Human eye or Hawkeye? That is the second most discussed issue, if not the most, of the ICC World Cup.
That is because the Indian skipper and entire Indian nation think that they have been denied a wicket in the immensely thrilling tied match against England. Obviously they are referring the case of Ian Bell who was declared not out by the ground umpire Mr. Billy Bowden though Yuvraj Singh looked getting trapped him leg before wicket. Indian skipper opted for DRS or Decision Review System.
Mr. Bowden indicated upstairs for the same. Meanwhile the slow motion replay showed up on the giant screen and to the naked eye it met with most criteria: not a no ball, hitting in line of the stumps and striking the wicket.
Still Ian Bell was declared not out as the appeal was dismissed on a particular rule which even Bell was not aware. Bell was called by Andrew Strauss because the rule that if the batsman is down too far, two and half meter or more, then the hawkeye wouldnot be accepted.
This particular ruling was hugely criticized by Indian fans and particularly the Indian skipper MS Dhoni as he thought that the said rule was an 'adulteration' of technology with human judgement.
Now the ICC officials have come in defence of the rule suggesting MS to be aware of the rules before commenting.
ICC General Manager, Dave Richardson have said that there are a set of rules along with the hawkeye to assist in making the desicion when DRS is implemented...Most of the time, a player is not fully aware of all the rules".
According to Mr. Richardson if MS Dhoni was made aware of the specifications of these rules, then he would have accpeted the decision that was made.
Now the biggest question is what could have been the reaction if the case was opposite. Generally captains and fans become critical of a rule, if it goes against them.
DRS is being for the first time in cricket but MS Dhoni is honest enough to decline to accept it when it is optional. But the question is if the rule is clear, is not it better to know it rather than criticise it. After a bad loser is not a good to have.
That is because the Indian skipper and entire Indian nation think that they have been denied a wicket in the immensely thrilling tied match against England. Obviously they are referring the case of Ian Bell who was declared not out by the ground umpire Mr. Billy Bowden though Yuvraj Singh looked getting trapped him leg before wicket. Indian skipper opted for DRS or Decision Review System.
Mr. Bowden indicated upstairs for the same. Meanwhile the slow motion replay showed up on the giant screen and to the naked eye it met with most criteria: not a no ball, hitting in line of the stumps and striking the wicket.
Still Ian Bell was declared not out as the appeal was dismissed on a particular rule which even Bell was not aware. Bell was called by Andrew Strauss because the rule that if the batsman is down too far, two and half meter or more, then the hawkeye wouldnot be accepted.
This particular ruling was hugely criticized by Indian fans and particularly the Indian skipper MS Dhoni as he thought that the said rule was an 'adulteration' of technology with human judgement.
Now the ICC officials have come in defence of the rule suggesting MS to be aware of the rules before commenting.
ICC General Manager, Dave Richardson have said that there are a set of rules along with the hawkeye to assist in making the desicion when DRS is implemented...Most of the time, a player is not fully aware of all the rules".
According to Mr. Richardson if MS Dhoni was made aware of the specifications of these rules, then he would have accpeted the decision that was made.
Now the biggest question is what could have been the reaction if the case was opposite. Generally captains and fans become critical of a rule, if it goes against them.
DRS is being for the first time in cricket but MS Dhoni is honest enough to decline to accept it when it is optional. But the question is if the rule is clear, is not it better to know it rather than criticise it. After a bad loser is not a good to have.
