Weren't they on about the situation where a review is technically correct, but the original decision is upheld (I.e umpire's call)?
Ah, yes, that would make sense.
I'm not sure I agree - DRS is supposed to be reserved for obviously wrong decisions - but I can see the sense in it.
It was introduced to stop the howlers (like the Broad not-out decision) however there have been several problems/failures:-
1) Australia (and plenty of other teams) have used the reviews for marginal calls rather than howlers and used them up so they aren't available when the howler does come along.
2) It relies upon technology run by the broadcasters (i.e. it is Sky that control Hotspot) and that system couldn't record and replay at the same time (what a crap system!) so they couldn't present the side-on Hotspot view for Trott's review as they'd cued up that system to replay Root's dismissal.
ObGrauniand:
England received apologies from the International Cricket Council and the founder of the Hot Spot thermal imaging technology after the dismissal of Jonathan Trott for his first golden duck in Test cricket had marred another memorable day of Ashes cricket in Nottingham.
...
Meanwhile Warren Brennan, a New Zealander who adapted the Hot Spot technology for cricket, contacted the ESPN Cricinfo website to confirm Sky's claim that the "glitch" which cost Trott his wicket was down to "operator error".
Brennan explained that the operator in question had not "triggered the system for the Trott delivery" because he was waiting to offer a replay of the previous ball from which Joe Root was given caught behind down the leg side. Root was left to regret his failure not to call for a review, as those replays showed no proof that he had edged Mitchell Starc's delivery.
3) The Agar stumping given not out by the third umpire despite all video evidence seeming to prove that it was a legitimate stumping. Even 3rd umpires are human and make mistakes. You still get a few 'mistakes' by the TMO/Video-Ref in Rugby.
