In the recently concluded test match between New Zealand and England an event occurred which in
this writer's opinion once again questions the predictability of an lbw
decision as a method of dismissing a batsman and especially the DRS system
which is being touted as a scientific fact. On the last ball of the 99th over
in the England
second innings the ball, to quote Andy Zaltzman in Cricinfo:
The ball ricocheted
from Prior's flailing bat/arms/head, and plonked downwards, in accordance the
traditions of gravity, onto the timbers. It did not brush the stumps. It did
not snick the stumps. It did not gently fondle the stumps. It hit the stumps.
The bails, perhaps patriotically mindful of their origins in early cricket in England
If the stumps and
bails had behaved as cricketing precedent and Isaac Newton would have expected
them to behave, England
If the ball having hit the stumps fails to dislodge the
bails then doesn't it introduce even more uncertainty into a DRS based lbw
decision which its supporters claim to be irrefutable evidence? This incident
requires that in an lbw appeal the DRS should not only predict whether the
ball, if not impeded by the batsman illegally, would have gone on to hit the
stumps but also if it would dislodge the bails.
Supporters of the DRS rely on the infallibility of
scientific laws to promote their support for technology. Then, like true
scientists they should admit the weakness of their science whenever an anomaly
appears. Assuming for a moment that these scientific laws are infallible then
how do they explain the reprieve that Prior obtained? Also, shouldn't the DRS have been used to declare Prior out
since the ball had actually hit the stumps?
Hence I would like to make a suggestion which may unite the
supporters and opponents of the DRS. I suggest that the LBW as a method of
dismissing a batsman should be struck off from the laws of cricket. Instead, a
run penalty should be imposed on the batsman every time the ball comes in
contact with an 'illegal' part of
his/her body. The DRS could be used to adjudicate on this decision. The penalty
could be ten runs and increasing every
time the batsman uses such illegitimate methods to stay at the crease.