Obstinacy against DRS not helping

Decades ago when umpiring was criticised for exhibiting obvious bias, Imran Khan propagated the introduction of neutral umpires. The first pair of neutral umpires Piloo Reporter and V.K. Ramaswamy was appointed in a home series involving Pakistan against West Indies. Not that umpiring became flawless but mistakes weren’t termed as biases.

The issue was pervasive enough to impel a funny cricketing anecdote off the pitch; that perhaps qualifies as an anecdote purely by belonging to another era. In 1956 a Pakistani umpire Idris Baig, who had acquired a reputation of being biased, was kidnapped from his hotel in Peshwar by the touring MCC team to their hotel. He was dumped in a tub and the players drenched him in ice cold water.

Pakistani umpiring continued to be viewed as biased; and sporadic incidents like the Mike Gatting and Shakoor Rana one, ensured the sustenance of such views on umpiring. India too featured in the frame of this debate but unlike the case in Pakistan the complaint was that the bias favoured the visiting teams.

The concept of neutral umpires was gradually accepted by the cricketing world but with money pouring into the game the ICC encouraged the implementation of technology to help the umpires minimise mistakes. All the member countries including India accepted the use of technology.

A few years ago in a series against Sri Lanka with majority of the reviews going against India resulted in India questioning the efficacy of the DRS. There have been a series of meetings in the ICC to convince the BCCI but despite bloopers by umpires there is no change in BCCI’s stance.

The umpires who are accustomed to the DRS in other international matches seem to get rattled in India matches because of the absence of the DRS system.

The umpiring fraternity points out that once one gets used to the system, absence of it in a single series, affects the decision making. For a nick or a bat-pad DRS can be accurate and efficient, especially with the hotspot technology.

However umpires aren’t sure of the same with their naked eye, especially in the crowded stadiums of the sub-continent.

In the on-going five Test match series between India and England there have been glaring instances in the two Tests of umpiring errors. If these decisions eventually prove to be decisive to the fate of the series then the contest will lose its sheen.

After a gap of 55 years, India is playing a five Test series in England and the millions of cricket lovers are captivated by the tussle between bat and ball.

There is no doubt that had it not been for the thoughtful marketing of the sport by the BCCI, the game would have suffered but to be obstinate in not having DRS is not helping.

The BCCI should realise that DRS as a system is not totally inaccurate and should offer solutions to improve it. The system is monitored scientifically by the ICC. However, if the BCCI is looking for one hundred per cent accuracy it may not happen immediately.

One possible solution that can be considered for implementation is to allow the third umpire to intervene without waiting for the on-field umpires to ask for the review. At present despite having the advantage of technology, the third umpire is isolated from the decision making processes. The fielding side and batsmen too shouldn’t be allowed to ask for the review. 

The system must be placed entirely in the hands of the third umpire who should intervene to convey the reviewed decision to the field umpires. This will help preserve the authority of the field umpires; while ensuring that correct decisions are made in case the field umpires miss a decision or make a mistake.

This way the system is simple and effective and in the spirit of the sport. There is no reason why the BCCI shouldn’t accept it.