Rhino Richards

The use of hotspot is in conjunction with other tests not on its own. If you are trying to base a decision purely on Hotspot then it would be sensible to rule the benefit of the doubt or umpires call.

The alleged "misuse" is an issue for the team but is not a flaw with the DRS. As I said batting and bowling teams are getting smarter with the use of the technology. That's to be expected. But the 3rd umpire only has address the referrals for review. The problem comes when he has to articulate quickly tight situations where he can only sight matters from a long way away in a split second with audibility of the matter. There is no way he could have navigated the close call decisions on Rogers.

Once again, Khawaja would not have been settled through the 3 umpires. There is no evidence of misue of the DRS by the players (I am not sure why you carry on about that??) and as you correctly pointed out its the authorities who have let the howlers through. So why leave it purely with the authorities? And if MC cant determine whether Warner hit it then the 3rd umpires from over 100 metres away wont work it out. And once again the players are adapting to the system. And i would hardly call the Warner example a howler. The umpire got it right and when challenged was shown to be right. Seems like a big tick for the DRS!!......once again.

For those who are confused on what LEADERSHIP is there is an excellent article from Ian Chappell on Clarke and Cook and Clarke's LEADERSHIP calibre. Yeah I know what would Chappelli know about LEADERSHIP and captaincy? He should get a dictionary..... http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/661025.html

I have already addressed the Stuart Broad issue and how that could have been avoided....if players had not squandered their consultations. The best way to get rid of the howler is to improve the judgement/decision making of the umpires. If two teams agree, then you should be able to draw from umpires either of those countries to ensure you are actually getting the best. Simon Taufel (Australia) is widely viewed as one of, if not the best umpire going around in Test cricket but Australia has been denied access. The issue is the players are not misusing it to the detriment of the system. They are not activating their challenges correctly (eg Lyon). So if an umpire gives a batsman out then when does the 3rd umpire intervene. He wont know at a split second if there is an issue particularly when the matter is often close. He wont know until the batsman is half way in the dressing room. This will lead to significant uncertainty as to what is going on...more so than what is happening now. What happens if the umpire gives a decision, both sides accept and the 3rd umpire decides to equivocate of his own accord?? Time wasting, uncertainty, frustration and uncalled for off field interference. And in the case of Khawaja the 3rd umpire clearly would not have picked up.....even after the watching the replay a number of times!!! He certainly would not have picked up any issue with the Chris Rogers decision So the howler or umpire error continues!! And in the case of close decisions the 3rd umpire is in the split second worst position to make a call. He cannot hear a sound and cant detect a deflection so how can he call it. Leaving it with the 3rd umpire does not address your core concerns about the process.

Well both options seem foolish and don't address the issue. I think the evidence is that the system has been poorly used by the players as they learn to deal with technology. If the Australian had not been so cavalier in blowing their DRS reviews then the Stuart Broad howler would not have happened. The players are getting smarter at using their challenges. If the DRS had been properly used by the 3rd umpire then the Khawaja howlers should have been overturned. Which howlers are you talking about? If there are howlers then surely they should be called out and rectified. And there were two howlers yesterday. Ryan Harris LBW ( how could the umpire have missed that??) and Nathan Lyons LBW (why didn't he challenge? It was clearly going down leg). There has been a lot of smoke screens and strawman arguments on here against the DRS. It's a pity they don't have much factual merit. It's not a perfect but evolving system but some of the incorrect claims really should be subject to due scrutiny. And isn't that what we are achieving with the DRS?

FWIW the umpires aren't young (Tony Hill certainly isn't). And a central umpire cant see a replay to check unless either side challenges it. They are just making a number of bad calls. And the reason for the DRS hold up is the officials reviewing the dismissal. It takes a player little time to push his fist into his forearm in the shape of a T less than 5 seconds. Teams have generally got the process down pat. Fielding teams consult keeper,bowler and captain. The batting side has the two bats consult. It's a matter of seconds. I don't begrudge the official if they take a minute or two to get a decision right rather than have a wrong decision stain a whole Test or series.

Yes. There have been many. Any sub continent series prior to neutral umpires. Another example is India in Australia in 2008. Steve Bucknor had a horror series and a number of bad calls. There was no DRS. The Indians stooped to character assassination in the media. It was a contributing issue into the real threat that they abandon a tour. The technoology is better now than 5 years ago and the results are showing the true extent of the problems we have always known were there but did no know the extent. Tony Hill has had a shocking series and he should not be on the Test umpires panel. His decision on Ryan Harris was an absolute howler. Over the past 40 years we have seen the confidence of the players in the umpires to get it correct fall...and with good reason. DRS and technology is now a part of cricket. We need to use it smartly not ditch it because we don't just like it.

