-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
CA and BCCI, explain yourselves
- Thread starter pasag
- Start date
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Isn't the rule in tennis that no part of your foot should be inside the line? Not so knowlegable abt tennis, so not sure..
vcs
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'm not aware of any technology in tennis for foot-fault calling.Isn't the rule in tennis that no part of your foot should be inside the line? Not so knowlegable abt tennis, so not sure..
Black_Warrior
Cricketer Of The Year
Well in a few years there might be no ODI cricket (the traditional 50 overs) so dont think CA is too worried about ODI rankings
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
CA & the BCCI aren't the blame here.
The underlying problem with these boards doing these crap, is the lack of proper "independent ICC". The ICC is disfunctional & thus boards can do what they want.
Its ridiculous really that we have 3 boards in the ECB, CSA, CA domestically have thesr 40/45 over ODI competitions when international we still have 50 over cricket. Thats like in football we have 11-a-side internationally, but a club level in Serie A, BPL, La Liga etc you have futsal.
The URDS situation is also a disgrace. The fact that the ICC has got into the predicament of not being able to find a way to pay for the URDS - thus having various test series going on, where one has the URDS & one doesnt - is a insult to test cricket.
Thats poor administration. You would never see such things in other sports. What should have been happening is the URDS just been implemented in ODIs & T20s, make sure they are 100% comfortable with the technology & have found a way make sure every test series can have - then implement it in tests.
But instead its been implemented in tests - been adjusted twice now & yet not every test series has it. Utterly ridiculous & is another clear example why the ICC needs revamping into a more independent body, since these kind of administrative flaws should not be happening. So in that sense i dont blame the BCCI (the defacto head of world cricket) for not wanting the URDS regularly in IND series, since who know what other changes the URDS may have in the future.
The underlying problem with these boards doing these crap, is the lack of proper "independent ICC". The ICC is disfunctional & thus boards can do what they want.
Its ridiculous really that we have 3 boards in the ECB, CSA, CA domestically have thesr 40/45 over ODI competitions when international we still have 50 over cricket. Thats like in football we have 11-a-side internationally, but a club level in Serie A, BPL, La Liga etc you have futsal.
The URDS situation is also a disgrace. The fact that the ICC has got into the predicament of not being able to find a way to pay for the URDS - thus having various test series going on, where one has the URDS & one doesnt - is a insult to test cricket.
Thats poor administration. You would never see such things in other sports. What should have been happening is the URDS just been implemented in ODIs & T20s, make sure they are 100% comfortable with the technology & have found a way make sure every test series can have - then implement it in tests.
But instead its been implemented in tests - been adjusted twice now & yet not every test series has it. Utterly ridiculous & is another clear example why the ICC needs revamping into a more independent body, since these kind of administrative flaws should not be happening. So in that sense i dont blame the BCCI (the defacto head of world cricket) for not wanting the URDS regularly in IND series, since who know what other changes the URDS may have in the future.
Sir Alex
Banned
BCCI were the one of the first Boards iirc to trial UDRS, and the experience was not too good. Quite a few decisions went against them, the system was pretty raw, and the feedback they got from the senior players was not good either. Of course BCCI will back it's own players first and foremost, and if they have good reason to believe that UDRS is still not error free, they'll not pursue it.
Although I think the system has improved a lot over the last 2 years, and I believe it can be implemented across all test matches, with uniform technology standardised by the ICC.
Although I think the system has improved a lot over the last 2 years, and I believe it can be implemented across all test matches, with uniform technology standardised by the ICC.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Decisions didn't go against them, they used the review system stupidly.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Haha, yea, they were just clueless. They used it at completely the wrong times. SL on the other hand used it much more properly.
Daemon
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Umpires must step up - Dhoni
India: Umpires must step up - Dhoni | India Cricket News | Cricinfo.com
And as if asking umpires to step up will magically increase their umpiring capabilities.
India: Umpires must step up - Dhoni | India Cricket News | Cricinfo.com
There we go, money.
And as if asking umpires to step up will magically increase their umpiring capabilities.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
It does not matter how they used it. UDRS should not be implemented in its present form so that it can be used as a strategic tool by captains.
It should be used to help umpires getting right deicions, Either you use technology for every single decision or you don't.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
There's nothing wrong with UDRS as it is; umpires get the vast majority of on-field decisions correct. UDRS is there to help the umpires with the 2-3% of decisions that they're getting wrong.