DRS stands for Decision Review System. It is cricket’s technology-based process for checking an on-field umpire’s decision: a team that believes a dismissal decision is wrong can challenge it, and the third umpire reviews the decision using television replays, edge-detection and ball-tracking before the original decision is confirmed or reversed. The ICC defines DRS in almost exactly those terms — a technology-based process for assisting the match officials with their decision-making, under which on-field umpires may consult the third umpire (an Umpire Review) and players may request that the third umpire consider a decision (a Player Review). DRS exists to correct clear mistakes — the LBW given when the ball pitched outside leg stump, the catch given when the ball never touched the bat — not to re-judge every close call, and its limited reviews and its famous grey area, umpire’s call, follow from that purpose.
In brief:
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Full form | Decision Review System |
| Who can challenge | The batter given out, or the fielding captain for a not-out decision |
| How | A “T” signal with both arms, within 15 seconds of the ball becoming dead |
| Reviews per innings (current) | Tests: 3 unsuccessful · ODIs: 2 unsuccessful · T20Is: 2 unsuccessful |
| Technology | Replays, ball-tracking (Hawk-Eye or Virtual Eye), UltraEdge / Real Time Snicko, Hot Spot where provided |
| First used | Test cricket, 2008 (India’s tour of Sri Lanka); ODIs 2011; T20Is 2017 |
Two kinds of review: Player Review and Umpire Review
DRS is an umbrella over two different routes to the third umpire, and keeping them apart clears up most confusion about the system.
A Player Review is the challenge — the part of DRS spectators mean when they say “they’ve reviewed it.” Under the protocol in Appendix D of the ICC playing conditions, a player may request a review of a decision about whether or not a batter is dismissed, with one exception: “timed out” cannot be reviewed. Only two people can ask: the batter given out can review their own dismissal, and for a not-out decision only the fielding captain (or acting captain) can ask. A bowler cannot review on their own behalf, a non-striker cannot review their partner’s dismissal, and no one can review a wide or a boundary. Player Reviews are limited in number — the subject of its own section below.
An Umpire Review is the on-field umpires’ own route to the third umpire. It is not limited and does not belong to either team. Umpires use it for the decisions replays settle best: run-outs, stumpings, whether a catch was taken cleanly or bounced, and boundary decisions. Players may not ask an umpire to start one. The front-foot no-ball, once the most common trigger, is now checked automatically by the third umpire on every delivery in ICC events.
How a Player Review works, step by step
The sequence is fixed by the DRS protocol, and it runs the same way in every format.
1. The decision. The fielding side appeals, and the on-field umpire gives the batter out or not out.
2. The signal, inside 15 seconds. The batter given out, or the fielding captain, requests the review by making a “T” sign with both forearms at head height. The protocol gives 15 seconds from the moment the ball becomes dead; the bowler’s-end umpire prompts the player at 10 seconds, and a late request is declined. Players may consult the team-mates around them, but no input may come from off the field: dressing-room signals are expressly forbidden, and if the umpires believe outside input was received, they may refuse the review. No replay may be shown on the stadium screen until the 15 seconds have expired. A request, once made, cannot be withdrawn.
3. The third umpire’s checks, in order. The on-field umpire signals the review with the flat-hands “TV screen” gesture. The third umpire works through the evidence in a set order. First, the delivery itself: was it a no-ball? A no-ball ends the dismissal whatever follows. Next, the questions specific to the dismissal — for a caught appeal, did the ball touch the bat, and was the catch taken cleanly; for LBW, did the ball hit bat before pad. Only then does ball-tracking run for an LBW. If the third umpire cannot decide with a high degree of confidence, the replays are reported as inconclusive and the on-field decision stands — the protocol forbids the third umpire from dealing in likelihoods.
4. The decision, confirmed or reversed. The on-field umpire reverses the decision if the third umpire’s information shows it was wrong, and confirms it otherwise. The outcome is recorded against the team’s allowance and play resumes. Since June 2023 there has been no soft signal. Before then, an umpire referring a low catch had to declare an on-field view of out or not out, which the third umpire needed conclusive evidence to overturn. The ICC abolished it; the third umpire now decides referred catches on the evidence alone.
5. The secondary-dismissal check. The third umpire does not stop at the dismissal appealed. If a caught-behind review shows no bat but the ball hit the pad, the third umpire checks the LBW as well. The 2025 playing conditions changed what happens when that secondary check lands in the grey area: the “original decision” for the secondary check is now out (the decision actually given), so an umpire’s-call verdict leaves the batter out — previously it defaulted to not out.
Umpire’s call: the grey band in the middle
Umpire’s call is the part of DRS that produces the arguments, and it applies to one thing only: the ball-tracking part of an LBW review. Ball-tracking reports where the ball pitched, where it hit the batter (impact), and whether it would have hit the stumps. Pitching gets a plain answer (in line, outside off, outside leg) — the cameras measured where it bounced. Hitting is different: it is a prediction of a journey the ball never completed, because the pad stopped it.
For impact and hitting, the protocol adds a middle category. If part of the ball was inside the impact zone but its centre was outside it — or the ball is shown hitting the stumps but its centre falls outside the wicket zone — the report is umpire’s call: within the margin where the projection cannot prove the on-field umpire wrong. The original decision stands, and since October 2017 the reviewing team does not lose a review for an outcome that failed only on umpire’s call. The full mechanics are explained in what is umpire’s call.
Umpire’s call is the clearest expression of what DRS is for: an error-correction system, not a replacement umpire. The ICC’s position, restated when its Cricket Committee reviewed the rule in 2021 and kept it, is that a prediction carrying a margin of error should not overturn a decision it cannot prove wrong. Other sports make the same bargain — compare NFL overtime rules, or how baseball separates what a statistic can and cannot say in what is OPS in baseball.
