Umpire Decision Review System
The Umpire Decision Review System (abbreviated as UDRS or DRS) is a technology based system currently being used in the sport of cricket. The system was first introduced in Test Cricket for the sole purpose of reviewing the controversial decisions made by the on-field umpires in the case of a batsman being dismissed or not. The new review system was officially launched by International Cricket Council on 24 November 2009 during the first Test match between New Zealand and Pakistan at the University Oval in Dunedin.It was first used in One Day Internationals in January 2011, during England's tour of Australia.The ICC had made the UDRS mandatory in all international matches but it later decided to end the mandatory use of DRS and now it will be up to both the teams to mutually agree on DRS use. However, the ICC's executive board made it clear that the DRS would still be part of all ICC events and that they support the use of technology and would continue to work on its development.
Components
There are basically three components in UDRS,although now two are used.- Hawk-Eye or Eagle Eye or Virtual Eye :ball-tracking technology..
- Hot Spot (cricket) :Infra-red imaging system
- Snickometer : a very sensitive microphone located in one of the stumps, which can pick up the sound when the ball nicks the bat. This technology is only used to give television audiences more information and to show if the ball did or did not actually hit the bat. Unfortunately the umpires does not get the benefit of seeing 'snicko'.
Uses
The system was first used during a Test match between Pakistan and England at Lord's Cricket Ground, on 21 April 2001, in the TV coverage by Channel 4. Since then it has been an indispensable tool for cricket commentators around the world. It is used primarily by the majority of television networks to track the trajectory of balls in flight, mostly for analyzing leg before wicket decisions. In this case, Hawk-Eye is able to project the likely path of the ball forward, through the batsman's legs, to see if it would have hit the wicket. Currently this information is not used by the umpires to adjudicate on LBW decisions - it is only available to television viewers, although in the future it may be adopted by the third umpire. Currently the central umpire only get to see it once - and they have to make their minds up instantly.
Response
The Decision Review System has generally received positive response from players and coaches since its launch, however there have been some criticisms as well. West Indies legend Joel Garner labelled the system a 'gimmick'. Another West Indian Ramnaresh Sarwan said that he was not a supporter of the experimental referral system. Former umpire Dickie Bird also criticised the system, saying it undermines the authority of on-field umpires. The cricketing board of India, (BCCI) is not in favour of using the system.Pakistani spinner Saeed Ajmal expressed dissatisfaction over the Decision Review System after semi-final of 2011 Cricket World Cup against India. He said that DRS showed the line of the ball deviating more than it actually did.
The British company HawkEye published an official response on the Sachin Tendulkar review, which proves that the decision reversal was right.
Criticisms
Although Hawkeye is very accurate in measuring the actual path of a ball, when it comes to predicting the future path of the ball, such as in LBW decisions, it is not as clear. If the ball is heading to the pitch, there's no way Hawk-eye can tell if a delivery is going to skid a bit more than normal or hit a crack, bit of grass, or worn patch of the pitch. The predicted path of the ball is based on the avrage and expected pathway.
Related Articles:
Cost Factor
The cost of implementing the UDRS - at $56,000 per match day - is almost the same as 'per diem' fees of two on-field umpires and the third umpire in an international match put together.
And both - umpires and technology - costing in excess of a whopping $100,000 per match day, are still not good enough to ensure fool-proof decision making. Neither human eye nor technology, despite the money being spent, guarantee complete accuracy.
Just like how an on-field umpire has to depend on the television umpire for many decisions, the UDRS has to depend on Hot-Spot and Snickometer. Unfortunately, the International Cricket Council (ICC) - despite debating the issue for close to two years now - has still not been able to make any firm decision on the issue.
The cost of implementing the UDRS - at $56,000 per match day - is almost the same as 'per diem' fees of two on-field umpires and the third umpire in an international match put together.
And both - umpires and technology - costing in excess of a whopping $100,000 per match day, are still not good enough to ensure fool-proof decision making. Neither human eye nor technology, despite the money being spent, guarantee complete accuracy.
Just like how an on-field umpire has to depend on the television umpire for many decisions, the UDRS has to depend on Hot-Spot and Snickometer. Unfortunately, the International Cricket Council (ICC) - despite debating the issue for close to two years now - has still not been able to make any firm decision on the issue.
really nice work :-)
ReplyDelete