Wednesday, March 02, 2011

Ultra Dumb Reaction Syndrome ... !!

It happens ... happens quite a lot ... and it goes into the bracket of "It happens ony in India" ...

OK ... so much has already been said of the UDRS decision going against India in their match against England. For starters ... we need to move on ...

Maybe, it has become such an issue because India was involved. It is very likely too that it is more so because we could not defend 338 and even more so coz after being outplayed by England, we somehow got the grip back only to tie the match ... so are we running away from the reality once again?

Well lets first see what the UDRS means? It stands for Umpire Decision Review System. According to this, each team gets 2 reviews per 50 overs. So each team gets 2 reviews in the first 50 overs as well as 2 reviews in the next 50 overs. The UDRS essentially tells you about 3 things ...

One ... whether the ball pitched in line and not outside the leg stump ...
Two ... whether the ball is hitting the pads in line and not outside the line of off stump ...
Three ... whether the ball is hitting the stumps after impact with the pads ...

In addition to these, the UDRS checks if its a legal ball by verifying if its a NO-ball ...

Now there is a catch ... if the Third Umpire is not sure even after reviewing ... he may ask the on-field umpire to stay put and keep the decision unchanged

... lets see the following examples ...

Lets say a batsman was given Not Out and the bowling side asked for a review ... now the Third Umpire got an affirmative response for the 3 points mentioned ... I mean the ball pitched in line, hit the batsman in line and was also hitting the stumps ... but it was hitting the outside of leg stump ... in such a case the Third Umpire will ask the on-field umpire to keep his decison unchanged since there was a minute chance of it hitting the stumps ... so the on-field umpire keep his decision unchanged ... had it been hitting the middle stump instead ... it would have been a reversal of decision ...

Imagine the same scenario with the exception that the batsman was given Out by On-field umpire and the Batsman calls for a review ... even in this case the Third Umpire will inform the on-field umpire that the ball is hitting the outside of leg stump ... so you decide ... and hence the on-field umpire does not change his decision and the Batsman is Out ...

This is where I agree to what Dhoni says ... how fool-proof is this UDRS? If it is still going to let the on-field umpires make the decision then you are forced to question the credibility of such a system ... however I do not agree to one point of Dhoni ...

Even with the fallacies of UDRS, it is still enabling the game to have fairer decisions as compared to previous times ... for example, a huge inside edge can be detected by the eye (this is very important) and the batsman can be saved from a howler ...

This brings me to the next point ... why is this UDRS half-baked for an event as big as the World Cup ... where is the Snickometer? where is Hot Spot? If you are going to use technology, you bloody well use it in its entirety and dont get installments of it out ... a very faint inside edge for lbw or for a Caught-Behind cannot be detected by the naked eye ... you need a Snicko and Hot-Spot for that ... and the reason given for this is Money ... good lord ... if the ICC (or should I say the BCCI) cannot arrange money for a Snicko and Hot-Spot who will? Its almost laughable ... how come folks in Australia are using it on a normal basis ... even in domestic cricket?

And finally, there is this 2.5 metre rule which I guess 99% of the people did not know ... I dont think even the ICC knew about it ... so what is this rule?

It states that if the impact of the ball with the pads is more than 2.5 metres away from the stumps (which means that either the batsman has had a huge stride forward or he has danced down the wicket), then the Third Umpire informs the on-field umpire of this and then the on-field umpire has to think again and make a decision ... in most cases ... a 2.5 metre distance most definitely means that the ball has a long distance to go before hitting the stumps and its highly improbable that it will hit the stump coz the bounce may take the ball above the stumps ... quite true ... but as an umpire, you have to think about a lot of things before giving a decision ... the current state of the pitch, the angle from which the bowler bowled that particular delivery, the pace of the delivery, was it a particular kind of delivery (a yorker, full toss, good-length ball, doosra, off break, leg break, skidder?) ... lots of things which may not give a correct decision ...

This is exactly what happened in the India-England game ... Ian Bell was given Not-Out by the on-field umpire and India reviewed ... the review showed that the ball was pitching in-line, hitting in-line and going to hit the middle and off stump half way up ... but the impact was more than 2.5 metres away from the stumps ... so the Third umpire may have said to the on-field umpire that it has 2.5 metres to go ... if that is what he said indeed then its a problem ... probably a message should have been sent to the on-field umpire that despite being 2.5 metres ... its hitting the stumps only half way up which means that it didnt make a difference if it was 2.5 metres away ... it was still not a boundary decision ... and it should have been given Out ...

That's that ... did it change the course of the game? Maybe ... Maybe not ... Ian Bell did go on to play a match winning innings ... but then thats just food for thought ...

The reaction in the media and within the Indian team was appalling ... Dhoni giving out statements in the press was most uncalled for ... poor Ian Bell was being grilled for no fault of his own ... after all he did not give that decision ... if anything Dhoni should look at himself ... there was 2 instances where Strauss nicked to Dhoni but there was no appeal ... if they would have appealed maybe Strauss would have been on his bike ... the field placements were downright ugly ... England picked a boundary per over with utmost ease ... if it hadnt been for Strauss's shocker to have the batting Powerplay in the 43rd over ... it would have been curtains for India ... Dhoni wad forced to keep an attacking field in the Powerplay and it brought India back into the game ... lots of stuff for India to think ... they better look at themselves before giving this UDRS thing too much attention ... but then again I aint a cricketer ... I am sure Dhoni knows what he is doing and he does not need any advice ... at least not from a non-cricketer ...

Then there is the media ... I have come to the point of hating Arnab Goswami ... you put him in any Newshour Debate and he brings some pre-conceived ideas and keeps putting his point across while embarassing himself as well as Times ... that too in front of legends like Barry Richards ... come on guys ... move on ... how can you say something like "Did Billy Bowden's (the on-field umpire who gave Bell Not out) ego stop him from giving a correct decision?" ... ridiculous ... how can you state if it was a correct decision or not? There is this so called Cricket historian Boria Majumdar ... well this guy is good ... he has a lot of Cricketing knowledge but still ... you put your opinion forward and move on ... dont be hell bent on proving your point when it is clear that the debate has no proper conclusion ...

Lets enjoy the World Cup ... it will have its low points for an Indian spectator ... but its still a spectacle ... if anything then this match was a cracker for a cricket buff ... its been years since I saw a cricket match from the first ball to the last and it ended in a tie ... more than 675 runs in a day ... what more do you want?

I am quite sure India will come out all guns blazing in their next matches ... they were caught off-guard by a resurgent English team ... but who's to say that we still cannot win the Cup? I wouldnt ... as long as we keep our focus on the game ...

Go India ... !!