GUIDES · BETSLIP DOCTOR
Why can an unchanged ICC DRS decision leave a team’s review count intact?
Where the fixture uses the standard ICC men’s DRS Appendix D, each team may have up to two unsuccessful Player Reviews in an innings. An unchanged LBW decision based only on Umpire’s Call does not use that allowance. An ordinary unchanged decision, or an Out decision upheld for a different dismissal mode, does count. Other narrow exceptions apply when a No ball removes the need for further review, an Umpire Review makes the request unnecessary, or technology failure prevents a review from being properly concluded.
For Cricket viewers trying to reconcile a DRS outcome with the reviews-remaining display · Updated
An unchanged decision can have different review outcomes
A decision staying the same is not enough by itself to tell you whether a Player Review counts as unsuccessful. Under the standard Appendix D, a decision reversed on review is successful and does not count toward the limit.
If an LBW decision remains unchanged solely because of Umpire’s Call, it also does not count as unsuccessful. By contrast, an ordinary unchanged decision does count. An Out decision that remains Out for a different dismissal mode also counts as unsuccessful.
Some requests are disregarded rather than charged
If a Not out decision remains unchanged because the delivery was a No ball and no further evaluation is needed, the request does not count as unsuccessful. A Player Review made on the same delivery as an Umpire Review is also disregarded when the Umpire Review makes the Player Review unnecessary.
The third umpire tracks unsuccessful reviews and advises the on-field umpires when a team has used its allowance. The standard clause also calls for the number remaining to be shown for the innings in progress.
A technical failure does not automatically restore a review
The ICC Match Referee has sole discretion to reinstate an unsuccessful review if a technology failure means it could not properly be concluded. The conditions limit that discretion: reinstatement is not available when the correct decision could still be made using other available technology, and working but inconclusive technology does not restore the review.
A score display or review tally cannot tell you whether those conditions were met. The specific referee decision and governing match rules matter.
First check whether standard Appendix D applies
This explanation is only for a fixture using the standard October 2026 ICC men’s ODI or T20I DRS Appendix D. It does not establish that every match uses DRS or this allowance.
An ICC addendum for Green-status Members says Appendix D does not apply within its stated scope and changes some referee references. The document is undated, and this page cannot determine which members or fixtures it covers. Check the actual series conditions and addenda before applying the tally.
The ICC says the revised playing-condition edition applies to international series starting on or after 1 October 2026; ongoing series keep prior regulations. That does not establish when each DRS clause was introduced.
Two stipulated reviews in one innings
In a fictional innings governed by standard Appendix D, a team asks for review of an LBW decision that stays Out solely on Umpire’s Call; that request does not count as unsuccessful. Later, an Out decision remains in force because a different dismissal mode is established; that request does count as unsuccessful. If a later review cannot be properly completed because the technology fails, the Match Referee may reinstate it only under the rule’s limited conditions. A functioning system that is merely inconclusive does not create automatic restoration. No ball-tracking margin or real review is assessed.
Related questions
Does an unchanged Umpire’s Call use an unsuccessful review?
Not when the LBW decision remains unchanged solely on Umpire’s Call under standard Appendix D. An ordinary unchanged decision is treated differently.
Does a technology problem automatically return a review?
No. Reinstatement is at the Match Referee’s discretion and only under the narrow technology-failure conditions in Appendix D.
Sources and further reading
- ICC Men’s One-Day International Playing Conditions, Appendix D clauses 3.6.1–3.6.10, printed pages 96–97
- ICC Men’s Twenty20 International Playing Conditions, Appendix D clauses 3.6.1–3.6.10, printed pages 95–96
- ICC playing-conditions addendum for Green-status Members, undated document, PDF pages 1–2
- ICC media release on revised playing conditions and series applicability, 1 October 2026