England vs West Indies - World Twenty 20 - Live - SS1 Now

[Everest]

You cock.

Bring everyone in

 

[The Wizard]

f***ing farce. f*** YOU 'DUCKWORTH LEWIS'.

 

[Beach Hut]

Oh well need to beat the Paddies for a place in the super 6

 

[Blackadder]

Can't believe we got 191/5 and lost!

 

[Everest]

Shambles.

Absolute f***ing SHAMBLES

 

[Blackadder]

We would have won over 20 overs FACT

 

[ChapManiA]

What a farce. Usually D/L works that you need to match the runrate of the previous innings, then add on about another 20 runs, then an extra 10 runs for each additional wicket down. It's supposed to take into consideration the 'acceleration period' at the end of an innings, they use historical data to see what scoring rate teams achieve at the backend of the innings. England hit about 70 runs from overs 16-19.

I remember about 3 seasons ago, Sussex had a day night game away, they batted second, and had 2 overs knocked off their innings due to rain during the interval. Their target required from 38 overs was MORE than the opposition got from 40 overs.

In this game, it was made easier for the Windies.

 

[The Wizard]

f***ing joke. I'm not even joking, how the f*** can a team be asked to get 15% of the oppositions total with 22 balls and all wickets allowed to be used? That is honestly the strangest and most unfair rule I have ever heard of in ANY SPORT.

FIX.

 

[Driver8]

Obviously D/L doesn't work in 20/20.

 

[ChapManiA]

Nick Knight has just revealed that the ICC use the D/L scoring rates from the 50 over game. Hense the tiny total.

 

[footychick]

Booooooooooooo! That sucks.

 

[sam86]

Nick Knight has just revealed that the ICC use the D/L scoring rates from the 50 over game. Hense the tiny total.

Aye? What, by mistake, or because there's no real current Twenty 20 option?

 

[Papa Lazarou]

Nick Knight has just revealed that the ICC use the D/L scoring rates from the 50 over game. Hense the tiny total.

Ok, that's alright then... sake :US:

 

[ChapManiA]

There has been plenty of T20 games played internationally for the stat boffins to have something to work with. The acceleration period in 50 over cricket is nothing like that of T20.

 

[Skint Gull]

So 20 overs at 9.55 per over without losing 10 wickets is just about equalled by 6 overs at 10 per over still with the ability to lose 9 wickets isn't it? What a CROCK OF SHIT!

 

[keaton]

If they had to 60 in 6 overs, but only had three wickets that would have been just about fair, but it's cost us twice in two WCs against the Windies now and is taking the piss

 

[e77]

Duckworth Lewis is based entirely round the 40 and 50 over game, where it works well, and is based on the study of how games finished after the batting team were at a set position.

I would imagine they (or anyone else) would need a body of games to be built up before doing a Twenty20 version, which might be the case now as it has been going for 7 years.

 

[simmo]

Can't believe we got 191/5 and lost!

It was a farce, we bashed there bowling for about 15 of the 20 overs and ended up with a formidable score of 191/5, they did it for about 2.3 of ours (before the rain) and coasted to victory after (also may I add without the score increasing after they lost the 2 wickets, why didn't that happen??).

Let's hope we don't bat first if there is a bit of rain around today against Ireland!

 

[Gwylan]

I wonder if people would be moaning so much if it had been the other way round and WI had notched up 191 and lost when England hit 60.

There obviously needs to be a rethink on this but it's worth pointing out that WI didn't just win on D/L. They won on overall run rate too (both at the end product and when the rain came at 2.2 overs) and if the line had been drawn at 2.2 overs then WI were ahead of England too.

There clearly needs to be some rethinking about this but generally speaking, a recalculation due to rain is nearly always going to favour the side batting second as getting runs in fewer overs is always going to be easier.

 

[The Wizard]

I wonder if people would be moaning so much if it had been the other way round and WI had notched up 191 and lost when England hit 60.

There obviously needs to be a rethink on this but it's worth pointing out that WI didn't just win on D/L. They won on overall run rate too (both at the end product and when the rain came at 2.2 overs) and if the line had been drawn at 2.2 overs then WI were ahead of England too.

There clearly needs to be some rethinking about this but generally speaking, a recalculation due to rain is nearly always going to favour the side batting second as getting runs in fewer overs is always going to be easier.

The system is farcical and unfair. FACT.