AlizeeFan
25th June 2011, 16:50
We have seen lot of discussions about UDRS. Controversies before UDRS, controversies after UDRS, BCCI's refusal and many other things. Most of us agree that it's a good improvement for the game. I personally feel that whatever may be limitations of the system, DRS should be universally implemented irrespective of home team or visiting team.
<hr>
But what about the financial limitations of UDRS? I was reading Niranjan Shah's comment on cricinfo (http://www.espncricinfo.com/india/content/current/story/520736.html).
"You have to look at the economics. Every board is not making money out of Test matches and ODIs. The system requires about $60,000 per match," Shah told DNA. "Last year, about 65 Tests and 170 ODIs were played around the world. Multiply those numbers with $60,000. It would be a staggering amount for one or two decisions in a match.
"The ICC can come up with such technology because the money is not going from its coffers. The member boards have to pay for it. There might be some matches in the world where the money coming in from the ticket collection will be less than the amount spent on DRS."
There are two companies that presently offer competing ball-tracking technologies, Hawk-Eye and Virtual Eye. Shah said more options were needed so that the technology could become affordable before it could be universally used. "I see some vested interests working here. Unless there are 10 different technologies and they become competitive and cheaper, we cannot adopt [the system]. A $1000 a day should be fine. Not $60,000 a day. That kind of money should go into the development of the game among the Associate members."
I do not support BCCI for not using it in India's matches. BCCI can certainly afford it. There is no doubt about it. I also believe that it will be good for the game.
But overall, I doubt how it can be used everywhere. BCCI, ECB and ACB can pay for it, but the situation of SLC, PCB, WICB and other boards is not unknown to us. Recently SLC had to accept uncertainty over one of it's proposed league due to lack lack of finance.
What do you think about it. Should it be universally implemented? If yes, then how the finance should be arranged for it?
<hr>
P.S. This thread is neither about whether UDRS improves the umpiring or not, nor about BCCI decision to oppose it. This thread is just for discussing financial aspect of the system. Most of us want to see the system in place. If you were asked to decide, what would you do? Consider yourself as an advisor of ICC and give your suggestions.
<hr>
But what about the financial limitations of UDRS? I was reading Niranjan Shah's comment on cricinfo (http://www.espncricinfo.com/india/content/current/story/520736.html).
"You have to look at the economics. Every board is not making money out of Test matches and ODIs. The system requires about $60,000 per match," Shah told DNA. "Last year, about 65 Tests and 170 ODIs were played around the world. Multiply those numbers with $60,000. It would be a staggering amount for one or two decisions in a match.
"The ICC can come up with such technology because the money is not going from its coffers. The member boards have to pay for it. There might be some matches in the world where the money coming in from the ticket collection will be less than the amount spent on DRS."
There are two companies that presently offer competing ball-tracking technologies, Hawk-Eye and Virtual Eye. Shah said more options were needed so that the technology could become affordable before it could be universally used. "I see some vested interests working here. Unless there are 10 different technologies and they become competitive and cheaper, we cannot adopt [the system]. A $1000 a day should be fine. Not $60,000 a day. That kind of money should go into the development of the game among the Associate members."
I do not support BCCI for not using it in India's matches. BCCI can certainly afford it. There is no doubt about it. I also believe that it will be good for the game.
But overall, I doubt how it can be used everywhere. BCCI, ECB and ACB can pay for it, but the situation of SLC, PCB, WICB and other boards is not unknown to us. Recently SLC had to accept uncertainty over one of it's proposed league due to lack lack of finance.
What do you think about it. Should it be universally implemented? If yes, then how the finance should be arranged for it?
<hr>
P.S. This thread is neither about whether UDRS improves the umpiring or not, nor about BCCI decision to oppose it. This thread is just for discussing financial aspect of the system. Most of us want to see the system in place. If you were asked to decide, what would you do? Consider yourself as an advisor of ICC and give your suggestions.