When whatever-it-takes @sardesairajdeep skirts the one OBVIOUS analysis that will separate the sick from the sharp umpires in his review of the UDRS, you know the “Political Editor” is now a full fledged “Politician”, ready for the plunge in 2014.
An analysis of UDRS decisions BY UMPIRE will show up the suckers from the sharps.
That UDRS is still evolving, with unfortunate technology constraints is at the heart of the scope for debating whether it is good for the game or not. The issue is NOT if it is good or bad for batsmen, given more LBWs are forthcoming! That is the thinking of the sick media political editors, aimed solely at generating controversy for TRPs.
Notice that even though Imran and Viv actually agreed that UDRS makes it ‘more fair’ for all, Sardesai had to ‘sum’ it up as “even though the two Kings of cricket differ somewhat…” Where has good journalism gone? Whatever it takes?
My bone of contention is against the ICC and the BCCI. With cricket being the richest game by far, this side of the Suez canal, how come the HOT SPOT and the Snick-o-meter could not be “afforded”???? These are the ones required for adjudicating catches leaving no “doubt” whatsoever. They’ll also eliminate doubts if the bat-pad sequence is too close to call. Saying these technologies were “not available” for all venues deserves a duh! And WHY does Mr.-whatever-it-takes not ask this OBVIOUS question?
QED: Mr.-whatever-it-takes must seriously consider becoming a politician. Pity is no major party would consider him since he is too smart for his own good.