West Indies fight for respect dusted as Australia handed them a crushing innings and 212 run defeat at Hobart inside three days. James Pattinson has grabbed five wickets while Adam Voges scored 269.

But, in a boring Test match, the Decision Review System (DRS) has baffled Australian players and former players like Shane Warne and Dirk Nannes.

The ball tracking technology confused everyone.

With West Indies crashing to the an innings defeat, Peter Siddle appealed for an lbw against Kraigg Brathwaite. But, his appeal was turned down by standing umpire Marais Erasmus that led to captain Steve Smith opted to review the decision.

Replays showed there was no edge and the Virtual Eyeball tracking technology showed the ball crashing into the leg stump.

But, the system returned a ruling of ‘Umpire’s Call’, despite showing a significant part of the ball to be cannon into the cricket.

The decision has taken Australian players by surprise and raised eyebrows in the commentary box and in the stands as well.

Australia’s legendary leg-spinner Shane Warne labeled the decision “ridiculous” on Channel Nine’s commentary while former Australia and Netherlands pacer Dirk Nannes was confused alongside Warne.  

“It just has to be out,” Nannes said on ABC Grandstand.

“I trust the technology on this one; I think that’s exactly where the ball was going.

“It’s the rules that govern the interpretation of whether it’s out or not that are incorrect in this one. It was going to smash leg stump.

“I thought the initial decision was incorrect. Live I thought ‘that’s out’. 

“If you look at the image, you look at the frame of where that ball was going to hit, you can’t help but shake your head.

“The ball hit the batsman in front of middle and off. It’s not missing leg stump. And it’s hit him on the knee. It’s not going over.”

The thing is that when technology showing something  different to “Umpire’s Call” then their decision have come down to a matter of millimeters. At the same time, the virtual ball tracking system is showing the uneven turn. 

Law 3.3, which outlines the process of consultation for Player Reviews, states: “If a ‘not out’ decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the ball is hitting the stumps, the evidence provided by technology should show that the centre of the ball would have hit the stumps within an area demarcated by a line drawn below the lower edge of the bails and down the middle of the outer stumps.”

Australia spinner Nathan Lyon was found also not happy with the ruling of Erasmus in some other time of the match. Lyon was left shaking his head at a ruling by Virtual –Eye on day two when Kemar Roach was declared not out.

Standing umpire Erasmus turned down Australia’s initial appeal and ball tracking technology showed the ball to be just clipping the top portion of the leg stump.  

Unlike the Brathwaite incident, Lyon’s frustration was caused by the path that Virtual –Eye determined the ball would have taken hand Roach’s pad not intervened.

“I was definitely surprised,” Lyon said to Cricket Australia. “When it first hit ‘Roachy’ I thought it may have been sliding down leg, if anything. But when I asked Marais and he said it was height, I thought ‘it’s not going over, I don’t think’.

“But there you go – DRS.”

“Enough about DRS,” Lyon added. 

    Sports Crazy man, Live in cricket, Love writing, Studied English journalism in Indian Institute of Mass Communication, Chose sports as the subject for study, Born 24 years ago during the 1992 Cricket world cup. When he is not writing love to watch movies and reading books and novels.

    Read More