Parsing Through the UDRS Code

A Cricketing View does us all an invaluable service and actually reads the ICC code on the DRS. I’m still going through the post, but I’m already sure it’s required reading for all those, like me, who are concerned with the state of umpire referrals (esp. after that Ian Bell disaster). Money graf:

What the ICC would like is for the TV Umpire to review Hawkeye’s output like a Clerk, and tick the appropriate check boxes for a finite set of variables, then report to the On-field Umpire which of the three possible decisions the Technology reports – Out, Not Out or Inconclusive. The way the review is currently structured, the TV Umpire is the de facto referee for a dispute between the on-field Umpire and the players, instead of being an assistant to the on-field umpire in satisfying the players doubts about the a particular decision. Hence, it appears to be unimportant what the on-field umpire’s rationale for the decision was, even though, as I have shown, this is crucial to what the technology can achieve in improving/reinforcing an umpire’s decision.


2 thoughts on “Parsing Through the UDRS Code

  1. With respect to Ian Bell’s non-dismissal and the surrounding noise made over the 2.5 metre rule, I have posted a detailed blog regarding what I perceive as its drawback and a suggestion that I have had for quite some time to improve it. You may find it an interesting read over here – UDRS 2.5 M RULE: CRITICISM AND SUGGESTION.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: