Chris Waters: Spinners of yore must be cursing their luck over review system

Human error is part of the game and to take it away is to take something out of sport.

Players, umpires, they all make mistakes – and the last thing we want is a robotic experience.

That is not to say technology does not have its merits.

In certain circumstances (I am thinking of run-outs and stumpings) it is a useful tool and, because of the complexities involved in making such decisions, does not undermine the officials’ credibility.

But I remain to be convinced that is the case with lbw decisions.

It is surely undesirable for an umpire to have to overturn an lbw in front of thousands of spectators, or, conversely, to award a decision that he failed to spot live, although the counter-argument, of course, is that it is undesirable for an injustice to have been perpetrated in the first place.

The Decision Review System polarises opinion but nevertheless possesses an unintended benefit.

It brings spinners more into the game – especially finger spinners – and gives them more opportunity to win lbws.

In the past, it was almost as hard for a finger spinner to procure an lbw as it was for a camel to proceed through the eye of a needle.

But the advent of television replays has shown just how many balls bowled by spinners would go on to hit the stumps, with appeals that were previously turned down on the grounds there was too much guesswork involved now being upheld with pronounced regularity.

That is clearly a development to be applauded, although I would maintain that the onus should be on the on-field umpire to ensure spinners are not discriminated against in that regard.

Umpires’ conservatism is not in itself sufficient cause to justify DRS, although you would find few spinners who would welcome a return to the previous system.

In the past, batsmen often used their pad as a second line of defence, safe in the knowledge they would not be given out lbw on the front foot.

Under DRS, the big stride forward has been shown to be fallible, forcing batsmen to rethink their strategy.

It is certainly desirable that batsmen should use their feet more to combat spin.

For years, youngsters were taught that a long stride with bat behind the pad was an effective way of countering the mysteries of the twirlymen, with Peter May and Colin Cowdrey leading the revolution in 1957 when they famously used pad play against “those two little pals of mine”, the West Indian spinners Sonny Ramadhin and Alf Valentine.

But the balance has shifted in recent times, with DRS the unwitting catalyst.

Coaching methods must now adapt accordingly, with youngsters encouraged to adopt a more fleet-footed approach.

Former England captain Michael Vaughan recently highlighted the effect DRS is having on batsmen’s tactics when playing against spin.

“This is the hardest era to play spin because of DRS,” said Vaughan.

“The way Misbah-ul-Haq was out in the first innings of the first Test against England, playing a forward defensive to Swann with his pad, with his bat behind, was how I played Saqlain Mushtaq and Murali throughout my career.

“We would lunge at it and pad it. Every single player was told to do that and it is how we earned the right to score off Murali.

“We got half a feel of what he was doing. These days it is hard to do that. Play with your pad you are out. Now you have to read him earlier and get your bat on the ball.”

Cricket has been weighted against bowlers for far too long.

A combination of flat pitches, covered pitches and changes to the lbw law have all had the effect of making batsmen’s lives easier.

Anything that redresses the balance can only be welcomed, particularly if it promotes the high art of spin.

With Twenty20 continuing to blossom, it is imperative that spinners are encouraged as much as possible – unwittingly or otherwise.

Where finger spin once seemed in danger of becoming extinct, it has suddenly experienced a marked revival.

There are now seven finger spinners in the world’s top 20, with England’s Graeme Swann and Pakistan’s Saeed Ajmal leading the way.

Previously, finger spin had begun to regress in much the same way leg-spin regressed before Abdul Qadir and Shane Warne.

The likes of Swann and Saeed have made it successful once more, which, in turn, should encourage more youngsters to take up the method.

Of course, the spinners of yore must be cursing their luck at the injustice of it all.

The likes of Phil Tufnell, for example, would surely have taken many more wickets had DRS been available throughout his career.

It is just another reason why comparisons across the ages are notoriously unreliable.

We can no more say how Tufnell would compare against Swann than we can definitively compare the likes of Don Bradman with Viv Richards or Sydney Barnes with Fred Trueman.