Why ICC Expanded the ‘Window Area’ for LBW Review Calls | Cricket News

Movement can result in more forward-leg decisions in favor of bowlers
NEW DELHI: Bowlers around the world were shot in the arm of the International Cricket Council (ICC) as the governing body of world cricket has taken an interesting step forward with regard to LBW review calls under Decision review system (DRS).
The ICC cricket committee, chaired by a former Indian footman Anil kumble, decided to extend the “wicket zone” from the lower edge of the bails to the upper end of the bails.
This effectively increases the chances that bowlers will get more LBW decisions in their favor, if and when a referee’s decision on the field is reviewed. Previously, deliveries cutting the bail ended up staying with the referee’s call on the pitch.
Under DRS, if more than 50% of the ball hits the “wicket area” then a no-out decision to the field may be overturned.

So what is the “window area” that the ICC considers legitimate? The “gate area” is the total area of ​​stumps, height and width combined. Previously, the height of the stumps that was considered valid under DRS was up to the bottom edge of the bails. But now, after the rule change, the height of the stumps will increase to the highest point of the bails.
According to cricket laws, the total height of a bond in senior level cricket must be 4.31 inches or 10.95 cm. When the bail nestles in the groove of the stumps, it protrudes about 2.94 inches or 7.5 cm. So after the rule change it’s an extra 2.94inch / 7.5cm room to play for the bowlers.
With the new rule, just over 50 percent of the ball hitting the top edge of the bail would be enough to reverse a court decision after a review.
“ Arbitrator’s appeal ” retained
The “referee call” factor in the DRS has caused much controversy and generated polarized opinions. Virat Kohli, in the recent ODI series against England, said the “referee’s call” aspect caused “a lot of confusion”. The ICC, however, decided to keep the “appeal to arbitrator” element in the DRS.
“The underlying principle of DRS was to correct clear errors in the game while ensuring that the role of the referee as decider on the playing field is preserved, keeping in mind the element of prediction involved in technology. The arbitrator’s call allows this to happen, which is why it’s important that it stays, ”Anil Kumble said in an ICC press release.
Blow played or not?
In another important change, a team can now ask the referee if “a real attempt has been made to play the ball” (deliberate or unintentional padding) before proceeding with an examination. Previously, the referee’s inference was binding and the field team was not allowed to raise objections on the field.
Short term problem
Also, just like no-ball appeals, decisions about whether or not there is a “short term” will now be the responsibility of the third referee.