Shenali D Waduge

Since March 1997, Senaka Weeraratna has waged one of the most persistent, solitary intellectual justice campaigns in modern sport — appealing locally and internationally for recognition as the author of the ‘Player – Referral’ system, today globally known as the Decision Review System (DRS). It began with a letter to the ‘Australian’ (National Newspaper of Australia) dated March 25, 1997. First adopted by the International Cricket Council (ICC) in 2008 as the Decision Review System (DRS), it replaced the “umpire’s decision is final” rule with a system allowing players to challenge on-field calls using technology.

For nearly three decades, his appeals crossed continents, institutions, cricket boards, editors, officials, and administrators. They were supported by documented evidence, first publication records, and formal submissions. Yet, despite the strength of the claim and the clarity of proof, institutional silence prevailed.

As a result, a revolutionary idea that transformed cricket adjudication forever — restoring fairness, accuracy, and justice — was allowed to circulate globally without its creator receiving an iota of rightful recognition or due compensation in the royalties.

This silence did not arise from absence of merit. It arose from institutional inertia, personal jealousy, and systemic resistance to acknowledging authorship outside traditional Western power centres. In South Asian terms, this can only be described as eersiyaawa” — envy-driven obstruction, a cultural malaise that prevents collective advancement by suppressing individual excellence.

As a result, a revolutionary idea that transformed cricket adjudication forever — restoring fairness, accuracy, and justice — was allowed to circulate globally without its creator receiving rightful recognition. Even umpires have failed to acknowledge its merit.

A lone struggle against institutional walls

Weeraratna’s campaign was extraordinary not only for its intellectual depth, but for its longevity and moral clarity. Alone, without institutional backing, he wrote to cricket boards, journalists, administrators, lawyers, international bodies, and governments. His writings appeared in leading international newspapers, and formal representations were submitted to Sri Lanka Cricket and the ICC.

Yet decision-makers remained unmoved. Sympathy replaced action. Praise replaced recognition. Polite acknowledgement replaced justice. Even 

This reveals a deeper problem: the inability of institutions to honour intellectual originality when it originates from outside entrenched power structures.

Why this moment is different — and urgent

Today, Senaka Weeraratna approaches 80 years of age.

The world of cricket, meanwhile, is undergoing a profound power shift:

·      South Asia now dominates global cricket revenues

·      Asian audiences drive broadcast markets

·      Asian teams define competitive standards

·      Asian players dominate performance metrics

Cricket’s economic, cultural, and moral centre of gravity has shifted East.

Yet intellectual recognition remains locked in old colonial hierarchies.

This contradiction can no longer be sustained.

From a Sri Lankan claim to a South Asian responsibility

This is no longer a private grievance or a national claim.

It is now a South Asian civilisational responsibility.

South Asia must spearhead this recognition because:

·      The innovation originated here

·      The beneficiaries are global

·      The denial reflects historical power imbalance

·      The silence enables continued intellectual marginalisation

To allow this injustice to persist is to accept a subordinate intellectual identity, where South Asian innovation is consumed but not credited.

Why recognition matters beyond One Man

This campaign is not about personal glorification.

It is about:

·      Restoring truth to cricket history

·      Correcting global intellectual records

·      Establishing ethical norms of authorship

·      Ensuring future Asian innovators are not erased

If Senaka Weeraratna’s authorship is denied despite documented evidence and international publication, what hope remains for the next South Asian innovator?

The DRS was not merely a technical adjustment.

It was a moral innovation — introducing justice, accountability, and transparency into a sport governed for over a century by unchallengeable authority.

This ethical architecture originated in Sri Lanka, from a legal mind trained in justice, fairness, and moral responsibility.

To deny that origin is to deny cricket’s own ethical foundation.

A Call to South Asian Leaders

This moment demands leadership.

Political leaders, cricket boards, legal communities, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals across India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and Nepal must now jointly act.

They must:

·      Demand formal ICC recognition

·      Insist on historical correction

·      Mobilize public opinion

·      Restore intellectual justice

Time must not be allowed to become another instrument of denial.

History Still Awaits Correction

Almost three decades ago, one Sri Lankan gave cricket its most transformative innovation which is now used across all sports.

Today, almost three decades later, South Asia must give him what institutions denied — truth, recognition, and justice.

If South Asia cannot protect its own intellectual pioneers, it forfeits its moral right to global leadership in cricket.

The time for hesitation is over.

The time for collective action is now.

Shenali D Waduge