Cricket gets new rainrule

[barmyarmy]

Cricket gets new rain rule


Statisticians spotted inconsistencies in high-scoring matches
Rain-hit international matches are set to become fairer with a revision to the Duckworth/Lewis method.
The system has gained plaudits since its introduction worldwide in 1999, despite criticism of its complexity.

But co-inventors Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis found inconsistencies in high-scoring matches.

"The ICC believes that this change ensures that the system is now more accurate in setting targets," said ICC general manager David Richardson.

With rain threatening in March's World Cup final, India were 145-3 after 23 overs, chasing Australia's 359-2.

But they could still have taken the title simply by scoring 12 runs in the next two overs, had it then rained.

"We have had the answer to this problem available for use for several years," explained Lewis.

"Using the Professional Edition of the D/L method, India would have been 20 runs behind par - a much fairer reflection of the state of the game."

The International Cricket Council (ICC) will introduce the new Professional Edition for Friday's opening one-day international between Pakistan and South Africa.

The new system is more complicated than the original and will be entirely computerised.

But the existing edition, which can be calculated manually, will still be available for domestic competitions and at grounds without computers.

copyright BBC online 2003

This will hopefully iron out some of the occasional problems and teams sense of mal-justice. I have always felt teh team battingsecond has a huge advantage under the old DL system. During England v Namibia, England were behind early on in their innings when rain was threatening which would have handed Namibia victory.

 

[Nirav85]

i dont understand y dont they just do

Total(first team) - (run rate * overs lost)

and if 3.3 overs is lost...y dont they just take 2 mins and bowl the last three balls?

 

[rasi]

Originally posted by amir51@Oct 2 2003, 04:25 AM
i dont understand y dont they just do

Total(first team) - (run rate * overs lost)

and if 3.3 overs is lost...y dont they? just take 2 mins and bowl the last three balls?

That's because, wickets lost has much importance when chasing.

Consider this situation.

Say, you are chasing, 300 runs in 50 overs. In 30 overs, the match gets abandoned. The team chasing is 181/9 in 30 overs. According to what you suggested, the chasing team wins. But, it is impossible to score 120 runs in 20 overs with just one wicket in hand. In case of D/L, it would be something around 280 runs required to win.

 

[Dimuthu]

I just hope it's refined so nothing like the following will happen again.

In December/January 2000/2001 Sri Lanka tour of South Africa, in the 6th ODI Sri Lanka were something like 23/3 in around 10 overs. Then rain interrupted. SL resumed and reconsiliated to get 212 in 40 overs. (not all out)
BUT South Africa needed only 209 runs to win!!
Now that's incredible!

My view is since SL didn't know at first that it was goin to be a 40 over match, in which case they wud have attacked more, they shud have ADDED some runs! Or the very least kept it at that!
But how in the world can u justify them reducing the target!!

In the end SL won the match by 5 runs! (phew)
Tense it was though! 2 balls 12 to win 1 wkt left......and Shaun Pollock hit a 6 !!! then last Ball sanath fired it to polly's legs and he hit it straight bak and then ran Donald out!

Hope this system is fairer!


Peace
DT

 

[andrew_nixon]

That target seems perfectly sensible to me.

It's to do with the fact that Sri Lanka were 23/3 of 10 overs.

Duckworth Lewis takes into account the match situation.

 

[Dimuthu]

Weirdo! :P

I don't think a target should ever be reduced!! It's just plain unethical!
so Sue me! That's my opinion!


Peace
DT

 

[andrew_nixon]

I don't think a target should ever be reduced

And you call me a weirdo?

 

[Nirav85]

i tihnk ym formula should be used just if the teams come back on the field...but if the mathc is abnaded..then use dl

 

[andrew_nixon]

tihnk ym formula

Which formula?

 

[rasi]

Jeyadevan's rain rule is considered to be far superior to D/L , but all of us know that the ICC does not like 'the best', whatever it is.

 

[Nirav85]

i am talkingabout me first post in this topic

 

[andrew_nixon]

As Iniyan said the run rate rule is just crazy.

An example:

India score 320 in their innings.

Australia reach 240/2 of 30 overs.

They have been scoring at 8 an over and are pretty obviosuly on top of the game.

The rain comes down, and 15 overs are lost.

Australia now have to score 48 of 5 overs. They now have to score at nearly 10 an over to win the game. The game has been swung in India's favour due to the weather.

I fail to see how this could be fair.

Jeyadevan's rain rule is considered to be far superior to D/L

Which is that, and where can I read about it?

 

[rasi]

Mr. Jayadevan is an engineer from India who has devised a new rain rule for cricket, and it has been found to be better than D/L in almost every case you can consider.

Get the details and comparisons between D/L and J rules from here.

Also here.

 

[rasi]

And, I suppose you might have seen my first try at my very own rain rule B). I am now working on it to improve it further with quite a lot of help from (Dr.)Mj. Rajat Ghosh Ph.D, of the 'xyz' squadron ( I am sorry the squadron name is classified ). He is quite a person, someone who gave up a professor's job at the IIT to become a pilot in the IAF. He is now a senior trainer for Su-30's.

 

[andrew_nixon]

It's intersting but those comparisons are with the old D/L method, not the recently introduced one.

I'd like to see a comparison with the new method before I make a judgement.