***Official*** DRS discussion thread

[Kirkut]

Look, the best way this problem can be solved only if other cricket boards put high pressure on the BCCI and bring a result out of this issue.

When you're serious about something, go and achieve it fearlessly instead of whinging about it later.

 

[Jono]

Remember, how Stuart Broad and James Anderson cheated in South Africa 2010 by placing their shoe over the ball as an attempt to tamper the ball?

Wtf does that have to do with the UDRS?

Oh boy this is going to get so nasty.

 

[Kirkut]

BCCI's latest strategy to avoid a repeat of the England and Australia tour drubbings:

ICC news : India threaten pull-out over DRS | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo


On a more serious note please GTFO of cricket.

Makes me wonder which coward nation introduced the 2 bouncer per over rule?

No sporting organization is a saintly one, every sporting body wants authority and dominate. And that is the bitter fact of the present commercial world.Period.

 

[Kirkut]

Wtf does that have to do with the UDRS?

Oh boy this is going to get so nasty.

I mentioned the word MANIPULATION. Hosts can manipulate mintue things to bring results in their favour, and DRS is not alone here.

 

[Jono]

Lance Armstrong cheated to win 7 Tour de France titles, so I think we should not include the UDRS.

 

[Top_Cat]

Wtf does that have to do with the UDRS?

Oh boy this is going to get so nasty.

It doesn't have to. Can we not feed the troll everyone? Please?

Especially that mankadding sonofabitch Jono.

 

[Jono]

Yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

[the big bambino]

Does Srinivasan even explain how the drs can be manipulated? Its not as if it will be in the hands of the home side's coach. If you can't trust it in the hands of appointed officials then why trust them at all on any matter they may adjudicate? Neither has he justified his belief that the drs is unreliable. It has been tested, its variances verified and accounted for, and accepted by players, fans and administrators.

Everyone except the BCCI. One wonders why an organisation that has complained abt umpiring doesn't endorse a technological aide to improve it.

One of the best things abt the drs is that it has stopped controversies over disputed decisions that seemed to marr every series. Ironically India will never again be able to complain abt poor decisions going against them (with any credibility). While their opponents will always be able to point out the benefits of having the drs.

 

[Cevno]

Thought the initial concerns were about the accuracy and opaqueness of the Ball tracking after impact, which hadn't been fully tested and was unverified with big concerns on whether it was even more accurate than umpires. The working equipment was also not given access too by the technology provider as per terms of the contract.

But now they are just being shunts for the sake of being shunts. Dunno, what Srinivasan wants? It's weird as they don't even articulate what problem exactly they have and how it can be solved?

Jailtey takes over as president in 2014 and hopefully he won't do a Srinivasan. Seems a more balanced person.

 

[Cevno]

India acts exactly as they have done for the last, nearly, couple of decades - acting the bully

Couple of decades? More like the last decade or so.

Before that other boards were the bullies for the longest time. Happens in every sport where those that hold the money power act as a bully. See Hockey and astro turf being brought in and how offside rule was removed.

But more than acting bully, what is weird in this instance is why they are doing it? It's not a issue to stake everything on. Just Bizarre. Other boards should call their bluff and ask them exactly what their objection is or tell them to do one.

 

[centurymaker]

Couple of decades? More like the last decade or so.

Before that other boards were the bullies for the longest time. Happens in every sport where those that hold the money power act as a bully. See Hockey and astro turf being brought in and how offside rule was removed.

thats a good point. i read somehwere that india used to rule the world in hockey but then people in power slowly changed everything about the game

 

[Scaly piscine]

Thought the initial concerns were about the accuracy and opaqueness of the Hawkeye after impact, which hadn't been fully tested and was unverified with big concerns on whether it was even more accurate than umpires. The working equipment was also not given access too by the technology provider as per terms of the contract.

But now they are just being shunts for the sake of being shunts. Dunno, what Srinivasan wants? It's weird as they don't even articulate what problem exactly they have and how it can be solved?

Jailtey takes over as president in 2014 and hopefully he won't do a Srinivasan. Seems a more balanced person.

If they articulated their objections then it would be a formality to address them and get on with the proper implementation of UDRS.

