There have been many instances where the camera was unable to reproduce the frame needed to make a decisive decision in a run out? Nothing is 100%.

User offline. Last seen 1 hour 2 min ago. Offline
StaffTop Contributor (click for details)
Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Runs: 22672
@Uppercut_7: Yeah, some of

@Uppercut_7: Yeah, some of them look upset when they have to reverse their decision.

User offline. Last seen 2 years 4 weeks ago. Offline
Top Contributor (click for details)
Joined: 19 Oct 2011
Runs: 5830
@Hilal, Mark Benson actually

@Hilal, Mark Benson actually retired, cus he didn't want his decisions second guessed by technology.

And great point about RUN OUTS by 3rd Ump. How many decisions have gone in favour of batter due to inconclusive evidence(due to lack of frames or angles)??? But we are still using it yeh??

User offline. Last seen 40 weeks 6 days ago. Offline
Top Contributor (click for details)
Joined: 28 Mar 2012
Runs: 2339
Hilal, That the point i

Hilal, That the point i finally want to make, When the camera cant reproduce the frame needed to make a decisive decision in a run out which make us handicapped, that tells us the benefit of the doubt goes to the batsmen(As mention by Uppercut_7) how many time even that rule was not followed. There are many times benefit of the doubt not went to the batsmen. Some times it goes some time its not, so tech is not clear as well as the rules used for reviewing. Why this ? This is what continuing in the DRS hotspot etc.

What I need is that tech should be clear and the rules to follow that.

(Last edited by Sakthivel on July 17, 2013 - 02:59)
User offline. Last seen 2 years 4 weeks ago. Offline
Top Contributor (click for details)
Joined: 19 Oct 2011
Runs: 5830
@sakthivel, so according to

@sakthivel, so according to u, should we also stop using 3rd umpire for runouts?? because SAME 'benefit of the doubt' occurs when 3rd Ump decides a runout

(Last edited by UppercuT on July 17, 2013 - 04:29)

Post new comment

Note
All anonymous comments are moderated.
  • Avoid abusive remarks and personal attacks.
  • Avoid posting unrelated links.
  • Avoid vulgar or obscene language.
Already a member? Log-in now. Not a member? Sign up for a new account.
CAPTCHA
This step helps us prevent automated submissions from spammers.
1 + 3 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.