Opinions on... UDRS

Is the UDRS about technology or the process by which decisions are delivered? 


We are all for technology. But not for technology for technology's sake. Unlike MS Dhoni, we  do not believe technology should be 100% fool proof before it is deployed. Unlike Sachin Tendulkar we do not claim to understand the reliability of Hot Spot over Snickometer. We don't really understand the cost issues around adopting UDRS, so we can't say whether the BCCI is justified in its relentless opposition to using UDRS. 


What we do know is that the process of delivering decisions using technology is flawed. Make the UDRS a tool of the on-field umpire not a tool for the players to challenge his authority.


So the recent announcement that UDRS will not be deployed for the title clash in South Africa, should make us happy. Not really, because its completely missing the point and unlikely to influence that case of our concern. 

Ashes 1.5: A Made To Order Pitch?

1. So is this what the hoopla was all about? We all worked ourselves up to a frenzy to see bowlers struggling to take 2 wickets for 600 runs on the last 2 days of a Test Match. And this is supposed to enthuse the world into becoming fans of Test Cricket? Are we sure that this was Brisbane and not Ahmedabad?
2. The only other time Australian bowlers were treated to such humiliation at home was in Sydney 1986 when Srikanth, Gavaskar and Amarnath, Nos 1-3 scored 100s. Is this an indicator of how bad the Australian bowlers are? Or is it the pitch?
3. Many believed, me included, the first session of play will decide the Ashes. That may well be true but out of sheer coincidence than anything.The force is with England. 500 odd for 1 declared is not just a score...Its a visual, a picture that will likely give Ponting sleepless nights. It tells a story of how placid the pitch was, how unimaginative the Australian bowlers were and how relentless English batsmen are going to be this summer. It also raises a question...Was this pitch made to order a draw? 

Ashes 1.4: A Rare Captain's Knock

1. What a day for England... from thinking of a draw as a win, they must now wish they had scored a tad faster and been in a position to force a win
2. It was the kind of opening partnership that usually ignites the "save test cricket from subcontinental pitches" movement. This one by Strauss and Cook came in the 3rd innings in fightback. This calls for questioning the skills of the Australian bowlers and sanity of selectoral decision makers In recent times 3rd innings of test matches in the subcontinent have been tricky for the batters. They usually throw open a game in stalemate. This one effectively killed any hope of a decision by knockout. Yet ESPN cricinfo curiously think Strauss and Cook Reignite Contest. Perhaps they meant "contest" as in not this test but the entire series. Or may be they have a thing for draws
3. Strauss's counter attacking innings reminded me of Saurav Ganguly's century at the same venue in 2003. It set the tone for the series and any talk of "targeting" the opposition captain was resigned to the dustbin. The last time a visiting English skipper scored a 100 in the 3rd innings of an Ashes Test match, they ended up winning the test match. It was 115 years ago though. Gooch scored one in 1991 saving a test match in the 4th innings.
4. For Australia, they must think they are still in the game. If they can remove England by mid-day they can have a go at the total.Seems quite outrageous but that's what McGrath, Warne and Hayden did for a living.

Ashes 1.3: England can win this with a draw

1. Hussey scored probably the most important century of his career. Certainly one of his most proud. For a casual viewer though with no allegiance to any side it looked like Hussey and Australia went to lunch on Day 3 124 for 7 and 329 for 12 respectively
2. While I claim no sympathy for England, it was hard not to feel any for Anderson. On any other day Anderson could have bowled half as well as he did today and gotten an LBW decision on Hussey even as he inside edged it on to the pads.
3. Most experts on Channel 9 kept calling Swann, the best spinner in the world. It made me cringe each time. Not because I have an alternative candidate, but because they may well be true.
4. The match is poised brilliantly for England to win it with a draw. Its the next best option to actually winning it. Get yourself into so much of a hole that you spend half of the test match playing for a draw. The draw then seems as good as a win and the side playing for a win feels like they lost it. It worked in South Africa and the previous edition of the Ashes.

Ashes 1.2: England Take a Second Look

Players seem to have more faith in Technology than the on-field umpire. England certainly do. They lost both their challenges in a session and a bit more of cricket. Players in general don't seem to be knowledgeable about the limits of the technology in use. When you challenge, its not whether the batsman is out or not out, rather its whether the technology will provide enough evidence to over turn the original decision. Players seem too eager to challenge, discounting the limited evidence technology can capture.

Australia are slightly ahead if you just look at the scoreboard. However, the way they batted it was pretty obvious reclaiming the Ashes was going to be extremely tough. While with England you could sense the batsmen were capable of much better, with Australia no such thoughts entered the mind. Ponting continues to be horribly out of form, which puts Michael Clarke under pressure - something he has a knack of not handling, and North isn't due for a 100 until sometime after the Ashes

After a nerve induced performance on day one, England seemed to have taken a step back, deep breath and played Australia on current form. England should win from this point on.

Is England Real?

England looked tentative, nervous and played stupid cricket. At no point did any batsman on view look convincing despite getting some runs on the board. Bell and Cook looked like they would grit it out despite the fact that they had not gotten on top of the bowling. But they were simply done in by good, honest, blue-collar bowling.

Siddle, Hilfenhaus and Watson bowled with aggression and purpose and got just rewards. Johnson was the only bowler not to hit his stride. I'm not sure Australia have the luxury of carrying him, if he continues to be so inconsistent. Many had said that Siddle could be the difference and he showed up. His bowling doesn't have the flash of a McGrath or Lillee, but he has the Gillespie-esque quality of bowling with an earnestness of a newcomer and a Vaas-like perseverance of a veteran. Watson is probably enjoying himself more now that his role is clearer. Although, I still feel he is more Manoj Prabhakar than Mudassar Nazar. Or better bowler than batsman. Hilfenhaus constantly probed the off-stump and bowled with a passion that I didn't see from the Australian bowlers on their tour of India.

All in all, it appears that the Aussie bowlers are reveling in home conditions and having Siddle back has been the right boost. Bollinger appears to me to be in the Bichel mold. Solid and decent bowler, but not someone that can consistently turn test matches on their head with bursts of wickets. So it was the right decision to bench him in favor of Hilfenhaus and Siddle. Watson's wicket of Trott was the pick of the wickets.

If there's any ray of hope for England, it's in the fact that they scored 60+ runs after the hat-trick. Australia has a vulnerable batting line-up too. It'll be up to the English bowlers to show that they can exploit the poor forms of Hussey and Clarke and put England right back in this contest. At this time, Australia have England by the jugular. Usually, they don't let go, but who knows.

Ashes 1.1: My 2 Cents

1. England have begun preparations for the 2013 Ashes in all earnest. Andrew Strauss and Andy Flower have released a schedule of how key players will be rested on tours and given time off during home summers. Clearly England have more of a knack for the build up to the Ashes than playing it. So now that the crucial, energy sapping build up is over, WAGs will join their HABs starting the end of the 2nd days play.
2. Aleem Dar is as good as the latest technology. Its is a sorry sight to see England challenge an Ashes Hat Trick. Why can't they let the umpires decide if they need to use technology? What's with this challenge system? Is this ICC's way to make players think that they are "empowered"?

The Hat Trick Aussie Style

The Way the English Saw it