India vs New Zealand series may have the DRS system if everything goes by properly © AFP
India vs New Zealand series may have the DRS system if everything goes by properly © AFP

BCCI president Anurag Thakur has said that India will be using the long-standing opposition for the Decision Review System (DRS) stating that they’d be open to using a revised version of the technology but without the use of Hawk-eye. The core of their opposition from the world’s richest cricket board is based on their distrust of Hawk-Eye, a program that’s used for lbw decisions that predicts whether a delivery that’s struck a batsman on the pads would go on to hit the stumps. So if the DRS system is used in the forthcoming Test series against New Zealand it will be without Hawk-Eye. READ: India vs West Indies: MS Dhoni believes USA is a ‘special’ market for cricket

“Our only issue is whether a technology which is not 100 per cent foolproof, shall we agree that error of judgement is equal with standing umpire and with the technology available?” Shakur was quoted according to

“So that is the call we have to take. You can have some and leave [Hawk-Eye],” Thakur told ESPNcricinfo in Florida during India’s T20 series against West Indies this past weekend. “If that comes as an option, we can look into that.” ALSO READ: BCCI to take call on pink ball cricket in India after Duleep Trophy

The ICC had commissioned a group of MIT researchers in Boston to do a study of the DRS’ various mechanisms and report back on their effectiveness. Current India coach Anil Kumble, who heads the ICC cricket committee, was involved in the process and Thakur said he was able to review the findings in his role on the chief executive’s committee at the ICC. The findings had not produced anything to sway the BCCI from their firm stance regarding Hawk-Eye’s predictive elements, but Thakur said the board is open to discussions on other parts of the DRS.

“I said earlier also that you can have it partially without the lbw decisions, only for the rest of the decisions, Hawk-Eye and the rest of the stuff,” Thakur said. “But we need to ask ourselves if a machine is making the same error which a human is making, what are we getting out of it?”