The DRS system suffered another foot trip at University Oval on Sunday.
New Zealand batsman Tom Latham had a reprieve on 97 after Sri Lanka had referred a not out decision from English umpire Richard Kettleborough. They believed the ball had struck Latham's pad before he swept it for two.
Third official Paul Reiffel didn't have access to all possible angles and said he had no reason to overturn Kettleborough's original decision.
As it happened, Latham had edged the ball, but hands were tied by protocol. On Saturday, Latham's team mate Doug Bracewell was rightly given out lbw at the tail end of New Zealand's first innings.
Bracewell tried a referral, but Reiffel could not rule as his television monitor was not working.
It is a sensitive issue in the wake of the Nigel Llong-Nathan Lyon snafu when New Zealand played Australia in Adelaide recently.
Three ways which could be considered to improve the DRS system:
1: Enable closer communication between the third umpire and the DRS operators -- that is, sitting alongside, or next door, to each other. Make them part of the ICC match team. This might seem a no brainer; try telling the International Cricket Council. If third officials are to be truly effective, it's commonsense they should have a full range of information at their disposal. The Latham situation yesterday showed that not to be the case. 2: Ensure all angles are available for the third umpire. The DRS operators had no authority to tell Reiffel that, in this case, they had exclusive access to a camera angle which showed the ball had hit Latham's bat. Reiffel was therefore handicapped. This is dopey. 3: The DRS operators should have the ability to use their judgment and immediately contact the third umpire when a referral is made, to advise they have information he'd want to see -- even if not part of the standard list of Hot Spot, Snicko and ball tracking. Exclusive angles or not, it would have helped Reiffel's ability to do his job.
