The dark side of the World Cup

Sunil Rajguru

Yes, India has won the World Cup. Yes, it was probably the greatest final ever.

But that still does not hide a lot of issues that show the ICC in pretty bad light.

Use of primitive technology

While Hawk-Eye is the best we have right now to assess LBWs, the other most contentious decisions revolve around faint nicks and inside edges.

The first technology to address this problem was the Snickometer. This piece of tech clearly picked up even the faintest of noises as the ball went past the bat. There was however some confusion in the smallest of cases when you weren't sure whether the noise was coming from the bat or the pad.

This problem was addressed by the revolutionary Hot Spot technology. That uses infra red technology to show clearly where the ball has touched the bat or pad. Even the faintest of touches show up in Hot Spot.

India celebrates date with destiny in Mumbai  |  10 World Cup magic moments  |  More

So when ICC introduced the UDRS, it decided to use neither Snickometer nor Hot Spot. (Financial constraints were cited in one report!) A technology that is made available for Test and ODI series was denied for a world cup.

The technology gap showed. Many close decisions proved inconclusive by the UDRS.
So if the third umpire was unsure, why should the particular team lose one appeal?  

In Image: Indian newspaper front pages, the day after India won the Cricket World Cup in New Delhi, India, Sunday, April 3, 2011.

Images: AP/AFP