Technology in sport an inexact science England soccer player Frank Lampard reacts after his goal was ruled out during the 2010 World Cup round of 16 match Germany. WHILE cricket is deservedly a laughing stock after the latest Decision Review System howler involving Usman Khawaja, very few other world sporting bodies can claim to have successfully mastered technology in ruling out adjudicating mistakes. Ask the AFL how it's goal review system is working - one that has fallen into farce as the season nears finals action? Or visit soccer where a 2010 World Cup round of 16 game between England and Germany saw a Frank Lampard goal disallowed despite the English midfielder's shot bouncing off the crossbar a clear meter over the goal line. The protests around the world were so strong after the Lampard fiasco that soccer has been led, kicking and screaming, into a system where Champions League matches now use goal line touch judges. The NRL was something of a trendsetter in referring questionable tries to the video referee but the judgements of that official, just like cricket, have at times overshadowed the result. For example, what was the video ref looking at when Penrith winger Dean Whare clearly had his hand on the sideline when he scored against the Knights two weeks ago? What happened at Old Trafford, when umpire Kumar Dharmasena failed to overrule a decision by umpire Tony Hill of New Zealand that incorrectly gave Khawaja out caught behind, will surely lead to urgent debate at the International Cricket Council. The Ashes series is only two Tests and one day old but has been marred by a series of contentious decisions normally associated with catches by the wicketkeeper that haven't shown up on Hotspot. Surely if there is no evidence of a snick on Hotspot or no obvious deviation, common sense would say the decision has to go to the batsman, although ICC umpire of the year Dharmasena, or Dumb-asena as he has been dubbed, wouldn't agree. So should we do away with technology altogether? No, because anything that leads to more correct decisions has to be a bonus. And when it can be used successfully, such as in tennis, then it enhances the game. Hawk-eye mightn't have ever won the heart of Roger Federer yet it is an example of technology working to the benefit of a sporting code. Had it been around in the days of John McEnroe he would have been reduced to arguing with a faceless machine rather than breaking anything within vicinity of his tennis raquet. Grid iron is another code where the review system is accepted by players and fans alike. Sadly that can't be said of cricket, where players and spectators are equally confused. The DRS and how to use it has become a vital part of the game - one that has had as much influence on a match as a swinging ball from Jimmy Anderson or a sharply turning Graeme Swann off-break. But clearly right now it's far from an exact science. Word from the inventors of Hotspot and Snicko is they are close to combining a new whiz-bang version that will greatly assist the third umpire. Let's hope they develop it quickly. TENNIS - Hawk-eye - Used to adjudicate on conenntious line calls by alloweding players to review close decisions. AFL - Multiple camera angles used to assist goal and field umpires in reviewing goal and behind decisions. NRL - Third umpire uses variety of video replay angles to determine whether rules have been breached or the ball grounded in the scoring of a try. SOCCER - Hawk-eye - Determines whether a ball has crossed the goal line, taking the decision away from umpires. CRICKET - DRS - Uses replay vision, Hotspot cameras and Hawk-eye to confirm or overturn umpire decisions on catches, LBWs and run-outs. BASKETBALL - The NBA uses replay vision to review 'last touch' decisions in the final two minutes of games, and also to determine whether players release the ball before the shot clock expires.