D/L Method is the real spoilsport

[dr_tooley]

Agree with OP. I have similar feelings about WC semi against SL. Kambli would have got us home and then after that glorius victory' date=' that would have pushed him on to be one of the greatest players ever. Clive Lyold basically stopped Kambli becoming an all time great![/quote'] The beauty of cricket is that you simply can't tell until the last wicket is out. We've both seen enough of Yusuf Pathan, Bhajji, Abdul Razak, Lance Klusener and Michael Bevan to know its not over until the last ball is bowled. Rain and D/L method takes this away. What Clive Lloyd did in that Semi Final was disgraceful. You can be patronising about Kambli if you want, but at that stage in his career was a pretty good player particularly against spinners. He might well have won it, we simply will never know.

[The Outsider]

As I understand it the OP is not criticizing Duckworth Lewis specifically, but any predictive algorithm to get a result. I think Duckworth Lewis works pretty well if one needs to get a result. However, the question is how badly does one want a result. In these days of hectic schedules it's not possible to have reserve days for matches outside big tournaments. Just look at the 4th ODI - if it was continued on Saturday, how would the 5th ODI be played on Sunday? I am not one huge for results - don't really cry about draws in Tests as long as they are competitive. Personally, I wouldn't care if the rain effected match was simply called off as abandoned. But remember there are going to be enough people complaining in that scenario as well. For example, India makes 400/5 in 50 overs and has Pakistan at 150/9 in 45 overs and it rains and the match is declared abandoned. There will be mayhem. In knockout matches of big tournaments, one can have a reserve day.

[cowboysfan]

is there a reserve day for the knockout games in the wc?

[Serani]

Perfectly placed?

[b555]

according to op :yes:

[zen]

Y'day, there was only one team that looked like it was pushing itself to win. In the morning, SA looked focused on not losing early wkts and played the first few overs cautiously. Then they tried to accelerate but in that process committed harakari too. The lower order guys took it upon themselves to see that SA got to a respectable total. For Ind, apart from Kohli there was hardly anyone who looked like he was pushing himself to win this for Ind. The way Rohit got out sums up our attitude in that game, along with how Dhoni placed the field despite having SA on the ropes. Well played SA!

[Sir_Afridi]

It is always the losing team fans who blames the DL method. DL method clearly tells how many runs team needs and the number of wickets needed to preserve after every over. India were just not good enough yesterday and lost. Stop giving excuses.

[CSK Fan]

It is always the losing team fans who blames the DL method. DL method clearly tells how many runs team needs and the number of wickets needed to preserve after every over. India were just not good enough yesterday and lost. Stop giving excuses.

Oye this has nothing to do with last match. but why on earth would india be checking the duckworth chart yesterday before the rain as you seem to be suggesting? The rain came suddenly

[Mariyam]

If it wasn't for the rain... Napoleon wouldn't have lost at waterloo I wouldn't have gotten my i-pod all wet and spoiled Umbrella's wouldn't be invented Ditto raincoats 'Tum Mile' wouldn't have a story line Noah wouldn't have to build his ark BUT India would have still lost the 4th One dayer

[Mariyam]

@ akhsayxyz: I wasn't joking when I said putting roofs over the stadium as an alternative. That was a serious reply. I didn't quite follow when you said some teams would find that as an unfair change. In what I suggested, there isn't going to be any change. You play with the roof on from the first delivery. @ Sachin=God : I don't have any expertise in the field of construction so I could be way off mark here, but why do you say adding a roof would be a very big incremental cost? Relative to the cost of taking the land on lease, building the stands, fixing the lights, preparing the pitch, a retractable roof would be a minor expense. Maybe under 5% of the total cost.

It was not according to D&L. It was first used in 96/97.

You are right. My mistake. I guess I didn't recollect properly what I read.

Well the same could have happened with saffers if they batted second! it is a rule for both the teams! The only thing which i am not sure is that, does Duckworthlewis takes the batting power play into the equation? Saffers had the advantage of taking both there batting powerplays whereas India only took one! does anyone know, if duckworthlewis calculations take powerplay into the consideration? if not they might have to somehow include it bcause it would really unfair for the team batting second then!

Thats a nice point. The power play being a non factor in D/L is a very good point against the current system. Maybe the D/L system should be tweaked to take into account the effect of the power plays.

[Sachin=GOD]

@ Sachin=God : I don't have any expertise in the field of construction so I could be way off mark here, but why do you say adding a roof would be a very big incremental cost? Relative to the cost of taking the land on lease, building the stands, fixing the lights, preparing the pitch, a retractable roof would be a minor expense. Maybe under 5% of the total cost.

Building a retractable roof in a stadium which was not originally designed to accommodate a roof would cost more than $100 million from what I know. And thats a huge sum considering the fact that we've got entire stadiums that are built in less money than that.

[yoda]

130 to score with 4 wickets in hand and perfectly placed. lay down the pipe. :giggle:

[yoda]

Yes DL is crap. Don't think any other sport has a way of awarding result in a rain shortened match. Yea, play it the next day and if weather doesn't permit finishing it over 2 days, declare it void, unless it is a knockout game in which case, keep playing I guess.

[Raghav_12]

D/L rule is best possible option we have now to decide results rain interrupted matches and we should continue using this until some one can suggest some better method. I have seen rules which were tried before D/L came in picture and they were absolutely ridiculous which produced farces like SA/Eng WC SF match ( SA's target was changed from 22 in 13 balls to 22 in 1 ball). The only option which is better than D/L is, don't allow matches to be rain interrupted or so.

[gaurav92]

Really ? I think we shouldn't discuss something that wasn't in our hands :--D

[yoda]

The only option which is better than D/L is, don't allow matches to be rain interrupted or so.

Allowing for one extra day for every ODI as a backup plan is another option. Can you imagine a WC finals decided by D/L?

[hari504504]

too many would haves and should haves in that argument... same can be said if someone argued on SA's behalf.. That being said..D/L is a bad bad way to decide contests..they should come up with a new formula.

[Jersey #10]

We should be thankful to the D/L system for saving our face. We lost the game by only 48 runs thanks to the rain. Without rain, we would have lost by excess of 90 runs.

[Guest Shivani]

too much maths in d/l :headshake:

[Raghav_12]

Allowing for one extra day for every ODI as a backup plan is another option. Can you imagine a WC finals decided by D/L?

I have told D/L is best option is case of match being interrupted. It's great if we have an option of match getting continued on next day or any other way by which we can avoid abridging game, but if not we have D/L. No better method then D/L as of now.