Print

[sanredrose]

the ICC grow some balls and make it mandatory or they get over themselves.

ICC cut off its balls in 2010 itself. I believe DRS was compulsory until mid 2011. If i remember correctly, BCCI brought a strong opposition to the DRS being compulsory and ICC reverted DRS to a nice to have feature. It was changed such that DRS will be used only if both teams agree ... I don't see this changing unless some modified version of DRS is deemed acceptable to all the cricket boards.

[sanredrose]

@roco read the article before making this comment. Dhoni didn't complain even though the reporter wanted him to. Here is the link to that http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia-v-india-2015-16/content/story/961593.html

Dhoni trolls reporters better than anyone. Someone asked in pre-match conference if MSD will get his revenge for Australian defeat in early 2015. MSD responded - if i respond to this question then your next question would be "isn't cricket a gentleman's game" .... He is very good in escaping from answering the question - management 101 ...

[tate035]

ICC cut off its balls in 2010 itself. I believe DRS was compulsory until mid 2011. If i remember correctly, BCCI brought a strong opposition to the DRS being compulsory and ICC reverted DRS to a nice to have feature. It was changed such that DRS will be used only if both teams agree ... I don't see this changing unless some modified version of DRS is deemed acceptable to all the cricket boards.

The only strong opposition that India brought to the table was the amount of people involved in cricket from that country.. The fact so much revenue is generated by India was the MAIN reason the ICC bottled it. No one can argue that on the whole DRS is NOT good for the game. It's time that cricketing nations all grew a set and told India where to go... They are holding cricket and especially test cricket back in many many ways and not having DRS is just one of them..

[ppccopener]

ICC cut off its balls in 2010 itself. I believe DRS was compulsory until mid 2011. If i remember correctly, BCCI brought a strong opposition to the DRS being compulsory and ICC reverted DRS to a nice to have feature. It was changed such that DRS will be used only if both teams agree ... I don't see this changing unless some modified version of DRS is deemed acceptable to all the cricket boards.

no...I don't think this is correct, it's India that objects and so it cannot be used in their games, the rest of the boards will do as the ICC say, it's just India that thinks it's bigger than the game.

one of the major teams should call India's bluff.

[ProCricketer1982]

The only strong opposition that India brought to the table was the amount of people involved in cricket from that country.. The fact so much revenue is generated by India was the MAIN reason the ICC bottled it. No one can argue that on the whole DRS is NOT good for the game. It's time that cricketing nations all grew a set and told India where to go... They are holding cricket and especially test cricket back in many many ways and not having DRS is just one of them..

money talks, merit walks. India will be the power house for years to come and will hold all the aces. The rest are simply playing catch up and will be going on a steady decline. I don't like that money rules everything BUT that's the society 'we' have deemed to desire so we have to accept it. FOrmats are almost irrelevant, the world will play whatever format generates the most money (probably 2020 now), the rest will again, die off as the years go by (or change beyond our recognition)

eeyore

[sanredrose]

The only strong opposition that India brought to the table was the amount of people involved in cricket from that country.. The fact so much revenue is generated by India was the MAIN reason the ICC bottled it. No one can argue that on the whole DRS is NOT good for the game. It's time that cricketing nations all grew a set and told India where to go... They are holding cricket and especially test cricket back in many many ways and not having DRS is just one of them..

Holding DRS back and popularizing T20 format is probably BCCI's handy work .. How is that related to holding back test cricket ?

None of the boards are going to argue with BCCI because of the sheer revenue they generate. At the end of day, cricket has also boiled down to a money game ...

[csnew]

The whole DRS issue is a farce, how can you have it in ODI's yet it's not part of the T20's. Surely a dodgy decision in a t20 is more likely to change a game

[ProCricketer1982]

The whole DRS issue is a farce, how can you have it in ODI's yet it's not part of the T20's. Surely a dodgy decision in a t20 is more likely to change a game

the whole point of 2020 is to be quick so wouldn't suit constant 'reviews'. 2020 is fine without DRS tbf, it's supposed to be quick and entertaining with all the biffing, not 'pure' for want of a better word like Tests. ODI's are kind of in the middle, you could get away without DRS in ODI's but it's fine with it.

