4 May 2010

More Duckworth-Lewis agony for England

We've been here before in Twenty20 haven't we? As if the game isn't a lottery enough when played over the full 20 overs, when the D/L is brought into play it seems to massively favour the side batting second. West Indies will be very happy with the result, but even Chris Gayle said afterwards that they need to look into how the calculations are made such was the advantage it gave his side, and this is the second time they have benefited against England in the World Twenty20.

Recently Daniel Vettori also raised the fact that the D/L method stuggles to take into account powerplays, and that's a further issue. It's difficult to know what the solution is, but what I can say is that England's over scores were: 5, 16, 9, 11, 10, 9, 11, 4, 5, 8, 3, 6, 8, 4, 6, 16, 14, 27, 10, 9.

If you were to take their top 3 overs and bottom 3 overs that would equal 70: 27, 16, 16, 3, 4, 4.
If you took their top 6 overs that would equal 95: 27, 16, 16, 14, 11, 11.
Somehow West Indies were asked to chase 60.

We all understand that the D/L method takes into account historical data but in a format with virtually no historical data to go on, an alternative needs to be considered until there is a sufficient body of games to go from, you would think wouldn't you? Presumably the ICC are praying that England beat Ireland now (no guarantee at all given the lottery of Twenty20), but somehow I don't think they're that fussed about the best team winning if their slow and poor adoption of technology to help umpires is anything to go by...


GROV said...

I was having this conversation with a friend of mine last night after the game.

I really do not understand Duckworth Lewis or even the weather regulations in the league that I umpire in. I rely on a book of rules and a calculator and my fellow umpire.

I agree with you but an additional problem is not knowing when it is going to rain, if at all. I think that the basic problem in T20 is what constitutes a game and 5 overs is just too few. I suggest that 50% of the overs should be completed by the side batting second which is what happens in our league

Ed said...

I'd certainly agree that 5 is too few....I'd probably argue that anything less than 20 is too few! It's already a bit of a lottery - making it even shorter can make it farcical. One ball v one ball anyone?