DRS plays spoilsport in Ranchi Test, should we rename Decision Review System as 'Dabba Review System'?

Is DRS a full proof system or an extension to the on-filed Umpires or is it really there to help the teams? Doesn't seem like it though!

Decision Review System (DRS) has been the talking point through the Border-Gavaskar Trophy whether it’s the ‘brain fade’ incident or the ‘Umpire’s Call’ loophole that keeps bowlers at bay even after trapping the batsmen plump in front of the wicket. Well, for those of you who don’t know, India were against the DRS rule in the initial years but accepted it after a few alterations. It seems like DRS is still not full proof as ‘Umpire’s Call’ still plays a major factor when a review is taken.

To make you understand, let me make you understand what’s the fuss moving around ‘Umpire’s Call’ in DRS. To make it simpler if the on-field Umpire gives not out to a batsman and the ball clips only 50 per cent or less of the stump, the Third Umpire is bound to stay with the original decision. It goes the other way when the batsmen reviews the Umpire’s decision.

DRS seems to be a hypocrite rule that seems to cover-up the Umpire’s faults. It changes the entire game. Two such incidents happened in the Ranchi Test when set batsmen Peter Handscomb and Shaun Marsh were saved by the Umpire’s call when Kohli opted for DRS. At first, it was Marsh who was facing Ashwin, the Indian offie trapped him in front of stumps. Kohli reviewed the decision straight away on seeing Ashwin’s excitement.

However, the DRS seemed to favour the Australians as the ball was hitting the leg stump partially. The third Umpire had no choice but to follow rules and stand in solidarity with Umpire’s call. Had India would have got that wicket, the tide of the match would have turned in India’s favour as it happened an hour before the Day 5’s play. Ashwin would have got the confidence and bowled his heart out there.

Well, the DRS misery did not just stop there as Indian players were yet to suffer. Handscomb too was trapped in front of the stumps by Umesh Yadav a few overs after that. All the players went up along with the crowd as the inswinging delivery hit the back pad of Handscomb. The Umpire again felt that the ball was off target. The review showed that the impact was in front of stumps and the ball has clipped the middle stump but the batsmen survived.

The review showed that the impact was in front of stumps and the ball has clipped the middle stump but the batsmen survived. The Umpire’s call was respected again and Indians were deprived of last glimmer of hope they had of winning the Ranchi Test and taking a 2-1 lead over the Aussies before heading to Dharamshala for the final Test.

Had India got the wickets of Handscomb and Marsh, that early, the situation of the game would have been the other way around. As just few overs before the session ended Jadeja got the wicket of Marsh and Ashwin got rid of first inning centurion Glenn Maxwell. We might have witnessed a flurry of wickets, similar to that of in the first innings and a lowly target would have been changed. But, again, these are mere speculations because the DRS decided to play spoilsport.

That leaves us wondering, whether the DRS rules needs to be changed or not? There will be more decisions like these, more tight situations like these. Is DRS just an extension to the field umpire or is it really there to help teams. That is still the question we all are waiting to be answered. We hope something like this does not happen at Dharamshala where the decider of the Test series is to be played.