BCCI open to using DRS but without Hawk-Eye

BCCI seems to have eased its longstanding discomfort regarding the use of Decision Review System (DRS) after president Anurag Thakur stated that India is ready to use the DRS in matches. He states that they may agree to the use of all the system if they can be “delinked” from Hawk-Eye, the technology used to project leg before decisions. Thakur showed no apprehensions in using the predictive elements like the hotspot and snicko used in the DRS.

“You can have some and leave [Hawk-Eye],” Thakur told ESPNcricinfo in Florida during India’s T20 series against West Indies this past weekend. “If that comes as an option, we can look into that.”

The ICC had commissioned a group of MIT researchers in Boston to do a study of the DRS’ various mechanisms and report back on their effectiveness. Current India coach and heads the ICC cricket committee Anil Kumble was one of the persons involved in the process.

Thakur said he was able to review the findings in his role on the chief executive’s committee at the ICC. The findings had not produced anything to make the BCCI loosen it sfirm stance regarding Hawk-Eye’s predictive elements, but Thakur said the board is open to discussions on other parts of the DRS.

“I raised this question at that time also, whether it is 100% foolproof? No. Whether changes are required? Yes. When it could be done? MIT was supposed to give a report but they are themselves not much confident that it could be 100% foolproof,” Thakur said.

“Our only issue is whether a technology which is not 100% foolproof, shall we agree that error of judgement is equal with standing umpire and with the technology available? So that is the call we have to take.”

The BCCI had proposed the idea of a scaled-down DRS system earlier this year ahead of the IPL season but the idea did not materialize.

“I said earlier also that you can have it partially without the lbw decisions, only for the rest of the decisions, Hawk-Eye and the rest of the stuff,” Thakur said. “But we need to ask ourselves if a machine is making the same error which a human is making, what are we getting out of it?”