IND vs ENG: Hawk-Eye's Inventor upset by Michael Vaughan's remark, advocates better preparation for understanding

During the India vs. England series, there was a lot of controversy regarding the Decision Review System (DRS). Former England captain and famous commentator Michael Vaughan recently gave advice regarding Hawk-Eye. He said that to improve transparency and accountability, if video recording of the person using Hawk-Eye is done and there are cameras in the room, then there will be no disputes. Let us tell you that Hawk-Eye Technology is the eye of the Third Eye, which helps in taking better decisions in situations of confusion in cricket matches. 

A debate broke out on DRS after the dismissal of Joe Root in the fourth Test played between India and England in Ranchi. On-field umpire Kumar Dharmasena did not give Root out LBW, but ball-tracking revealed that the ball was pitching exactly in line. In such a situation, Dharmasena had to reverse its initial decision. At the same time, Jack Crowley had to return to the pavilion twice due to close decisions. England captain Ben Stokes has even advocated abolishing the umpire call. Hawk-Eye creator Paul Hawkins is disappointed by Vaughn's proposal to put cameras on DRS operators. He gave a vigorous class to Vaughan and explained how DRS operators work.

Here's what he said...

"There are usually three people for Hawk-Eye tracking, and another person handles UltraEdge," Hawkins said on The Analyst Podcast. One handles the output side, and there are two independent people who do the tracking. Therefore, there is no point of failure. The cameras are on two tracking systems. There are two sets of readers and two different operators. And so with each ball, there are two clocks to keep track of. You check that they are always the same. There is quality control between the two systems. 

He further said that I think there is a little lack of knowledge in the commentary. It's unfortunate for Vaughan to say this because he's been a fantastic player, it's been fun watching him play. He is a great commentator and very entertaining. But I think from a journalistic point of view it is a responsibility towards the game. Perhaps, Vaughan's role as a journalist requires a little more preparation, which might help him explain this. With this, whatever he writes will be factually correct. Just as Hawk-Eye has a responsibility to be factually correct, perhaps journalists too have a responsibility.