It's too late to talk about embracing the technology. It's here and we have to work with it. My comment about run outs 40 years ago was to highlight that the pre DRS world for umpiring was not fine. It was hardly a connect of run outs to the DRS. As I said for the ICC to become a software developer would need a massive change in its modus operandi. It's an ambitious step for such a dysfunctional ruling body. After 15 overs in the Australian innings the umpires made 3 incorrect decisions that either were or could have been corrected by DRS. And you are worried about it being flawed!!!! You may not like it but tossing up grab bag strawman arguments does little to suggest we get rid of it or diminish its future.

9/258 and 20 in front. Disappointing we could bat until lunch. Great catch by Prior to dismiss a top knock by Rogers. Showcases the value of DRS. Corrects another flawed umpiring decision.

I am not sure which universe you have been in if you have thought things were fine. For over 40 years the integrity and competence of the umpiring has been an issue. In the 1st Test of the 70/71 Ashes when Australian opener Keith Stackpole (given not out) was shown in a front page picture to be a metre short of crease when chasing a run, umpires have been under public review. And with TV bringing cricket into loungerooms with the unstoppable march of sport TV technology, the decisions of umpires have come under greater scrutiny. And in the past 10 years even more so and umpires have at times come up alarmingly short. As the technology has improved so has the scrutiny increased and umpiring found wanting. The ICC should be congratulated for seek to utliise the technology rather than be a bunch of luddites.\ Its early days and the process of using the technology needs refinement from the administrators the umpires and the players. But the technology will continue to improve and this will be to the games benefit. A number of sports had an adjustment period for introducing technology witth the current position that the game is better for it. Tennis for example has been plagued with erroneous and at times incompetent line calls. Not anymore. And setting the standard for the DRS as "perfect" is ridiculous given the previous systems it was meant to enhance was riddled with perennial flaws and inconsistencies. It will never be perfect. But already we are seeing the benefit of the DRS . Every decision given by the umpires that is overturned by the DRS is a better result for the game. There have been a number of overturned decisions which highlights why the DRS was brought in. And India is hardly a bellwether of good judgement. They have snubbed the DRS and its notable that they have had the bad rub of the green on umpiring errors that would have been corrected had they had DRS. Appropriate karma. And I am sure the BCCI would totally back the DRS if their Board members had their snouts in the profits from bringing in successful technology Its not the ICC's function to be a software technology house. The ICC is battling on a number of fronts to properly run the game of cricket. But while cricket surives on TV and technology we just cant turn our backs on the use of it. We need to learn to work with it and adapt to the ever changing technology that is available.

5/222 is a good result in treacherous batting conditions under cloudy skies where the ball seamed. IMO the hardest day batting in the series. Chris Rogers was magnificent today. A century on this day is as good if not better than a flat track double in perfect batting conditions. Great concentration and application. He rode his luck and good on him. It's mystifying why the Australian selectors have continually overlooked him. Rogers is having the last laugh and creating some red faces. Warner and Khawaja played no where shots to good balls. Smith and Clarke played lazy shots. Watson may have finally found his spot at 6. Otherwise there is no other spot for him. Broad was outstanding bowling full and presenting the seam. I am buggered why England have had bowling short. Anderson and Bresnan were not on line today. I am puzzled by England selection and captaincy of recent: 1. Not selecting home boy Onions for the Test. He would have been dangerous today. 2. If he has Broad bowling full to seam and the ball is moving why put 2 men out on the hook with no short leg. He needed to attack and create something today. 3. When the wicket was seaming he bowls Swan 25 mins before lunch...why not work the seamers? 4. Their batting approach in their last two innings has been questionable and has been very negative. 5. When the pressure has been on has used the DRS poorly. Lack of judgement. He may have won the Ashes series here, but Cook has not impressed me at all. Lacks flair, conviction and judgement. His lack of leadership is infecting the other players approach. Maybe those that were so vociferous in their condemnation of Clarke will have some insights on LEADERSHIP.

