KARACHI - Former captain Rashid Latif believed that a half-baked Umpires Decision Review System (UDRS) is far more dangerous than fixing.
“With the current state the DRS, the actual purpose is not being served. The ICC should have launched it [DRS] after a methodical review to make it as error free as possible, let’s say 99%, said Rashid Latif while talking to a local television channel on Thursday.
“Initially the DRS was implemented with state-of-the-art equipments by the ICC along with the broadcasters of England and Australia, however later the quality, especially of the Hawk-eye and the hot-spot, plunged due to the heavy cost attached to procedure, said Latif.
He feared that unless the flaws are not rectified the DRS system would keep on damaging the game rather than serving it. Since the faulty DRS is in control of the umpires and the ICC, hence I consider it far more dangerous than the menace of fixing.
To a question, Latif criticized the ICC for unnecessarily trying to justify the umpiring blunders in the first Ashes Test. “Australia would have won however sub-standard umpiring decisions let them down. If the technology does not restrict blunders then what is the purpose of having it?” asked former wicketkeeper.
Latif is of the opinion that the ICC should stop using the DRS system unless it becomes almost error-free. He said a few sports bodies around the world did the same before introducing relevant technologies. “World bodies governing tennis and football took their time before the implementation of the goal-line technology. The ICC should also halt the use of the DRS for a while, and re-launch it with utmost precision later,” he added. He also touched upon the latest spot-fixing cases and categorically rebuffed a reported bid to cut down on the sentence of banned Pakistani fast bowler M Aamir.
“The PCB is trying to help Amir and the ECB is doing the same for Westfield. On top of all the ICC has supported both the boards by forming a sub-committee to look into the matter. I cannot buy that, in fact this is a negation of their own anti-corruption laws,” he mentioned.
“If the ICC believes in zero-tolerance, as they showed in Kaneria’s case by implementing the ECB’s decision world wide then I have a confusion why the same approach is missing when it comes to the Malik Qayyum commission report,” asked Rashid Latif. Mushtaq Ahmed, Inzamam, Waqar Younis, Wasim Akram, Saeed Anwar, Akram Raza etc were fined by the Qayyum commission, but what did the ICC do with them?” he concluded.