D & L ARE NOT CRICKETERS AND I DONT THINK THEY MUST BE HAVING MUCH KNOWLEDGE ABOUT CRICKET. ITS THE STPD ICC WHO INTRODUCED THIS RULE. THIS SHUD BE SCRAPPED. THE RESULT SHUD NOT BE ONE SIDED SIMPLY THRU SOME STPD SATISTICS BUT BY THE GAME EACH SIDE PLAYS.
Re: THESE RULES AR NOT MADE BY CRICKETERS
by Chennai Tiger on Mar 21, 2009 10:58 AM
D&L is by far the fairest method I have seen in the last 20 years in truncated matches. It is very clear (but not straight-forward for anyone to calculate manually). The issue here is clear mistake by Dyson than D&L method itself. It gives weightage to lost wickets which is fair - if u hv less # of wkts in hands, more difficult to score remaining target since with less # of wkts, chasing team takes less risk. If you think D&L is not fair, u don't know cricket.
Re: Re: THESE RULES AR NOT MADE BY CRICKETERS
by Haramohan Roy on Mar 21, 2009 11:05 AM
Granted, it may be a very good method. But, the problem is - since it is not easily understood by ordinary humans, often the fans think that their team has been victimised which gives rise to renetment. We should demand for a transparent method.
Re: Re: Re: THESE RULES AR NOT MADE BY CRICKETERS
by ravi atreya on Mar 21, 2009 11:24 AM
this is a great rule. but pepole are not understand it well. so try to learn this method and i think this is the only rule which can finish game in case when rain or other things are happen. one more thing that umpire will take charge this rule on ground and tell both team what r the postion after over by over
Re: Re: Re: THESE RULES AR NOT MADE BY CRICKETERS
by prakash mohanasundaram on Mar 22, 2009 03:31 PM
Mr. Roy, Just because fans dont understand, we cannot change the D/L method. Every game has rules, some of them simple, some complex. But it is those rules that make the game what it is. Imagine playing tennis without lines and net!!. The D/L is actually a good method, it is by far the best deal teams can get.
In the same series in Tests, England needed one wkt of Windies when bad light came in with 10 overs to be bowled. Windies tailenders were given the option to continue or not. They said no..and the test was drawn.
This will be a sweet revenge by England...in ODI !!
The match was won by England not with their own skills but due to poor maths of the coaches/ technicians from WI side. ICC should come forward and see that if their is match delay, there should be some kind of visual indication on the scoreboad about the amount of runs to be scored after every ball so that there is no confusion for both teams. This should be made mandatory at every ground. This is a farce played by England team on the opponents.
Imagine if Greg Chappell had done this miscalculation while he was the coach, in a match against Australia :-) He would have been killed on the streets!
This is unbelievable. How could Dyson have messed it up. Lucky idiots from England. Remember the 92 WC semifinal. Rain interrupted play for 12 minutes with South Africa 231/6 off 42.5 overs and the over limit was reduced to 43 from the actual 45 overs with the target reduced by 1 to 252. (The SCG scoreboard and the TV coverage incorrectly displayed South Africa needing 22 off 7 balls, then 22 off 1 ball - the actual requirement to win was 21 off 1 ball. The idiots won then also denying SA a possible win.
Re: Luck by chance
by Chennai Tiger on Mar 21, 2009 11:02 AM
It was not D&L method then - one reason why D&L was introduced which gives by far the best method to calculate target fairly;
Re: Re: Luck by chance
by prakash mohanasundaram on Mar 22, 2009 03:34 PM
very true, it was not D/L method back then, thats probably the reason why SA suffered
This is the only way the bloody Poms know how to win! Imagine the "oohhs..." and "ahhhs..." in the British press had there been a reversal of roles here. "It isn't Cricket", would've been the chorus. All's well if Eng wins, eh? Pathetic sods! A crying shame, nevertheless!
