KOLKATA: Former Australian captain Ian Chappell has said India is correct in questioning the Decision Review System (DRS), a referral system accepted by all boards except the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).

Writing in the popular webzine ESPNCricinfo, Chappell referred to Brendon McCullum’s controversial dismissal on the final day of the Gabba Test between Australia and New Zealand last week, to say “India are right to have reservations about the system (DRS)”.

The Black Caps skipper was judged to have been caught at second slip by Steve Smith off Mitch Marsh, despite replays showing he had not hit the ball.

New Zealand could not appeal as they had used up their allotted two referrals, goading a leading Australian daily, The Sydney Morning Herald, to say McCullum was “a victim of an umpiring howler”.

And though McCullum later claimed he had no issue with the DRS, it seems Chappell, a highly respected television commentator and columnist, has plenty to say about it.

“From the outset India have distrusted the Decision Review System, in particular the ball-tracking technology used for deciding LBW appeals,” Chappell wrote in ESPNCricinfo.

“It only took one decision in the recently completed Gabba Test between Australia and New Zealand to provide further proof India are right to have reservations about the system.”

Chappell’s grouse list

Chappell listed a string of grievances, the first being the number of reviews a team is allotted – two.

“Firstly, any system that has a finite number of reviews can’t guarantee the correct decision will always be reached,” he said, and lamented that McCullum “had no recourse to justice” as he had used up his quota of appeals.

“Unfortunately for McCullum this situation was replicated at the WACA when New Zealand were again unable to correct a decision via DRS because they were out of referrals.”

Chappell’s second grouse was that “players often use it (DRS) as a tactic”.

“Umpires’ decisions shouldn’t be part of a team’s tactics. It’s a ludicrous concept, but that’s what the DRS has spawned,” he wrote.

The veteran cricketer also had a bone to pick with what he called “fifty-fifty decisions” – his third grievance.

He warned that while players in general accepted close decisions would go against them sometimes, “the really bad decisions that eventually cost one team dearly can cause friction between two sides”.

Chappell also asked why the broadcaster and not the ICC that controlled the DRS equipment. “There’s a discrepancy in the amount and standard of equipment used in different parts of the world,” he said.

His solution – “the ICC should pay for the equipment (and recoup the money in the sale of rights, if they so desire), so each Test has a full complement of DRS technology”.

When Pakistan suffered

India says it will not follow DRS – save for ICC-organised events like the World Cups – till the system was foolproof, though many believe they themselves have suffered as a result.

The Indians felt particularly shortchanged in the 2011 World Cup, when England’s Ian Bell was ruled LBW to Yuvraj Singh, but was reprieved by a little-known rule that says if a batsman is more than 2.5 metres down the pitch, he is not out.

“If Hawk-Eye says it’s good and going to hit middle stump, I see no reason why the distance matters,” Indian captain MS Dhoni later said.

He said an “adulteration of technology with human thinking” deprived his team of a wicket.

Pakistan found themselves in a similar situation in 2012, when in the third Test against England in the UAE Mohammad Hafeez was ruled out leg before in a controversial decision.

Simon Taufel, the on-field umpire, had turned down the appeal for LBW but was overruled by third umpire despite the Hot Spot showing a thin edge.

ICC General Manager Dave Richardson later indicated that the third umpire had missed the “tiny fleck of white” in the TV replays.

In August, while sharing the microphone with commentators during the second Test between India and Sri Lanka in Colombo, BCCI Secretary Anurag Thakur said his board was open to DRS.

“You have to look at the overall feasibility of it, whether it is practical, whether it is close to 100 per cent, whether it is going to help decisions be implemented. If that is there, we have never closed our minds on DRS,” Thakur had said.

Now, it seems, BCCI and the Indian players have an ally in their suspicion of DRS. “Until the DRS is subjected to a serious overhaul, India are right to be cynical. In this case India have used their power wisely,” Chappell said in his piece.