What other reason could there be for the sound? The sound is admissable as evidence along with hot spot, hot spot is showing nothing but there is a definate sound. The bat is miles from his pads, the only two things in any kind of vicinity of each other are bat and ball and there is a sound, surely that proves there must have been an extremely faint edge thats not been picked up on hot spot but has been on audio and therfore correct decisions has been made on the pitch.
What mixed messages? please tell me what they are? The only really controversial one in this match was Khawaja, no hot spot, clear air between bat and ball and the sound showed quite clearly to have occurred when the ball was not close to the bat, the third umpire got it completely wrong plain and simple, DRS showed him that, he made the wrong decision, thats human error, not DRS
Regardless though, if the DRS had not even been there the on field decision would have been out anyway so DRS has changed nothing in that instance, if the third official had made the correct decision he would not have been out, would we have been discussing how good DRS is because of that? I doubt it as only the mistakes seem to be being highlighted
DRS has been used very well and very successfully for a long time now, in this series it seems the officials are having trouble with it, thats down to the officials. Just because the decisions have been wrong in this series it doesn't outweigh the amount of times it has been used successfully by a long shot.
Anyone that watches enough cricket will have seen it work very well.
I can see where he is coming from but he seems to think DRS as a whole goes, not just change or improve parts of it which seems very foolish to me. It's a shame Snicko is not used more but it seemingly takes too long for the data to come through.
The hot spot cameras have been improved since their original ones, they were only about 90% accurate, as technology improves so will the cameras. Perhaps its worth suggesting that hotspot is not used on edge and we go with audio only but that can only come if Snicko is made faster, hopefully that will come and with the two hand in hand it becomes pretty damn certain.
To my mind this technology has been been brilliant since its introduction and has improved decisions being made at the stumps and for the third umpires, as with anything you will have errors on occasion but I would say at the moment DRS has correctly helped to overturn many decisions that have improved the overall games being played
Why did the 3rd umpire get it wrong with Khawaja? So he sees no hot spot, but thinks it might still be an edge. So he hears a sound, and he's probably ended up putting it down to an edge. The conflicting technology of hot spot vs sound has confused him.
Did you see the Ian Bell 'edge' in the 1st innings, when Haddin went up for an appeal but no one else did? Can you tell me what would have happened had that been referred? No hot spot, but a small snickometer sound. No clear daylight between bat and ball.
It looked out, but would the 3rd umpire have given it? Tricky isn't it? I've no idea what would have happened.
I agree that it's been used fine a lot of the time, but it's rare to have a series without a couple of DRS controversies. Now, in one of the highest profile series of all, it's happened several times in just about every match.
All I'm saying is maybe a period of review is in order, as most players are willing to accept umpire errors but it's very difficult to stomach a decision made when it contradicts the technology used that's meant to be protecting you in the first place.

Did you even see the review on Khawaja? Quite frankly I doubt you did if thats your thoughts on it! It was quite clear at what time in the replay that the sound occured.
Its irrelevant on the Ian Bell edge, it wasn't used, again your focus on DRS rather than what has just been poor officials in this match is tainting your view massively.
What exactly has DRS got wrong in this series? We get to see the same things as the third umpire and it seems that on the controversial decisions most people viewing, the commentary team and such can see what the third umpire got wrong, seems to me that DRS is working in that instance, even the layman can see the errors made that DRS proves.....
So if even a layman can get it right, why are the 3rd umpires often getting them wrong? What's your explanation for that?
They aren't often getting it wrong, it only this series I have really seen some errors and even then not as many as seemingly are being made out
What ones have the 3rd umpires got wrong? Khajawa is one, what are the others?
Trott's dismissal in the 1st Test? Bell's dismissal in the one day final vs India? Ashton Agar's stumping in the 1st Test? Bell being caught and not being given out in the 2nd Test?
Do those examples fulfil your definition of 'often'? Not 100% sure if they were all 'reviews' as such but incorrect use of the technology available.

Let's not get off track here, your issue has been with DRS and then with 3rd umpires who don't seem to be using it correctly, of those incidents where is the DRS issue?
Trotts dismissal - offical's mistake, Erasmus didnt have enough clear evidence to overturn a decision and wrongly did so, even the ICC admitted it was his mistake, thats not DRS' fault
Bells in India, DRS not even used, would DRS have made a difference?
Agar in the 1st test, again, it seemed fairly obvious to most in the commentary that the decisions should not have been overturned, possibly though the one incident listed where it hindered things somewhat
Bell in the 2nd test, it wasn't even reviewed so in that instance, the third umpire and DRS were not used
So thats 1 out of 4 that was a bit iffy so no thats no often, thats nit picking and not very well
So we come to the original point, what is the DRS fault here that suggests it should be scrapped?
It's not necessarily the DRS fault, it's 3rd umpires' implementation of them that's at fault. The only DRS fault I can think of is the fact that not all edges are picked up on hotspot.
If the umpires can't use DRS properly, as well as technology in a non DRS setting, then they need a period of review and re-education. That's all I'm saying.

Right so it should be scrapped is now review and re education?
Even though examples you have given thus far have on occasion not even included DRS at all that's still your stance? Even though DRS has corrected wrong decisions far more times than it has been controversial we should be pulling it out and looking at it again?
The only way this system is going to become better is by using it more and more, by highlighting some of the errors by 3rd umpires we can use that as a way to reducate others, it does not need scrapping, it's working damn well as a whole and the continued investment and improvement into the way it works will only aid them more