Just for curiosity I am asking that if it was a 17 over match only instead of 20 overs and Aussie would have scored 158 runs, then how much India need to score to win? 159 or 174? I know this DL method has a complex algorithm, but just because a match is rain hit, why the opponent need more runs to win. Iff DL method says that batting second has more favourable conditions in a rain hit match,, then why not in a normal match?
Re: What if
by shib roy on Nov 21, 2018 11:47 PM
If it was 17 Over match from beginning, then the surge by the Aussies would have started from 13th over or so.
what makes you say that India was outclassed? we had to make more runs then the Aussies and that oo in as many overs as the Aussies faced thanks to this Duckworth Method - The inventors sure deserve Nobels. We fought till the last and it was sheer bad luck that found us 4 runs short.
Re: Re: India was never outclassed
by shib roy on Nov 21, 2018 11:45 PM
Poor journalism. But have to agree that this lie caught our attention to this apparently dead article.
what makes you say that India was outclassed? we had to make more runs then the Aussies and that oo in as many overs as the Aussies faced thanks to this Duckworth Method - The inventors sure deserve Nobels. We fought till the last and it was sheer bad luck that found us 4 runs short.
Re: India was never outclassed
by lakshmanan rajan on Nov 21, 2018 07:40 PM
As always luck plays it's part. Even against the 3rd grade west indies team we won many matches at the last ball_the tie and the t,20. Didn't we 'outclass'them?
