To err is DRS?

England ‘bazballers' will bemoan losing Zak Crawley to an unavoidable occurrence and mull how best to keep safe from the Decision Review System (DRS) hereon as they seek to bounce back from an upset second Test loss to India. The hosts, widely considered a threat to England's hopes of securing a fifth Test series win, pulled off a 106-run triumph on Monday in an extended afternoon session.

Opener Crawley stood out with his 132-ball-73 as England came out all guns blazing in their mountainous chase despite losing Ben Duckett on day three. Interestingly, the on-field umpire Marais Erasmus denied India's appeal off Kuldeep Yadav, but the second-ranked Indian team successfully reviewed the call minutes later, much to England's dismay.

The tracker showed the ball would have hit a large part of the leg stump, but skipper Ben Stokes, at the post-match press conference, said what all of England was thinking by slamming Crawley's lbw decision in the critical moment of the Visakhapatnam Test.

Someone in the commentary box wasn't too pleased with his read, letting out an audible groan. Crawley held his ground with Stokes pasting an incredulous smile on his face as the players in the dressing room struggled to hide their disbelief. The commentators then turned on the players, arguing Crawley must cop the call. "Two stumps were visible", a baffled Ravi Shastri was heard saying.

Also Read: A derby not for the faint-hearted!

Given the fiercely contested nature of the series so far, and the tendency of both sides to stand their ground, Crawley's lbw had the makings of a much bigger controversy.

"Technology in the game is there. Everyone has an understanding of the reasons it can never be 100% which is why we have the umpire's call. That's why it's in place. When it's not 100% as everyone says, I don't think it's unfair for someone to say 'I think the technology has got it wrong on this occasion'," Stokes said.

"And that is my personal opinion. I will say that. But in a game full of ifs, buts and maybes, I am not going to say that the reason why we haven't got the result we wanted. I'm just saying my personal opinion is that the technology has gone wrong on this occasion, and I think that's fair to say. You can't really do much with things that have been and gone. A decision has been made, and you can't overturn a decision that has been made. That is where I stand on that," he added.

Naturally, a debate on the ‘spirit of cricket made an appearance again and has since become the topic of popular discourse. Experts, analysts and former players have lashed out at the contentious decision whilst calling for superior umpiring practices.

Also Read: Don't write off Djokovic just yet!

"Kuldeep Yadav seemed to be saying "bahut seedha hai" to Rohit, trying to convince him for the DRS. I honestly thought it was pitching just outside, but clearly Kuldeep knew what he was doing," a fan wrote.

"India won this test match with the help of umpires. Gill was out on 4 by Anderson again. But umpire saved him. Same on field call went against Bairstow today when it was barely clipping. Ball tracking for Crawley's LBW looked very fishy too. Impact looked outside off," an user remarked.

"Technology was again manipulated to favour India in the 2nd Test, Hawk-Eye ball tracking in Zak Crawley LBW was clearly doctored & the ball would have missed the stumps. Also, Gill should have been out for 4 in the 2nd inns but saved by the manipulated technology," wrote a fan.

"So the cat's out of the bag! #BenStokes says the technology got it wrong with the Zak Crawley's LBW. Personally, I agree with him. It did not look out," tweeted another.

As cricket strives for perfection in its adjudication processes, the occasional divergence of DRS into the realm of fallibility thus serves as a reminder that even the most sophisticated technological apparatus is not immune to the inherent unpredictability and nuances of the sport.

The views expressed here are the author's personal views, and do not represent the views of Mid-Day.