Hot spot is unreliable. - that's why there is the benefit of doubt concept Snicko isn't used because it's not immediately available.- that's not a fault of the DRS but the technology isn't there yet. It soon will be The LBW decision has 2 separate criteria - and the LBW is being assessed reasonably by both the umpires and DRS Top order batsmen are using up the reviews to perhaps save their own skin. - What how could they?? They should save them for the tail enders! Each side has 2 calls per innings. They are learning how to use it Batsmen might be putting 'substances' on their bats to avoid hotspot. - Evidence?? No proof but its made wonderful press so far. And it's a 2 edged sword because if you take away the edge on the bat you open up the bat pad LBW. Hawk-eye isn't accurate. - the issue is that Hawk eye is more accurate than the umpires split second decisions. Evidence shows that it is. Umpires are possibly 2nd guessing themselves. - Evidence?? The pressure has been on the umpires even since the slo mo replay was introduced nearly 30 years. The umpires are seemingly being undermined. - evidence?? Where an umpire gets it wrong then he is accountable. However most DRSs have been turned down. With the exception of Khawaja, the umpires have got it right. Human error surrounds the use of DRS. - is there human error surrounding pure reliance on umpires ....you betcha It's created far more issues than it is solving. - that can be solved through the evolving technology (its going to get better and quicker), the adoption of proper processes of review and players becoming smarter in the way they trigger its use. Ditch it. = let's put our heads back in the sand.

The issue in my view is not the DRS but the way it is used. And given what the technology has told us about fallibility of the human umpire, heaven help us if a Test or Ashes Series hinges on an obvious howler from an umpire. It's a step backwards. And in regard to LBWs if the batting side challenge an OUT decision then the ball must miss the stumps for the decision to be reversed (allowing for the pitching in line). If a bowler challenges a NOT OUT then to have the umpires decision reversed the ball must be hit the stumps flush and not just clipping. There have been a number of bowler challenges where the ball under Hawk Eye has been given not out even though it would just clip the stumps. The benefit of doubt has been given. The real problem has been the catches.

Australia missed out on an LBW challenge yesterday. A sense of karma. Broad has been dangerous today where he has previously been ordinary through the series. Pressure on at 3/59 with clouds overhead. Scoreboard ticking over at nearly 4 an over. What were the Poms doing yesterday.

For all the grief about Australian cricket, I think there is great room for optimism. Our fast bowling stocks despite injuries to a number of them look very good. There are holes in the batting but early signs that Smith could make it. Haddin is doing well with the gloves and we have Paine in the wings if his mojo and fitness returns. Given where they have been in the 1st 2 tests after the Indian debacle, the application has been pleasing. The focus yesterday was very good. We need to get rid of the last wicket and be around 250 - 280 at stump with at least six wickets in hand. It would be nice to bat for two days and get amongst them as well. The Ashes are with England for this series but there is sooooo much o achieve in the last 2 Tests with respect to the return series in Australia that we have everything to play for.

FWIW, I think Maxwells batting is better than his bowling but neither crafts are Test standard on their own. There's the rub. I think he could be very capable in the ODI/T20. And good on him. I not excited about Faulkner and Marsh at test level. Watson is singing for his supper as an all rounder. In this series, like a number of others, he hits too few runs and takes too few wickets. Does bowl a lot of maidens....on the ground ( as opposed to the great Sharne Warne!). IMO, Andrew McDonalds time has passed. Good and capable all rounders at Test level are hard to get. To get a great one you would have to win Tattslotto. Half a Jacques Kallis would do nicely.

Great pressure bowling from Australia on a wicket where the bowl just did not seem to be coming onto the bat. While the TV screen ball speed meter was working with the quicks 81-86 mph, the batsmen seem to be reaching for the ball. The ball was not coming off the deck that quickly. But there was an air of tentativeness about England even at 1-100. They never looked like they were getting on top. The England top 3 now have question marks on them in this series. If we had not have gifted Root a Lords Test 100, he would be close to the axe. Neither Cook or Trott have fired a shot. And Lyon puts to bed the thought of rushing Ahmed in for the 5th Test. And dare I say it....well captained by Michael Clarke. And for ex players commenting on this...Ian Chappell has been repeatedly saying that Clarke has been a far more impressive Captain than Cook with good fielding placement and clever bowling changes. Durham is not an easy wicket to bat on. If Australia can hold its mettle and post a plus 320 score then its really game on. Its great the Australians have backed up Old Trafford with a good first day at Durham. But there is lots of water to flow in this Test.

