Err on the side of Technology

This DRS debate continues to be on the front burner of cricket. It should remain on the front burner until the ICC makes up their minds one way or another. In the present limbo, justice cannot and will not be served. History is littered with the consequences of injustice so much so that the ICC is really threading in very volatile and dangerous waters.

Okay, enough with the metaphors. Why is this position being taken in this article? Well, after observing the use and non use of the DRS since its introduction in 2009, the conclusion is simple, you can't have the system in ad hock series. It is going to have to be all or nothing.



Interestingly, it is not all aspects of the DRS which provides the bone of contention; it is the ball tracking component of it. It appears India is the staunchest objector to this. Their point is well taken. Afterall, how can one accurately predict the motion of a cricket ball to an exact science?

Hawk-Eye developed this system that uses the pictures from at least four high speed cameras. These pictures are broken down into frames and then the pixels from each are processed together which basically is that milli second images are put together to bring about a 3D effect of the motion of the ball. These frames then builds up the path of the ball which it has traveled. Up to this point, it doesn't seem as if there is much contention. It is the next aspect of ball tracking that is the sore point.

This is the predictive path especially as it relates to LBW decisions. There is  concern that calculations may not be as accurate as one would want. There is even the more sinister view that calculations may or can be skewed against or in favor of one team. Interestingly, the system which is used in Tennis for line calls does not draw significantly on the predictive path. In this respect, cricket provides more challenges.

The easy way to get around that would be to use the projected path but not the predictive path. This has been done before and was largely accepted since a decision had to be made based on the projection of the ball, and it has already been explained how that works, and the impact of the ball with the pad. After that point, it would be up to the Television Umpire to determine if the ball would have struck the stumps or not. There is still a human component there, just that it would be from someone who is taking a second or third look who hasn't been on the field concentrating for hours in the humidity of the hot sun or numbing frigid atmospheric conditions.

Sadly, on a few occasions, even the third umpire demonstrated epic failure as evidence by the chronicled events of a game between the West Indies and England. This only goes to show that no matter what the situation, competence and subjectiveness will always play a part.

Despite these drawbacks, the real value of the DRS is the attempt to take out the subjectiveness of the human factor. In other words, give the illusion of justice being served even though there will always be the underlying feeling that something may be amiss. It makes no sense to use it for some series and then not having it for another. Even though there are neutral umpires, batsman A who is accomplished and respected throughout the cricketing world, is likely to get a marginal decision in his favor than a number 10 or eleven batsman, call him B, who is not renowned for his batting skills. It is human to be subjective. Fair should be fair no matter what the skill level.

The cost factor should also be addressed. The more cameras there are, the better Hawk-Eye works. If the DRS is to be used then it should be the responsibility of the ICC to make sure that funding is in place for this. They are the governing body; it is their responsibility to make sure that the game is not brought into disrepute for lack of a fair system.

Who is at a disadvantage? Is it the batsman under the DRS or the batsman at the whim of the on field umpire? That would be a good topic for another article but what is clear is that it is not the same conditions. Sports should be played on a level playing field. To use or not to use DRS especially for LBW decisions makes the playing field uneven.