As component of this reorganization, DRS has committed to enter into a new Proxy Agreement with the Defense Security Service in the close to term. Who desires to listen this guy…..DRS must be enables and India want income thats y they dun want drs…..ICC must leave india opinion and enable DRS. Even the most bigoted of Indian fans ought to uncover it diffcult to swallow the inanity of BCCIs argument – considering that DRS is not fool-proof , it is not wothy of use! If SL,Pak WI & BD agree to pay the costs for DRS, then I think DRS should be made mandatory. A few information about DRS: It is more than 90 % effective and at least helps in sorting out umpiring howlers.
I still don’t recognize why we need any additional high-priced technologies than what we always have – ACTION REPLAYS. I’m confident nearly all media contracts would really like to have the complete use of DRS as they can then re-run and analyse virtually every shot/ball!! If what Niranjan Shah is actually correct then DRS is a really expensive technology a white elephant.
With all these revenue( just main sponsors) he is complainning about the expense on DRS method.Which is a really essential aspect of the game and the very best thing that hapend to cricket for a was justified in the very first test (IND vs WI ). Every single other board desires to use the drs method, they havent raised any concerns about cost but here comes bcci, by far the richest board in the planet calling it unfeasible.
What ever others say BCCI has got a powerful point right here.Very first people never even attend test or some ODI with lesser ranked they want DRS in those games as well. For the initial time we come to hear about the staggering price involved in the DRS it is not one hundred%, then clearly it is a costly point about two unsuccessful testimonials is really appropriate. I agree with Shah points on… Spending this money on Associates… 2 per innings… Some occasions ticket sale is significantly less than DRS expense… IPL team spends ten million each and every year on players to run their whole show… DRS @ 14 million (64.12 crore) is an high-priced proposition.
Strange , the only board that is opposing the DRS on economic feasibility is the richest cricket board in the globe. But it has also 1 narrow view point in -Eye is a technologies created in England with the support of Wisden Group and the big amount of spent on technology would go to might not know no matter whether it would be spent for cricket once again.I as soon as once again point out that DRS have to be guiding the umpire rather than challenging the umpire. I do not know his accurate intentions, but I do support his view about DRS that its beneficial to have it, but may not be economically feasible in the present context.