Quote from: JSRAW on Today at 12:42:23 PM

Quote from: Sithara007 on Today at 10:50:28 AM

Quote from: JSRAW on Today at 09:22:31 AM

I guess you are indicating towards a pre-90s era when there was no concept of neutral umpiring in cricket but again back then every cricket playing nation had this problem.
In the early 90s neutral umpires started featuring in test cricket, also i don't remember any major instance where umpires were deliberately helping the Indian team.
But i do agree that BCCI do have a habit of being reluctant on adopting tech at the start or any new things, although it's changing nowadays, not fast enough but it's going forward as they recently announced the adoption of more technical stuff in Ranji like DRS etc

Well.. now neutrality of umpires doesn't matter much, because we have the option of DRS. But still, there is a need to eliminate the "umpire's call" loophole. The fact that BCCI don't want to use latest technology in domestic cricket may have something to do with financial reasons. Indian domestic cricket consists of 38 first class teams, and a huge number of matches are being played every year. Implementing technology such as DRS will require additional manpower, and extra funds. And I am sure that the BCCI guys may not be happy with this requirement.

I've said a few times that the "Umpire Calls" rule should be scrapped, IMO if a ball is touching the stumps even for 10% or even clipping it (the current rule is for more than 50%) then it should be out but I guess ICC willingly leaving some scope for human error in umpiring despite tech is available there to use.
Yeah, a huge number of matches in the domestic circuit could create a financial burden but we can't deny the fact that it does help players immensely. I think they will use this according to grouping (relegation). Also, I'm in favor of using full fledge technical/technique analysis for players so that BCCI can identify and tackle their weaknesses at a domestic level, shouldn't cost more than $10-15 Million per season for satisfactory results.

I’m fired call is still in the game just because technology can also be wrong. So, they tried to make the best out of both parties. And through that way even though the technology is the best idea, they decided to keep the umpire's call so that if there is any fault in the technology, the on field umpire is the one to finalize the decision. But to me, this is just a bunch of bullshit. If you have the technology available and also true science you can understand and see in the trajectory the ball is going, why would you go against it just by keeping the umpire's call?

We all know that the DRS system is quite expensive to have. All the cricket boards don’t even have the luxury of the system. So, it is obvious that India, in the state level cricket, will not be able to implement the DRS system. I’m quite sure they can if they want to. But that is obviously going to take a toll on the finance of BCCI.