The Board of Cricket Control in India's (BCCI) continuous opposition to the use of the controversial Decision Review System (DRS) has drawn flak from the Australian media.
Senior cricket writer Malcolm Conn wrote in his column for News.com.au: "India's continuing refusal to use the umpire decision review system (DRS) will encourage excessive and frivolous appealing during the four-Test series against Australia. Worse, it promotes bad behaviour from cantankerous players who feel aggrieved or do not get their way."
"Umpires have more trouble controlling matches because players lose faith in them when there is not the option of righting decisions, which are shown by technology to be obviously wrong," he added.
"Apart from sheer bloody-mindedness, and the fact that a fading Sachin Tendulkar apparently doesn't like DRS, it remains impossible for Indian cricket boss N. Srinivasan to justify India's lone opposition to the system," he further wrote.
"International Cricket Council analysis has found the DRS increases the accuracy of decision-making from 92 percent to 96 percent. But more importantly, players can't carry on about a decision they don't like because they can legitimately challenge," he further added.
Conn wrote: "There are two unsuccessful challenges allowed during each innings of a Test and one per innings in a 50-over match. This means if the players are serious about feeling wronged they must challenge or shut up and get on with the game."
"As Bolshy as Indian cricket has become in recent years with its fabulous wealth from television rights, no one has changed BCCI from the Board of Control for Cricket in India to Bullies who Control Cricket Internationally quite like Srinivasan, the current president," he added.
"Srinivasan is driving a strange morality to save cricket from technology, which improves the game when his own behaviour does not stand up to scrutiny," he wrote.
"As BCCI president and owner of IPL franchise the Chennai Super Kings, which cost his company, India Cements, 94 million dollars, Srinivasan has an outrageous conflict of interest which would not be allowed in any properly run organization," he concluded.