[tate035]

Holding DRS back and popularizing T20 format is probably BCCI's handy work .. How is that related to holding back test cricket ?

None of the boards are going to argue with BCCI because of the sheer revenue they generate. At the end of day, cricket has also boiled down to a money game ...

The majority will tell you that having DRS at test matches enhances the experience for those watching . I never mentioned that heavily promoting T20 had effected test matches. I only mentioned DRS as to why India had a negative effect on Tests. However I could throw in the type of pitches they prepare (India are the biggest culprit. IMO.)  also the question of corruption in all formats has effected many a person's thoughts on cricket. Whilst India are not alone in this department the seeds where originally sown within their culture.

It doesn't have to be about money because other nations could boycott playing in India. No one nation should be able to dictate how a sport develops whether it's to the advantage or detriment of the game.

[sanredrose]

The majority will tell you that having DRS at test matches enhances the experience for those watching . I never mentioned that heavily promoting T20 had effected test matches. I only mentioned DRS as to why India had a negative effect on Tests. However I could throw in the type of pitches they prepare (India are the biggest culprit. IMO.)  also the question of corruption in all formats has effected many a person's thoughts on cricket. Whilst India are not alone in this department the seeds where originally sown within their culture.

It doesn't have to be about money because other nations could boycott playing in India. No one nation should be able to dictate how a sport develops whether it's to the advantage or detriment of the game.

"Holding back DRS and promoting T20" => This is actually my comment. I didn't mean to say that you said this, but the way i typed it was wrong. So agree with you on this one. DRS is the problem area.

Corruption in all formats & seeds are sown within their culture => IMO This statement is a pretty wide accusation. I hope you are referring to the culture of the people who run the BCCI organization and not the whole country.

The way i see it, BCCI is run either by political big wigs or some big corporate or industrial guy. The organization is not run by former players.

[roco]

@roco read the article before making this comment. Dhoni didn't complain even though the reporter wanted him to. Here is the link to that http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia-v-india-2015-16/content/story/961593.html

I read that and read the article on sky sports plus talked to someone that watched it, that is why I said I hear not that it was gospel and clarified it was a leading question.

But, he is complaining in a backhanded way by asking people to look at the amount of 50/50 decisions that go against India.

Its simple either accept DRS or accept the decisions on the field and don't complain.

Can't have cake and eat it too.

PS. even with DRS decisions are not 100% but they have gone from 95% to 98% I think the last figures showed and we are seeing the amount of howlers overturned so it can only be a good thing.

[northernboy1987]

I'm with @roco India should follow the rules like everyone else and stop whinging about it.

[edge]

I'd like to see India use their position to improve the DRS rather than just refuse to consider it. I don't agree with them on not using it, but the current umpires' call/enormous margin of error business is daft. Shrink the virtual stumps to provide the margin of error if you prefer, but a technology review system should give a definite answer.

[ProCricketer1982]

I'd like to see India use their position to improve the DRS rather than just refuse to consider it. I don't agree with them on not using it, but the current umpires' call/enormous margin of error business is daft. Shrink the virtual stumps to provide the margin of error if you prefer, but a technology review system should give a definite answer.

I'd go with 'if it's hitting any part of the stumps it's out'.. do away with margin for error completely. It's either not out.. or out. The only other thing I'd change is the no ball rule.. rather than 'something behind the line', I'd just say 'nothing must touch or go over the front line'.. again, just make it clear and simple for dumb ass bowlers

[sanredrose]

rather than 'something behind the line', I'd just say 'nothing must touch or go over the front line'.. again, just make it clear and simple for dumb ass bowlers

+1 .. i am with you on the no-ball rule ...