TheSportsCampus

If we just look back at cricket for the past two years or even a little more; the most important debate that has been doing the rounds has centered around the imposition of technology in place of the human element existing with pertinence to the on-field umpires. There have been multiple schools of thoughts that have ridden on their carts during this period, but it can be safely assumed that none of these have actually gone on to reach their destination.

From the camera positioning theory to the pitch condition theory, the Vaseline theory and the player credit diminishing theory; all have been unsuccessful journeys. Considering the way things are at this moment with regards to this volatile issue, there is very little reason to suggest that it could end in success. With different theories hitching rides on different routes, clarity is blurred leading to unconstructive output.

But the long lasting DRS debate has taken a very interesting tract altogether following the interesting events that unfolded in the ongoing test series in the Middle East between England and Pakistan. There were some very intriguing decisions taken by both captains that have led this debate to a different standpoint and its utility to a parallel level. The sparks were ignited in the Dubai test when a couple of LBW's were reversed by the use of reviews.

But what was just a message in the first test became a strategic factor in the second. On day two of the second test at Abu Dhabi, Saeed Ajmal had an LBW appeal against Johnathan Trott, who was just beginning his innings, turned down by umpire Bruce Oxenford. Despite Trott looking like a dead duck, wicketkeeper Adnan Akmal was not convinced, and chose not to take the matters to a higher authority. How many runs Trott went on to score is immaterial here as we focus on the intricacies of the review system.

The astonishing part was that Pakistan lost their reviews to a couple of dreadful appeals by Ajmal, Abdul Rehman and a nodding gesture from Mr. Akmal. From these events we can deduce that there are five key players on the DRS – the bowler, the keeper, the batsman, the runner and the umpire.

The DRS rather than being a direct boon is more like an added strategic alternative for the captain to use along with man management. While there are positives to the system, the downside of a player using it incorrectly or unintelligibly can have a disastrous impact on the team. It becomes even more censorious now to have a set of trustworthy and knowledgeable individuals making use of the technology, leave aside benefitting from it.

Pakistan have been found wanting more than once in this regard. There seems to be a lack of understanding of how to use the system and what is even more surprising is that it has created doubts about their awareness of the LBW rule. The captain's role and especially Misbah's becomes even more definitive in this amusingly critical scenario. In all the occasions mentioned earlier, Misbah had to rely on the understanding of his keeper and bowler to go for technological assistance and what happened after that is history.

England, on the other hand have made Strauss's job a tad easier as was evident from the Cook LBW of an Ajmal doosra when the former, who was on 94, trusted his partner Kevin Pieterson's advice of not reviewing it and you bet, it turned out to be bang on. A couple of guys who are emotional jumpers in England, namely, Broad and Panesar feel that it's always out when they bowl them are well handled by the belligerent Strauss.

The most critical inference coming out here is – "get emotion out of decision making". The aforesaid makes the captain's role essential as he has to know his players well and needs to have a core understanding of their knowledge and habits. We were earlier talking about man management and these events have shown how important it can be.

Another equally pertinent inference that can be taken from this is that it is more important than ever to educate some of the players about the game. It is important to mention here that cricket education and raw ability do not go hand in hand and it is important to understand the merits of each of these parallel routes.

All said and done; it is important to take DRS as a strategic tool and not as a supportive tool as it is equally capable of exposing a player's capabilities (talent and knowledge) as cricket playing skill sets can. This paradigm shift might instigate another debate as to whether we need another asset in a team of 11 or not? But having said that, debate is something that makes ordinary sporting matches turn into spectacles.