Wrong decisions go against England

Along with Vaughan's unlucky dismissal where he middled the ball only for short-leg to hold on to the catch, England also suffered two wrong umpiring decisions today - Pietersen and Cook, so can consider themselves a little unlucky. Only a couple of days ago, I mentioned how pleasing it was to hear Clive Lloyd's views on using technology, and now Michael Vaughan has also said that technology should have been used to ensure the correct decision was made today when Pietersen edged the ball to slip.

The question is...why are we resisting the inevitable? If the game of cricket was invented today, it would be considered rediculous not to use what technology we have to ensure that the correct decisions are made. But given that cricket has survived for so long without the use of technology, there is an understandable reluctance to accept change. In a business context, it's inconceivable that the senior management team of a company wouldn't embrace change - if they did it would cost their company money and, probably, cost them their jobs. There aren't the same financial impacts for not embracing inevitable change in cricket, but it really should cost people their jobs if they can't make the decision to use technology at the right time and manage that change appropriately.