Unanticipated events and the DRS

when the Decision Review System (DRS) was brought in to cricket, it was meant to resolve the "howlers" that is decisions made by an umpire that was obviously wrong.

Instead it is used for marginal decisions. But that is not of concern here, the focus is on the unanticipated effect of using the DRS - it has changed, or will change surely, how the batsmen play their defensive shots.

Why should this be so? The DRS contains a highly controversial ball tracking technology that can "predict" where the ball would go. In times past, when the umpire on-field was the sole voice of authority, it was usually okay to tuck bat inside pad and take a big step down the wicket to smother the ball (the only caveat was if it was obvious that the batsman was not offering a shot, then a more relaxed, bowler friendly decision is possible). This would cause enough uncertainty as to where the ball would go, since it still had a way to go, and the benefit of the doubt went to the batsmen.

Now, with ball tracking, this uncertainty is removed. Obviously (in retrospect) now batsmen have to use their bats more to pat the ball down. For this alone, the DRS is a good thing, no more will England and South Africa get over their inadequacies against spin by hiding behind their legs. Perhaps a more equal game, and thus, a more interesting game awaits.

Shows how policy changes can have effects that were not anticipated, let alone expected.