DRS in the IPL: The Review That Changes Matches
The Decision Review System arrived in the IPL in 2018, adding a layer of tactical complexity that has fundamentally altered how matches are played and decided. The ability to challenge on-field umpire decisions — subject to a limited number of reviews per innings — has created a new dimension of cricket strategy that extends from players in the batting crease to captains on the field.
CricMind's analysis of DRS usage across IPL matches since its introduction reveals the patterns that determine review success, the tactical moments where reviews matter most, and the data on which teams use DRS most effectively.
How DRS Works in the IPL
Each batting team is allocated two unsuccessful reviews per innings. An unsuccessful review — one where the original umpire decision is upheld — is consumed. Successful reviews (where the decision is overturned) do not count against the remaining total.
Reviews can challenge:
- LBW decisions (whether the ball would have hit the stumps)
- Caught behind decisions (whether the ball touched the bat before reaching the keeper)
- Run-out and stumping decisions
The technology used: ball-tracking (for LBW trajectory), Snickometer or edge detection (for bat contact), and Hot Spot/ultra-edge (for faint edges).
The DRS Tactical Dimension
The review allocation creates a resource management problem. Two reviews in a 20-over innings are scarce — particularly in matches where LBW decisions against dangerous batters in the powerplay could shift the entire match.
The decision to review is not binary — it is probabilistic. The batter reviewing an LBW must assess: was the ball hitting the stumps? Was it outside the line of the stumps? Was it too high? These assessments, made in real time under match pressure, are the DRS skill.
The field captain reviewing an LBW appeal against a dangerous batter must assess: do I believe the umpire missed this? Is this worth spending a review on? How many overs remain and how likely is another reviewable situation?
Review Success Rate by Decision Type
From the IPL data since 2018, the patterns show:
LBW reviews initiated by batting teams: Batters who challenge LBW decisions win approximately 40-45% of reviews. The majority of reviewed LBW decisions (where the batter was given out) show the ball clipping or just missing the stumps — the umpire was often correct or the decision was extremely marginal.
Caught behind reviews initiated by batting teams: Batters challenging caught-behind dismissals win their reviews at a lower rate — approximately 30-35%. Modern audio detection technology is highly accurate, and umpires have become progressively better at detecting faint edges.
Reviews initiated by fielding captains: Fielding captain reviews — challenging not-out LBW decisions — succeed at approximately 45-50%. Captains are often reviewing when they have a strong intuition that the ball was hitting the stumps, and the technology frequently confirms this.
The High-Stakes Review Moments
The most consequential DRS moments across IPL history have shared a common characteristic: they occurred when a dangerous batter was either saved by a review or dismissed through one in the first ten overs.
A batter reprieved by a successful DRS review who subsequently scores 70 has changed the match outcome more than almost any other single event type. Conversely, a successful fielding captain review that dismisses a batter on 35 in the powerplay has redirected the entire innings trajectory.
The Virat Kohli DRS record is worth noting in this context. In 259 IPL matches, Kohli's ability to read whether a ball is hitting the stumps — the primary variable in LBW reviews — has been among the most accurate in the competition. Experienced high-average batters generally show better DRS intuition than less experienced alternatives.
The Review Burn Rate Problem
Teams that "burn" reviews early — using both reviews before the 10th over on marginal decisions — are structurally disadvantaged for the remainder of the innings. In the death overs, where LBW decisions against tail-end batters and run-rate pressure create more borderline situations, the absence of reviews removes a material escape option.
The data shows that teams with at least one review remaining in the final five overs of their batting innings have a measurably better chance of avoiding crucial incorrect decisions than teams with no reviews left. This is partly survivorship bias — teams not burning reviews early are typically chasing more productive batting approaches — but the structural effect is real.
The Strategic Pause
One underappreciated DRS function: the review process provides a legitimate pause in a match's momentum. A batting team whose lower-order batter challenges a marginal LBW decision — regardless of the outcome — has inserted a 90-second delay into the innings at a potential pressure point. This pause allows the batting partner to regroup, the captain to relay instructions, and the crowd momentum (which affects fielding side intensity) to be interrupted.
This "review as strategic timeout" use is more subtle than the obvious DRS function but appears in the data as a pattern: teams that review decisions in high-pressure moments slightly more often than expected by pure probability calculations are arguably using reviews as both a decision-correction mechanism and a momentum-management tool.
DRS and the IPL's Specific Challenges
The IPL's specific conditions create DRS challenges that differ from Test cricket:
Spin bowling trajectories. Leg-spin and mystery spin deliveries that pitch outside the line of the stumps can still be LBW if the ball turns back to hit. The trajectory modelling for sharply turning balls has been a source of controversy — the ball-tracking systems are less accurate for extreme turn than for straight-line pace deliveries.
High-pace yorkers. Death-over yorkers bowled at 140+ kmph create extremely fast LBW scenarios. Umpires have limited processing time for these decisions, and both batting and fielding teams have found that borderline toe-crushing yorkers are more reviewable than other LBW scenarios.
FAQ
How many reviews does each team get in an IPL innings?
Each batting team receives two unsuccessful reviews per innings. Reviews that result in the original decision being overturned are not counted against the remaining total.
Can a fielding captain use DRS for a no-ball call?
No. Front-foot no-balls are checked by the third umpire automatically in the IPL (since 2019). Teams cannot use their DRS reviews to challenge no-ball decisions.
What technology is used for DRS in the IPL?
Ball-tracking (showing the trajectory of the delivery for LBW), Ultra-Edge/Snickometer (audio-based edge detection for caught-behind), and sometimes Hot Spot (infrared technology showing the contact point on bat and pad). The IPL uses a combination of these technologies depending on the type of decision being reviewed.
Has any team used all their reviews successfully in an IPL match?
Using both reviews successfully — meaning both reviews overturned the original decision — is uncommon. It requires both that the team's review judgment is correct on marginal decisions and that the technology confirms their assessment. It has occurred in IPL matches but is not common.
What happens if there are no reviews left and an incorrect decision is made?
The on-field decision stands. This is the cost of burning reviews on earlier marginal decisions — the protection mechanism is no longer available. In high-profile IPL matches, incorrect decisions without available reviews have occasionally affected match outcomes in ways that generated post-match analysis.