View Poll Results: Duckworth Lewis; good or bad?

Voters
14. You may not vote on this poll
  • D/L FTW! Lets keep it.

    12 85.71%
  • D/L sucks. Lets use something better.

    2 14.29%
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 94

Thread: Duckworth/Lewis - Fair?

  1. #31
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    The great state of New South Wales
    Posts
    42,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    rest assured
    ~ Cribbage

  2. #32
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    5,657
    The folly of the 1992 World Cup regulations were best highlighted in the Group Match between Pakistan and England. Pakistan set England a target of 75 from 50 overs before the rain came. The England target was reduced to 11 less runs in 34 less overs (64 off 16).
    As for the poor old South African, these days Wessels would probably cop a six month ban for his gamesmanship.

  3. #33
    U19 Cricketer albo97056's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    London and UEA Norwich
    Posts
    455

    Icon8

    I think everyone here is missing the real injustice of todays game. DL is fair, no probs with it. My problem is England only got 8 powerplay overs back when India got 17ish. Thats ridiculous!

    I understand when the game is reduced powerplay overs reduce as well, but that should only be before the game has started. Once a side has batted - theyve used those pp overs and now they gain an advantage because the 2nd side have half the pp overs.... Whats so bad about giving england 17 pp overs today?

  4. #34
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Umm... so it'd have been fair for England to have 17 out of 22 overs as Powerplay when they knew they only had 22 overs to face?

    No.

    India played their Powerplays as if they were batting 50 (or for 3 overs' worth, 43) overs. That's completely different to knowing that Powerplay will be in force for the vast majority of your innings.

    Mind, given that England's batsmen performed infinitely better in the just-concluded game with non-Powerplay in place than Powerplay, such an outcome might well have seen England knocked-over far more cheaply than they were.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006


  5. #35
    U19 Cricketer albo97056's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    London and UEA Norwich
    Posts
    455
    What im saying is that given dl takes into account everything to do with how many overs you think you would have gotten etc, why do we then have to make another adjustment? The whole point of dl is to balance the chase perfectly so 22 overs india got is equivalent to the 22 overs england are going to get, but then once we get that new number... they screw around with the power plays! Making it all very uneven again.

    IF we were chasing the same total or a run rate adjusted total like the old days then having 17 pp overs would be unfair, but with those extra 30 odd runs youve already balanced the whole thing statistically... theres no need to reduce pp. UNLESS dl takes into account pp, which from my recollection it doesnt.

    EDIT long story short.. everything dl doesnt consider should be exactly the same
    Last edited by albo97056; 23-11-2008 at 04:51 PM.

  6. #36
    Soutie Langeveldt's Avatar
    Pinball Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    29,512
    Its the fairest system anyone has come up with.. Rarely do you get a result or target where you think, no thats unfair to a certain side.. It may be confusing but it always seems fair and understandable as to how the targets are achieved
    Quote Originally Posted by vic_orthdox View Post
    Don't like using my iPod dock. Ruins battery life too much.
    Quote Originally Posted by benchmark00 View Post
    Thanks Dick Smith. Will remember to subscribe to your newsletter for more electronic fun facts.

    ****.

  7. #37
    Hall of Fame Member _Ed_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Auckland, Aotearoa
    Posts
    19,799
    Haha, knew there'd be a thread like this as soon as I saw the result of that game.

  8. #38
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by albo97056 View Post
    What im saying is that given dl takes into account everything to do with how many overs you think you would have gotten etc, why do we then have to make another adjustment? The whole point of dl is to balance the chase perfectly so 22 overs india got is equivalent to the 22 overs england are going to get, but then once we get that new number... they screw around with the power plays! Making it all very uneven again.

    IF we were chasing the same total or a run rate adjusted total like the old days then having 17 pp overs would be unfair, but with those extra 30 odd runs youve already balanced the whole thing statistically... theres no need to reduce pp. UNLESS dl takes into account pp, which from my recollection it doesnt.

    EDIT long story short.. everything dl doesnt consider should be exactly the same
    IIRR, D\L has been adjusted to some degree to take into account Powerplays, though obviously there's only 3 years' worth of data so far.

    However, there is simply no way you can set a team out knowing that 17\22nds of their innings will be Powerplay. Just not fair.

  9. #39
    International Coach morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dishing out broken ****ing floggings
    Posts
    10,689
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    He will punish you, rest assured.
    5-0

    RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012

    Proudly supporting the #2 cricketer of all time.

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Cairns
    Posts
    310
    They should have just calculated india's target after 20 overs and turned into a 20 20 where they would have been more familiar. The game should still be counted as an odi though. Too Bad for England their have been plenty of other incidents where teams have been screwd over and you guys don't care it's only when it happens to your team.

  11. #41
    International Coach biased indian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    office
    Posts
    11,008
    Quote Originally Posted by albo97056 View Post
    I think everyone here is missing the real injustice of todays game. DL is fair, no probs with it. My problem is England only got 8 powerplay overs back when India got 17ish. Thats ridiculous!

    I understand when the game is reduced powerplay overs reduce as well, but that should only be before the game has started. Once a side has batted - theyve used those pp overs and now they gain an advantage because the 2nd side have half the pp overs.... Whats so bad about giving england 17 pp overs today?
    But the fact is that england actulay scored less in those 8 overs ..think in the last game england would have been happy had there been no power play overs at all
    Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
    RIP Craigos

  12. #42
    gwo
    gwo is offline
    U19 Debutant
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    308
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    D\L is acknowledged by all senior mathematicians as the fairest possible system imagineable.
    Yes... because making sweeping generalisations helps your argument heaps.

    For all you know, all "senior" (again what the hell do you mean by this) mathematicians might not give a flying fruitcake about D/L or cricket.

    But hey, making sweeping generalisations makes you sound like you know what you're talking about.

    D/L is a fair system, but to try and use this as a basis of your argument for it is a load of ****.

  13. #43
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Rahmaniverse
    Posts
    7,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    Personally i prefer the pre-1971 method.
    ODIs before 1971???

  14. #44
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Cairns
    Posts
    310
    Quote Originally Posted by gwo View Post
    Yes... because making sweeping generalisations helps your argument heaps.

    For all you know, all "senior" (again what the hell do you mean by this) mathematicians might not give a flying fruitcake about D/L or cricket.

    But hey, making sweeping generalisations makes you sound like you know what you're talking about.

    D/L is a fair system, but to try and use this as a basis of your argument for it is a load of ****.
    Yeah here here mate well said.

  15. #45
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    #7Thompson
    Posts
    47,162
    Quote Originally Posted by Precambrian View Post
    ODIs before 1971???
    whooooosh
    #JFT96
    "I can't promise anyone success but I can promise them a trip to the moon." - John King
    SWA

    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Fair enough Freddy....I eat my words
    By Zinzan in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 30-08-2005, 12:47 AM
  2. The ICC Fair Play Award
    By Tim in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 15-09-2004, 11:46 PM
  3. God save our Queen...Advance Australia Fair
    By Jamee999 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 26-11-2003, 01:53 AM
  4. England or Somerset?
    By jf2001 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 19-05-2003, 01:00 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •