ICC's chief match referee backs DRS

By Hilal Suhaib | August 24, 2012

Ranjan Madugalle
Ranjan Madugalle believes using DRS regularly is the best way to improve it. © AFP

The ICC's chief match referee Ranjan Madugalle has said the Decision Review System (DRS) is "good for the game" and the system must be used regularly to be given a chance to improve.

Madugalle, a former Sri Lankan captain, played 21 Test matches and 63 ODIs from 1979 to 1988. He is the first match referee to officiate in more than 200 ODI games before becoming the first referee to be appointed chief match referee.

"Personally, I like [DRS]. I think it's been good for the game," Madugalle told Sri Lanka's Daily Mirror newspaper in a recent interview.

"I know there are certain operational issues that we need to tackle, [but that] happens in anything. When you introduce something afresh and new, there are teething problems. As you use it, and use it regularly, you tend to overcome that.

"One must never forget the fact that technology advances every day. So with advancement in technology, you have greater accuracy and consistency. As such, we must give it a chance to get the best results.

"By standing still you actually fall behind in today’s world."

India's influential cricket board is responsible for a large share of cricket's global revenues, and their dislike for the review system has effectively curbed the universal use of it.

Critics of the DRS point to contentious decisions made with the use of the system as a means to prevent its use.

However, several current players, including Sri Lankan captain Mahela Jayawardene, have shown their support for DRS.

"I have always been a fan of the DRS," Jayawardene told reporters during a Test series against Pakistan in June.

"It might not be 100-percent technology, but if we can use it to get the maximum number of correct decisions it will help the umpires as well."

Despite a recommendation by the ICC cricket committee to make DRS mandatory universally, and despite recent improvements to the technology, the ICC's executive board seemingly bowed down to India's demands by not putting the issue to vote during the executive board meeting in Malaysia in June.

It is understood that India was the only member nation to object to DRS at that meeting.

According to the ICC, DRS has helped improve decisions by around five-percent and has helped minimise the impact of blatant errors on the outcome of a game.

© Island Cricket

Comments

Anon's picture

Really proud of you Mr.Ranjan Madugalle...No point of talking about accuracy of DRS, bcoz we all know that, it is not the real reasons for Indians to reject this system. They want to get the favoritism of umpires in important matches by influencing them indirectly through the power of their cricket board. Inexperience umpires like Bruce Oxenford, Ian Gould rarely give decisions against Indians and that explains the situation. Shame on you BCCI.

Sakthivel's picture
Member since:
28 March 2012
Last activity:
1 day 16 hours

Its really poor in part of SLC not used DRS when pakistan touring SL. Mahela Jayawardene should have felt ashamed that SLC never provided DRS. Shame on SLC.

kk_mix412's picture
Member since:
4 August 2012
Last activity:
38 weeks 6 days

Anon, read the article and then reply.

The onfield umpires have a deadly accuracy of about 95 % and you wanna say that drs should be given more preference. A method which is still only 50 % reliable. Oh come on!

[Comment edited by moderator]

(Last edited by kk_mix412 on August 25, 2012 - 15:34)
kk_mix412's picture
Member since:
4 August 2012
Last activity:
38 weeks 6 days

The drs is good in many aspects but the hawk eye is still not reliable

pradeep jayatunga's picture

Nothing is perfect but cricket with DRS is much better than cricket without DRS. Simple logic!

Post new comment

Note
All anonymous comments are moderated.
  • Avoid abusive remarks and personal attacks.
  • Avoid posting unrelated links.
  • Avoid vulgar or obscene language.
Already a member? Log-in now. Not a member? Sign up for a new account.
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
Enter each letter you see in the box below. It helps us prevent automated submissions from spammers.