That's why we get this babble. They have no legitimate argument and so the only plausible way to garner any support is to talk bollocks and hope morons swallow it. BCCI is basically a mass cult operating a pyramid scheme.

 

[harsh.ag]

thats a good point. i read somehwere that india used to rule the world in hockey but then people in power slowly changed everything about the game

Apologies for talking about other sports on CW, but then since we've been going on about politics for some time, I figured we already burnt that bridge. Astroturfs were introduced in Hockey in the 70s, and have led to increase in player safety, a faster, more precise game, and low maintenance costs. That is the official stand. What it also led to was the dethroning of then champions, India and Pakistan. With astroturf, the major skill-set required to excel was that of the European style of play, i.e. endurance and strength, and precise passing. The Indians and Pakistanis relied much more on the dribbling and ball trapping skills, and know-how of playing on the field. Moreover, at that point of time, the Indian and Pakistani board weren't rich enough to be able to implement the astroturf on their home grounds, and thus were not able to compete at the international level.

Administrators failed to realize that players who have spent a great part of their lives developing skills on natural turf cannot just change their game overnight and perform on synthetic turf. The kind of adjustments required in speed, endurance, anticipation, and more importantly, ball distribution skills were significant enough to render the Indian teams largely ineffective in most situations. Natural turf with its uneven bounce requires players to watch the ball closely till the last second to control the ball. Astro turf with its predictable bounce and speed requires players to commit to the ball as early as possible. Also, shouldn't the administrators have at least made sure that the two champion teams from their era would be given enough funds to become competitive in this format, or at least made the change very gradually as to not render them incompetent.

The transformation of the game in the 70s resulted in a "product" that was definitely a faster brand of field hockey with swift crisp passes – a perfect stage to showcase pure athletic skills. One can say that field hockey now resembles a crude version of ice hockey. The European and American audiences haven't fall for this bait – ice hockey continues to dominate their mind space and field hockey has never really taken off there. At the same time, Indian audiences have increasingly lost interest in the game as their teams could never adapt to synthetic turf. Not only has the new game of hockey failed to attract world-wide audiences, it has blatantly ignored the biggest sport market for hockey in the world.

 

[SJS]

thats a good point. i read somehwere that india used to rule the world in hockey but then people in power slowly changed everything about the game

Yes astro turf was brought. But many other countries just went ahead and started using astro-turf in all their major centres. India just refused and except for Delhi, they did not have astro-turf anywhere in the country. Everytime the team had to go out of the country to play, the players had to be brought to Delhi for a quick camp and getting used to astro-turf.

Of course, that wasn't enough.

The rough and uneven grounds of the past were ideal for the short pass and the ball control of the Indian and Pakistani players where as the smooth, consistent astro-turf meant players with less than the fabulous stickwork of the sub-continental players could now resort to trapping and hard hitting, long passes and suddenly from field goal artists, the penalty corner specialists became the stars. The game changed. But the same had happened when tennis started moving away from grass courts. The world just adapted.

Indians refused to do so for a couple of decades and by the time they got astroturf all over the country, they had lost an entire generation of players and the country's rankings in the sport had hit rock bottom.

What's the point in talking of conspiracy theories?

And how is DRS country specific.

It can be manipulated - yes. So can everything else including umpires and third umpires and match referees. One needs to put in place systems by which the neutrality at all the important stations that determine the decisions is maintained. Why is this such an impossible thing to manage, If some doubts will remain they will remain even in the present system.

Mr Srinivas has now started talking of manipulation since the earlier argument of the technology being imperfect has been countered pretty well. This is a new tactic.

By the way, why should home team's manipulation only go against Indians. Are we suggesting that those in India are beyond a bit of underhand skullduggery themselves. Is it Mr Srinivasan's (or anyone else's for that matter) case that Indians will never manipulate anything to their advantage when the games are played in their country but the rest of the world will against them.

What a whole lot of self-righteous bovine excreta !!!

 

[Furball]

Rest of the cricket boards can GAGF. It's hard to be mad at the BCCI, at least their "no DRS, lalalalalala not listening" attitude has been consistent.

