It was the hawk eye tech that pretty much saved India in the WC 2011 semi-final when Tendulkar was initially given LBW to Saeed Ajmal by Ian Gould. But for hawk eye, we would have finished in 200 plus runs range as no other batsman except Raina in the end looked like taking the Pak bowlers on. Every technology will have its limitations but also has its advantages. Makes no sense to selectively go for UDRS leaving out hawk eye.
Re: Why not the hawk eye?
by hawaldar on Jun 27, 2011 04:34 PM
Yes LBW is the key decision to make. Hopefully some better technology comes in this regard so as to convince BCCI. Remember with the hawk-eye is not accurate enough.
Re: Good gesture by BCCI
by Against Pseudos on Jun 28, 2011 05:39 AM
:) The above article should read - "BCCI gets the Indian version of DRS into ICC"... ;-)
BTW, why did they bother to stick to DRS? Any idea? :)
Re: Finally !!!!!!!
by shubasrikrishna on Jun 27, 2011 04:26 PM
what is so much sense about it. 90 % of DRS is sued for LBW's . What is the use of DRS if it cannot be used in LBWs
