Cruel on West Indies, D/L does them in

[ganeshran]

South Africa 1992: Lost to rain 1996: Lost to windies 1999: Lost in a tie 2003: Lost to D/L 2013: Beat rain, windies, tie and the D/L rule

[Sachin=GOD]

South Africa 1992: Lost to rain 1996: Lost to windies 1999: Lost in a tie 2003: Lost to D/L 2013: Beat rain, windies, tie and the D/L rule

this time the opposition got screwed by rain in a match featuring SA - is this a sign of SA winning this thing :nervous:

[vvvslaxman]

South Africa 1992: Lost to rain 1996: Lost to windies 1999: Lost in a tie 2003: Lost to D/L 2013: Beat rain, windies, tie and the D/L rule

baby steps .. after 4 losses a tie

[Era of Gold]

How is Pollard dumb? Can you imagine how difficult it is to figure out if to keep up with D/L or play with the entire 31 overs in mind? In any case, good tournament Windies. We beat 2 sides above us (If you count the warm up vs Sri Lanka) and drew with another.

[G_B_]

How is Pollard dumb? Can you imagine how difficult it is to figure out if to keep up with D/L or play with the entire 31 overs in mind? In any case, good tournament Windies. We beat 2 sides above us (If you count the warm up vs Sri Lanka) and drew with another.

The rain was always falling (lightly) when he got out. Its not as if a shower came out of nowhere. It just got heavier. At the ground he would have known the darker clouds were spotted over the horizon. WI needed less than 9 runs per over over a 6 over period with Sammy to come. The ball he attempted to hit was a good ball. The shot a poor shot.

[Era of Gold]

The rain was always falling (lightly) when he got out. Its not as if a shower came out of nowhere. It just got heavier. At the ground he would have known the darker clouds were spotted over the horizon. WI needed less than 9 runs per over over a 6 over period with Sammy to come. The ball he attempted to hit was a good ball. The shot a poor shot.

The rain kept coming lightly and stopping. So it was no certainty that the 31 overs wouldn't have been played. It was a 5 over period.

[coffee_rules]

South Africa will be the first and last winners of CT...Jao abhi chaap do..

[yoda]

The rain kept coming lightly and stopping. So it was no certainty that the 31 overs wouldn't have been played. It was a 5 over period.

In D/L, wickets are crucial. If you keep losing wickets, you end up playing catchup. They needed 5 runs from that over to keep ahead of D/L.

[ravishingravi]

Moral of the story. Don't have any ODI tournament in England.

[PriyankaSR]

Moral of the story. Don't have any ODI tournament in England.

+1 It's always raining. I just hope it doesn't rain in the India-pak match

[FischerTal]

Moral of the story. Don't have any ODI tournament in England.

SL too

[Old guy]

+1 It's always raining. I just hope it doesn't rain in the India-pak match

I hope it gets washed out:pray:

[Lord]

How is Pollard dumb? Can you imagine how difficult it is to figure out if to keep up with D/L or play with the entire 31 overs in mind? In any case, good tournament Windies. We beat 2 sides above us (If you count the warm up vs Sri Lanka) and drew with another.

wow I didnt know we have a WI fan amongst us.post more,maan:icflove:

[Lord]

The rain was always falling (lightly) when he got out. Its not as if a shower came out of nowhere. It just got heavier. At the ground he would have known the darker clouds were spotted over the horizon. WI needed less than 9 runs per over over a 6 over period with Sammy to come. The ball he attempted to hit was a good ball. The shot a poor shot.

no it wasnt falling when he played the shot.watch it again

[Era of Gold]

wow I didnt know we have a WI fan amongst us.post more' date='maan:icflove:[/quote'] I'll try :p

[hhunaeh]

In D/L there should be a way to give some weightage given to the quality of batsmen yet to bat. west indies would have won comfortably if they had played out all the overs.

[suraj]

West Indies is always exciting but slightly brainless team disappointing cause after India WI is my 2nd fav team

[suraj]

In D/L there should be a way to give some weightage given to the quality of batsmen yet to bat. west indies would have won comfortably if they had played out all the overs.

Algorithms will get too complicated - how can you account for "potential" vs. actual ??

[hhunaeh]

Algorithms will get too complicated - how can you account for "potential" vs. actual ??

can't they use average and strike rate?

[Lord]

I feel they should decide matches only after completed overs.like WI was 190/5 after 26 overs and should have won,then if the overs cant be completed,Pollard wicket would be ignored,else they'll get new target for 27 overs. that way teams can know thier targets and can plan,atm its too random