Careful Tall Defence, your almost WYL-like in trying to restate your position on Maxwell. In post #4817, you had hopes that he would be our next spinning all rounder or the next Doug Walters. Either way you are putting the cart a country mile ahead of the horses. Its already been pointed out that to be a Test allrounder you need to be proficient at both batting and bowling. And his form in India should have highlighted the challenges. Warner is a very capable batsman and he showed he was capable in longer forms of the game prior to breaking on the Test scene. With Maxwell, his promise as a talent was exposed. He is either going to make it as a batsman or less likely as a bowler. Unless he changes his spots, he needs a flurry of runs in all conditions to justify the call up as a batsman alone. And the current dearth of quailty batsman may well change in that time and he will potentially battle alot of competition for a batting spot.

Absolutely right. Maxwell is a tease because he does all three disciplines flamboyant in the contrived rules and atmosphere of ODI/T20. The problem is he is not sufficiently competent or dominant in either batting or bowling to be picked consistently in Test cricket. You just won't make it at Test level if you bowl dibbly dobber off spin or your flat track short term lower hitter. These good time Charlie's always get found out. An all rounder at Test level is someone who get picked as either a batter or bowler. And their role as all rounder as they will be expected to Test competent in both disciplines. It's a hard act and so few rise to the challenge and make it. We have been teased by Watson but he is not truly there. And Maxwell is not there with either discipline. I have more hopes in Agar for the future. And he is not there yet.

I don't think he needs to be given a whole series but..... 1. If he taken wickets in the last test and is fit then surely he would be picked. 2. And why would you pick a 19yo for the most important series without any decent experience or form then drop him 2 tests later after he was almost MOM in his first test and thrown to the wolves in his second where he was on a hiding to nothing. Agar is an exciting prospect but we are stuffing around with him early in the series. 3. If Lyons bowls well in the last two Tests and is fit then I can't see why he would not be selected for the Gabba Test. Then his performances are assessed on their merits like everyone else (should be) While we have been erratic with spinner selection there really has been some ordinary options for selectors following the retirements of Warne and McGill. There are a number of "spinners" that got a baggy green that were not up to standard but the empty ranks of talent got them selected. I am sure selectors grimaced with a couple of choices at times. I know I did.

Unless Lyon bowls really badly in the 4th Test or is injured for the 5th Test, I cant work out the selectors sense in even having him in the Ashes squad. They have thrown him around like a rag doll. I am no Lyon fan but his omission for the 1st Test for an unknown 19yo (and the selectors did not know Agar would make 98 on debut) after taking 9 wickets on his last hit out was surprising. Then Agar was given short shift after Lords where he really was on a hiding after Australia's batting disaster. We dont know where Lyon is after the washout. Unless he is OMG awful in the 4th Test, he should play in the 5th Test. The Oval wicket is a turner and we could play two spinners. The lack of logic so far would suggest that Agar is out of the running for a Test spot and they might just pick Krejza or Hauritz!!

Great bowling by the quicks. Pity we didn't get Root. England have a bad mindset today. They were rattled. Cooks decision to challenge the LBW ranks with the worst judgement the Australian (Watson and Hughes have shown). Pietersen got a tough one but under the rules of the DRS, the sound when the ball passed the bat prevented the 3rd umpire overturning the decision. Still does not explain Khawajas which clearly missed the bat. Now for the weather today in Manchester.....pity we lost so many overs. England have a siege mentality.

If you had listened to the carping over Lyons omission you would have thought he was a Test class spinner. From what i have seen so far if you are a batsman struggling against spinners then you should face up to Lyon or Hauritz. They bowl you back into form. Lyon really had a gem of a day with 500+ runs in the bag on a turner. Clarke really has to plan this well. He needs 13 more wickets to get in the Test to win it and a big ? over Lyons ability to deliver. Agree with the bold. Watson is burning his opportunities. If he fails with the bat in the 2nd dig I would swap he and Warner. At present Watson cant open and Warner is not a number six. Unless a calamity strikes I would not expect to see Hughes in the baggy green for a long time. If the 1st dig is an indication, Rogers has an opening spot there for the rest of the Ashes campaign. In absence of a better alternative, i am prepared to back Smith. Dug in hard in India and England...he could make it. You have to laugh at the suggestion that you would bring Maddinson in for the 4th Test. Good grief. No doubt a player of the future but they would focus on him for the home series.

They can still win it. Hell they played poorly in Trent Bridge and nearly won. The Lyon miss was unfortunate. However i think Bresnan is a victim of Bresnan. He thought he hit it end of story. The DRS technology is fine but the processes around it and the judgements made have been appalling.