How many reviews does each team get?
The allowance is counted in unsuccessful reviews per innings, not in total reviews used. A review that overturns the decision costs nothing, and neither does one that survives only on umpire’s call. A team loses one only when the technology clearly confirms the on-field decision was right. Under the ICC conditions in force in November 2026 (men’s conditions effective June 2025 for Tests, July 2025 for white-ball), as set out in the ICC Men’s Test Match Playing Conditions, the allowances are:
| Format | Unsuccessful reviews per team, per innings |
|---|---|
| Test cricket | 3 |
| ODI cricket | 2 |
| T20I cricket | 2 |
Those figures need their date stamp, because this is the point on which cricket pages disagree most. Older guides — including pages still ranking for this keyword — state 2 in Tests and 1 in ODIs and T20Is. That was the position before 2020. In mid-2020, with home umpires standing in Tests during the pandemic, the ICC raised the allowances to 3 in Tests and 2 in ODIs as an interim measure; the higher allowances were retained and are the ones in the current conditions, and T20Is likewise sit at 2. The old Test top-up — reviews refreshed after 80 overs — was abolished in 2017: the allowance is per innings, full stop, and unused reviews do not carry over.
Two qualifications belong with the table. First, these are the ICC’s standard international conditions; domestic leagues run DRS under their own conditions, which usually copy the ICC allowances but are not bound to — the IPL has at times allowed reviews of wides and no-balls, which international Player Reviews do not permit. Second, DRS is only available where the host broadcaster provides the required technology; in fixtures without the full package, only Umpire Reviews operate, or a reduced form applies.
The technology inside DRS
DRS is not one technology but a kit of them; the ICC’s playing conditions definitions and the Appendix D protocol specify the approved components a host broadcast must provide.
Ball-tracking — Hawk-Eye or Virtual Eye. High-speed cameras around the ground track the ball from the bowler’s hand. For an LBW review the system reports pitching, impact and the projected path into the wicket zone. Pitching and impact are reconstructions of events the cameras saw; the path after impact is a projection, which is why the wicket check carries the umpire’s-call margin. The protocol names the approved providers: Hawk-Eye and Virtual Eye (also known as Eagle Eye).
Edge detection — UltraEdge and Real Time Snicko. The question “did the ball touch the bat?” is answered with sound. Stump microphones pick up the noise of the ball passing or striking the bat, synchronised with slow-motion pictures so the third umpire can match a spike on the waveform to the frame in which the ball passes the edge. The system in most international cricket is UltraEdge; Real Time Snicko is the equivalent approved system from the other main provider. Edge detection is checked before ball-tracking in an LBW review, because an edge onto the pad means the batter cannot be out LBW at all.
Hot Spot. An infrared imaging system that shows a bright mark where friction heated the bat, pad or glove. It answers the same question as UltraEdge by a different route — heat rather than sound — and for years the two were used together. It is now seen only in some series, principally in Australia, because of its cost and logistics; where it is not provided, edge decisions rest on UltraEdge and the replays.
Replays. The least glamorous component does the most work by volume: broadcast replays at any speed from every angle decide run-outs, stumpings, boundary checks, fair catches and the no-ball check — a large share of third-umpire work is Umpire Reviews decided entirely this way.
A short history of DRS
The third umpire came first: from November 1992, on-field umpires in Tests could refer certain decisions — run-outs and stumpings at first — to an official watching replays. That was an Umpire Review in everything but name. The addition that created DRS was giving the players a right to challenge.
The Player Review was first trialled in 2008, during India’s tour of Sri Lanka — the July 2008 series in which the system, then often called the Umpire Decision Review System (UDRS), was used in a Test for the first time. The ICC formally launched DRS for Tests on 24 November 2009, in the New Zealand–Pakistan series. It reached ODIs in January 2011 and T20Is last, in October 2017, with one unsuccessful review per innings at the time.
The system has been adjusted repeatedly since: the 80-over top-up of Test reviews came and went (trialled in 2013, removed in 2017), umpire’s-call reviews stopped costing a review in October 2017, the allowances rose to their current levels in 2020 and stayed there, the soft signal was abolished in June 2023, and the 2025 conditions refined the wicket zone and the secondary-dismissal protocol. India, the strongest early sceptic, resisted DRS in bilateral series for years before accepting it at home in 2016; the system is now standard.
Frequently asked questions
What is the full form of DRS in cricket? Decision Review System. Its 2008 trial form was called the Umpire Decision Review System (UDRS).
Who can ask for a DRS review? Only the batter given out, or the fielding captain for a not-out decision — with a “T” signal within 15 seconds of the ball becoming dead, and no advice from the dressing room.
How many DRS reviews are there in a Test match? Each team has 3 unsuccessful reviews per innings. Successful reviews and reviews lost only on umpire’s call do not count, and the allowance resets each innings.
How many reviews in an ODI or a T20I? Two unsuccessful reviews per team per innings in both formats, under the conditions in force in November 2026. Pages saying one are describing the pre-2020 rules.
Can a team review a wide or a no-ball? Not in international cricket. Player Reviews cover dismissal decisions only, and the front-foot no-ball is checked automatically by the third umpire on every ball. Some domestic leagues — the IPL among them — have allowed reviews of wides and no-balls under their own playing conditions.
Does DRS guarantee the right decision? No. It corrects the decisions the technology can prove wrong. Where the evidence is inconclusive, or an LBW projection falls in the umpire’s-call band, the on-field decision stands by design.
This article is general information based on the ICC’s published description of DRS, the Appendix D protocol, and the ICC Men’s Test Match Playing Conditions effective June 2025, checked in November 2026. Allowances are set by each competition’s playing conditions; domestic leagues may differ.