ODI Tri-Series (Malaysia)

[aussie1st]

Moving Chanderpaul seems to have helped, since hes moved their top order has been blasting off. Morton is another talent as mentioned, he'll be a good backup opener. Bravo has the talent to stay in and make a big one while Smith is more the smasher but it suits the team.

 

[irottev]

Ok the D/L in this game was rather weird, India 309 in 50 overs (6.1?) West Indies would of needed 114 to win off 20 (5.8?) Is it easier to score 120 runs in 20 overs or 300 in 50? Obviously 120 in 20 overs. India can be seen a little unlucky in this game..

Thats true, they did have wickets in hand though. If India had of gotten a few more wickets then they would have won.

 

[aussie1st]

Wickets in hand mean nothing if they don't stay in. Just look at India 9 wickets in hand 200 odd up yet just got over 300 cause no one else really contributed and of course the big collapse by the Windies in game 1.

 

[irottev]

My point is, India had a chance to win if they had of gotten more wickets. 1 more early one could easily of won them the game.

It is an unfortonate way to lose the game and a lucky way to win it. But it's the only way.

 

[aussie_ben91]

The D/L system is pretty much unfair to the team batting first. Though, I heard it had been raining earlier that day on commentary and India won the toss and chose to bat. Tactically it was India's fault.

 

[IloveGilly]

The system is practically totally unfair. West Indies probably would not have been able to chase down the total, but especially when you can play a 50 game over in 20 overs. Totally unfair.

 

[MUFC1987]

How is the system unfair? The most important thing it takes into account are the wickets in hand. For example, had the WIndies been 4 down they would have needed more runs, as D/L suggests that with more wickets in hand, you can score at a higher rate. It's the fairest way to do it and saves every match where rain is involved to be abandoned as a draw.

 

[nightprowler10]

How is the system unfair? The most important thing it takes into account are the wickets in hand. For example, had the WIndies been 4 down they would have needed more runs, as D/L suggests that with more wickets in hand, you can score at a higher rate. It's the fairest way to do it and saves every match where rain is involved to be abandoned as a draw.

I agree. The system is fair enough. If you think it is unfair, make up your own formula and send it to ICC.

 

[wolf]

The system is fair, just that it is impossible to predict the future, so it is the best system out there.

 

[aussie_ben91]

How is the system unfair? The most important thing it takes into account are the wickets in hand. For example, had the WIndies been 4 down they would have needed more runs, as D/L suggests that with more wickets in hand, you can score at a higher rate. It's the fairest way to do it and saves every match where rain is involved to be abandoned as a draw.

It's unfair because you can't just predict what's going to happen, especially after the West Indies massive collaspe the other night. The chances of the West Indies winning if they lost another quick wicket, particulary Lara, would be slim... very slim. Besides, on paper I think it looks silly to have a side beat another side when one side has only batted for 20 overs when they haven't reached the other team's total or come anywhere near it for that matter.

 

[icyman]

Giving a second thought to the match, i get it now that the match was abandoned at 20 overs.
I must second the view that D/L is totally unfair.I agree with Ben 91 regd the collapse and stuff.

If you ppl look back at the World Cup Final, had the match been abandoned at that time,India would have won the Cup.That would definately have been unfair on the Aussies.

 

[cri]

How is the system unfair? The most important thing it takes into account are the wickets in hand. For example, had the WIndies been 4 down they would have needed more runs, as D/L suggests that with more wickets in hand, you can score at a higher rate. It's the fairest way to do it and saves every match where rain is involved to be abandoned as a draw.

i am sure u are aware of many matches lost even in the penultimate over when teams couldn chase down the score although they had wickets.the game isnt over untill the last bowl is bowled

 

[Sureshot]

This is unfair on the part of India! I just wish people dont blame Sachin for this.. I have always listened to people saying that when Sachin scores, India loses. He played a brilliant innings today on a relatively difficult & faulty pitch.

The bowling was pathetic today. Lot of 'hit me' balls from almost all the Indian bowlers who bowled today! Ajit Agarkar started off well but then got back to his usual old unpredictable self. Pathan is starting to be a consistent flop as a bowler. RP picked up a wicket but he gives away lot of runs too! Munaf isnt threatening at all in the ODI's. Bhajji was spanked by Lara today but Bhajji can get his bearings back soon!

If India can win against Australia, it would be fantastic and would set up a thrilling second half of the tournament leading into the final. If India dont win the next one, they will be under enormous pressure! But I wish Sachin continues this form. He has done extremely well in the ODI's that he played in recent times. Before injury, he had a great ODI series against Pakistan where he scored a 100 and 95.



Not quite fair. West Indies must have seen the weather conditions when they started their innings. They could have calculated their totals and would have come out with a specific plan to be ahead of the calculations if the weather intervenes! So its basically not fair on the Indians!

It's fair because it's the same rules for everyone, the only difference was that the rain came when WIndies were batting and who were all ahead of the rate. It's a perfectly fair rule.

Wow lucky win for the West Indies.

I am guessing India took theirt two powerplays? Because if they did, they were probably better off not using them. Then again they wern't to know. I think they have some calculatio nfor unused powerplays anyway.

India unlucky to lose. Rain affected matches suck.

I don't see how it's lucky for WIndies. They had gotten nearly half the runs with still 30 overs left. I'd have backed WIndies in the situation had it gone the whole distance.

 

[aussie_ben91]

I think the D/L rule needs to be changed into a scenario where a certain ammount of overs have to be past (eg: 35-40) before the actual D/L system can actually come into play or maybe even you'd have to be within 50-75 runs of the oppositions total for it to come into contention. I'd hate it if Australia were playing and for example McGrath wasn't playing and the oppostion got off to a flying start and it rained out after 10 overs and Australia lost due to Powerplays.

 

[Sureshot]

Giving a second thought to the match, i get it now that the match was abandoned at 20 overs.
I must second the view that D/L is totally unfair.I agree with Ben 91 regd the collapse and stuff.

If you ppl look back at the World Cup Final, had the match been abandoned at that time,India would have won the Cup.That would definately have been unfair on the Aussies.

You can't implement the possiblity of a collapse into D/L or a similar method. Because you just don't know when they happen, nor is it likely to have 2 major back to back collapses.

I think the D/L rule needs to be changed into a scenario where a certain ammount of overs have to be past (eg: 35-40) before the actual D/L system can actually come into play or maybe even you'd have to be within 50-75 runs of the oppositions total for it to come into contention. I'd hate it if Australia were playing and for example McGrath wasn't playing and the oppostion got off to a flying start and it rained out after 10 overs and Australia lost due to Powerplays.

There is a certain ammount of overs past. 20 overs each constitutes a game.

I agree in the sense that it's horrible to see a game go like this because you want it to be played out rather than decided through a system. But it isn't feasible.