On balance I prefer the idea of the DRS - to my mind getting more important decisions correct and being seen to get them correct is good for the game. The problem I have is in the way the 3rd umpire is interpreting the technology. The idea of DRS I thought is to give a chance to review decisions one side thinks are wrong and then overturn them if it is clear there was a mistake made by the Umpire - so for example with LBW there is an area around the ball just hitting the stumps where the on fields umpires call stands - the same for Roots dismissal in the first innings where to me it seemed marginally the umpire got it slightly wrong but it wasnt a clear error Where I have a problem is when the 3rd umpire overturns a decision based on less than clear evidence - Trott for example in the last test, and the decision being talked about in this thread - in this case I think the batsman probably was out - but I think the original umpires decision should have stood. The one change I would like to see is how reviews are used up - currently if a decision is overturned the review isn't lost but if the original decision stands then the review is used up. I would like a chance for reviews where the decision is close but the on field umpires call is upheld not to be a waste of a review
The issue is with the fact HT had an opinion. If he says black then there's a group on here who will argue it's white.
That KERS will be a lovely person for next season too. Kelvin Etuhu Referral System. Technology used, to decide whether he plays next season, or gets dropped like a stone for Diggers or Daws. Uses a complex formula of youth & experience Not to be confused with Kinetic Energy Recovery System