Cricket World Cup: Doubtful Review System?

Case 1: Feb 27, 2011; India vs England, Chinnaswamy Stadium, Bangalore.

In the 25th over of the innings, Ian Bell goes down to play a paddle sweep off Yuvraj Singh. He misses the line and a leg before appeal is overruled. India captain MS Dhoni asks for a review. Replays show the ball will hit middle and leg. But, third umpire asks the on-field umpire Billy Bowden to take a call as the batsman is forward by 2.5 metres from the stumps.
Result: Not out

Case 2: March 4, 2011; New Zealand vs Zimbabwe, Sardar Patel Stadium, Motera.
Zimbabwe skipper Elton Chigumbura dances down the wicket (more than 2.5 metres) but misses Daniel Vettori’s delivery and is rapped on the pad. On field umpire gives it out. Batsman asks for a review of the decision. Replays show that the ball is going on to hit the leg stump. Like in the Ian Bell-episode, third umpire asks the on field umpire to take his call.
Result: Out

The supporters of the Decision Review System (DRS) in cricket should ponder over these two cases. How reliable is the technology if two similar situations can produce different results?

It seems like this case will only strengthen Dhoni’s claims that adulterating technology with human judgement beats the very purpose the system is there for.

What is sauce for goose should be sauce for gander too. If Bell was not out when a much straighter ball hit his pads, when he was 2.5 metres from the wicket, Chigumbura, much further down the track, must also be not out.

It is not likely that if Chigumbura was not given out, the match would have seen a different outcome. New Zealand thrashed the minnows in this Group A match by 10 wickets.

Batting first after winning the toss, Zimbabwe could only manage 162 as Tim Southee (3/29), and Kyle Mills (2/29), playing his first match, struck good form. In reply, New Zealand openers Martin Guptill (86) and Brendon McCullum (76) did not trouble the rest of their batsmen as they overhauled the target.

About Chigumbura’s lbw decision, both the captains played down the controversy. Chigumbura said, “I was told that if a batsman is out more than 2.5 metres and the ball is going to hit the middle stump, then it is out. It is one of those (decisions) that goes against you. Sometimes, it favours you. But end of the day, it’s umpire’s decision. It is a good system.”

New Zealand captain Vettori said, “I guess they (umpires) had a very good day. They get close calls but not today. They got everything right,” Vettori said.

While the two captains that played the match are not complaining, it remains to be seen what Dhoni makes of the whole incident.

Scorecard: Zimbabwe: B Taylor lbw b Styris 44, C Coventry run out 0, T Taibu lbw b Southee 8, C Ervine
c Ryder b Mills 11, E Chigumbura lbw b Vettori 1, R Chakabva c Taylor b Vettori 0, G Lamb run out 18, P Utseya b Southee 36, G Cremer c B McCullum b Mills 22, R Price lbw b Southee 11, T Panyangara not out 4
Extras: (LB4, W3) 7; Total: (all out, 46.2 overs) 162; FoW: 1-2, 2-27, 3-42, 4-46, 5-46, 6-86, 7-89, 8-122,
9-157, 10-162; Bowling: K Mills 10-0-29-2 (W1), T Southee 9.2-3-29-3 (W2), H Bennett 8-0-37-0, D Vettori 10-3-25-2, S Styris 4-0-13-1, N McCullum 3-0-15-0, J Ryder 2-0-10-0
New Zealand: M Guptill n.o 86, B McCullum n.o 76
Extras: (LB1, W1, NB2) 4; Total: (For 0 wickets; 33.3 overs) 166; Bowling: T Panyangara 5.3-0-42-0 (NB1),
R Price 7-0-23-0, P Utseya 6-0-23-0 (NB1), G Lamb 5-0-18-0, G Cremer 7-0-38-0, E Chigumbura 3-0-21-0 (W1)

UDRS debate has not soured relations with BCCI: ICC

The International Cricket Council (ICC) on Saturday admitted a "difference of opinion" with the Indian board on the controversial Umpire Decision Review System but denied it has soured their relationship.

The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) remains a steadfast opponent of the UDRS system, which made its World Cup debut in the sub-continent.

Infuriated by Ian Bell's apparent let-off for lbw in the tied India vs England match, BCCI secretary N Srinivasan wrote an angry letter to ICC chief executive Haroon Lorgat on Wednesday, saying the incident exposed the inadequacy of the system.

Lorgat, however, denied the governing body has fallen out with the world's richest, and most influential, cricket board.

"Not at all," Lorgat told reporters in Chennai. "We share an excellent relationship with the BCCI. We have to accept that there will be difference of opinions from time to time but we are mature enough to work through those," Lorgat said.

The ICC official said he was "disappointed" by the BCCI letter of complaint, much of which was based on an "inaccurate" report.

The UDRS allows each team the right to question at least two decisions which go against it during an innings. A "third umpire" uses the technology to determine if the on-field officials were correct.

Lorgat conceded the UDRS was not foolproof. "My understanding is that it's a work in progress. We would continually work with the technology providers ... to try and improve it all the time.

"We are aware that there is limited availability of Hot Spot (cameras which provide a reliable image of the ball's contact with bat or pad).

"In spite of its absence, we have got something like a five percent improvement in correct decision-making. I believe one cannot ignore that."

Bell was caught on his pads with a ball which the technology predicted would have hit the wicket but was reprieved by a rule which refers the decision back to the on-field umpire if the player is more than 2.5 metres from the stumps.