 

[Black_Warrior]

No point blaming BCCI or other cricket boards here.. you have to blame the original culprit - Ajanta Mendis.
If Mendis had not humiliated Indian batsmen in the 2008 series when the DRS was first tested, we would not be having this conversation today.

 

[Cevno]

Has the Hotspot in South Africa been ordered from China or something ? Been bloody dodgy.

Was watching highlights yesterday and for one appeal on replay there was a slight mark which showed up on the bat, and after a few seconds it appeared on his pad.

Every time it is reviewed it barely shows anything registering too. FAF and Misbah being different interpretations due to that.

 

[uvelocity]

spot fixing

 

[Cevno]

Yes astro turf was brought. But many other countries just went ahead and started using astro-turf in all their major centres. India just refused and except for Delhi, they did not have astro-turf anywhere in the country. Everytime the team had to go out of the country to play, the players had to be brought to Delhi for a quick camp and getting used to astro-turf.

Of course, that wasn't enough.

The rough and uneven grounds of the past were ideal for the short pass and the ball control of the Indian and Pakistani players where as the smooth, consistent astro-turf meant players with less than the fabulous stickwork of the sub-continental players could now resort to trapping and hard hitting, long passes and suddenly from field goal artists, the penalty corner specialists became the stars. The game changed. But the same had happened when tennis started moving away from grass courts. The world just adapted.

Indians refused to do so for a couple of decades and by the time they got astroturf all over the country, they had lost an entire generation of players and the country's rankings in the sport had hit rock bottom.
What's the point in talking of conspiracy theories?

You didn't get the point. Yes, the world has to adapt but decisions in every sport are forced by those holding money power. Especially, in sports with smaller number of nations.

And if you want to debate Astro Turfs then the South Asians couldn't adapt to it quickly and lost a generation of players because their skills were honed on grass from the beginning, unlike the Europeans/Australians who had astro turfs available. Now to adapt you had to start from a basic level and bring in high level of coaching and build facilities everywhere. Astro turfs were also pretty expensive back then too, and to have them all across the country for young players to train on wasn't possible as Indian economy wasn't as large back then, and Indian Hockey barely has much money now, let alone back then.

It'll be like BCCI making some sort of expensive pitches mandatory in Cricket which would mean poorer boards couldn't afford that many of them.

 

[centurymaker]

Apologies for talking about other sports on CW, but then since we've been going on about politics for some time, I figured we already burnt that bridge. Astroturfs were introduced in Hockey in the 70s, and have led to increase in player safety, a faster, more precise game, and low maintenance costs. That is the official stand. What it also led to was the dethroning of then champions, India and Pakistan. With astroturf, the major skill-set required to excel was that of the European style of play, i.e. endurance and strength, and precise passing. The Indians and Pakistanis relied much more on the dribbling and ball trapping skills, and know-how of playing on the field. Moreover, at that point of time, the Indian and Pakistani board weren't rich enough to be able to implement the astroturf on their home grounds, and thus were not able to compete at the international level.

Administrators failed to realize that players who have spent a great part of their lives developing skills on natural turf cannot just change their game overnight and perform on synthetic turf. The kind of adjustments required in speed, endurance, anticipation, and more importantly, ball distribution skills were significant enough to render the Indian teams largely ineffective in most situations. Natural turf with its uneven bounce requires players to watch the ball closely till the last second to control the ball. Astro turf with its predictable bounce and speed requires players to commit to the ball as early as possible. Also, shouldn't the administrators have at least made sure that the two champion teams from their era would be given enough funds to become competitive in this format, or at least made the change very gradually as to not render them incompetent.

The transformation of the game in the 70s resulted in a "product" that was definitely a faster brand of field hockey with swift crisp passes – a perfect stage to showcase pure athletic skills. One can say that field hockey now resembles a crude version of ice hockey. The European and American audiences haven't fall for this bait – ice hockey continues to dominate their mind space and field hockey has never really taken off there. At the same time, Indian audiences have increasingly lost interest in the game as their teams could never adapt to synthetic turf. Not only has the new game of hockey failed to attract world-wide audiences, it has blatantly ignored the biggest sport market for hockey in the world.

wow. what a story. little wonder then that hockey isn't really a global sport.