Group D - Pakistan, West Indies, Zimbabwe, Ireland

[Goughy]

138-5 with 12 to go and the possibility of rain in the air.

5 an over needed to make a decent 200 but they will have to play well and the spinners are tying them down.

EDIT Taylor on

 

[steds]

Rain rain go away.

 

[silentstriker]

How in the hell does a team ever chase more than what the opposing team scores?

 

[BoyBrumby]

How in the hell does a team ever chase more than what the opposing team scores?

Neil's our de facto Duckworth-Lewis expert. We lesser mortals take it as gospel.

It'd be nice to see the Micks get a coupla early wickets.

 

[silentstriker]

I mean - just make it 48 over game. Not 50 and also increase the amount of runs. Makes no sense to me logically.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Right, extreme example to work it out.

England are batting first against Australia in a fifty-over game. After 20 overs, they get to 83/0 (forget the fact that Ed Joyce would have been out by now at least six times and just roll with it), at which point the clouds open. That's a pretty damn good platform and, all things considered, England will end up upping their run-rate from the present 4.15 (total - 207).

In fact, D/L's charts suggest that England would go on to end up, on average, with 278 from their fifty overs from that starting position - a very decent proposition (0 down after 20 overs is equivalent to 24.9% of a completed innings)

Now, back to our rain-drenched ODI, let's pretend the clouds clear off to leave Australia 20 overs to make their chase. Can't set them 84 - that would be a walk in the park - nor can w set them a chase based on that 278 (5.56rpo), which we would if they had a full 50 available: that would only be 112 to win, simple in a Twenty20.

So we work out how a twenty-over innings usually scores, compared to a fifty-over innings. The D/L tables say it's 56.6%. So they have an extra 31.7% of innings resource!

To calculate the target, we then add the extra percentage of a par ODI score (235) to the initial 83 scored by England, and get a target of 158 to win - something that's pretty much an equivalent proposition to that chase of 278.

Hope that makes sense!

 

[silentstriker]

Right, extreme example to work it out.

England are batting first against Australia in a fifty-over game. After 20 overs, they get to 83/0 (forget the fact that Ed Joyce would have been out by now at least six times and just roll with it), at which point the clouds open. That's a pretty damn good platform and, all things considered, England will end up upping their run-rate from the present 4.15 (total - 207).

In fact, D/L's charts suggest that England would go on to end up, on average, with 278 from their fifty overs from that starting position - a very decent proposition (0 down after 20 overs is equivalent to 24.9% of a completed innings)

Now, back to our rain-drenched ODI, let's pretend the clouds clear off to leave Australia 20 overs to make their chase. Can't set them 84 - that would be a walk in the park - nor can w set them a chase based on that 278 (5.56rpo), which we would if they had a full 50 available: that would only be 112 to win, simple in a Twenty20.

So we work out how a twenty-over innings usually scores, compared to a fifty-over innings. The D/L tables say it's 56.6%. So they have an extra 31.7% of innings resource!

To calculate the target, we then add the extra percentage of a par ODI score (235) to the initial 83 scored by England, and get a target of 158 to win - something that's pretty much an equivalent proposition to that chase of 278.

Hope that makes sense!

Thanks for the explanation - but why not just give WI 48 overs to get the score...the same amount IRE had?

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Thanks for the explanation - but why not just give WI 48 overs to get the score...the same amount IRE had?

Because Ireland thought they had 50 overs and batted accordingly. West Indies know they have 48 overs and will bat accordingly.

See Neil's example. You'd want Australia to chase 84 in 20 overs.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Because the overs lost in Ireland's innings were 47 and 48, generally high-scoring overs. West Indies lose overs 1 and 2, generally low-scoring.

 

[roseboy64]

Was at the game today. Was great. The only disappointing aspect really was the prices for food and drink, with costs doubling and tripling in some respects. Due to having to fork out some extra cash because where I intended to be seated was sold out, I went without food during the match. certainly not going to pay over the odds for something now when after the match I could get it much cheaper and not have to face such long lines. Anyway, the crowd was brilliant and the atmosphere was good even with the rain. Good times, good times. Helps though that the home team was winning/won.

 

[roseboy64]

Also, the Irish are some great folks. They were lively even though it was clear they had no hope of winning when Chanderpaul got going. Hated that they took off thier shirts but one guy had a Manchester United badge tattoo so it wasn't all bad.

 

[roseboy64]

Long Lines ?? I thought because of VISA problems overseas tourists were struggling to get to the games. I thought thats why a lot of the marquee matches earlier in the tournament had only a smattering of people. Have the crowds increased suddenly now, roseboy ??

I meant for food. The game today was almost sold out but that was mostly due to Jamaicans and other West Indians. With Jamaica having a larger population and thus having more people who can afford to attend a match than the smaller islands, it's only natural that Sabina Park would have bigger crowds. Hoepfully it'll pick up though in the Super 8s.

 

[Beleg]

Nice to see WI play so professionally. So far, five teams (Aus, SA, WI, Sri Lanka and NZ) look in great form.

 

[roseboy64]

The crowd was kinda peeved at Sarwan for batting so slow though.

 

[GIMH]

Right, extreme example to work it out.

England are batting first against Australia in a fifty-over game. After 20 overs, they get to 83/0 (forget the fact that Ed Joyce would have been out by now at least six times and just roll with it), at which point the clouds open. That's a pretty damn good platform and, all things considered, England will end up upping their run-rate from the present 4.15 (total - 207).

In fact, D/L's charts suggest that England would go on to end up, on average, with 278 from their fifty overs from that starting position - a very decent proposition (0 down after 20 overs is equivalent to 24.9% of a completed innings)

Now, back to our rain-drenched ODI, let's pretend the clouds clear off to leave Australia 20 overs to make their chase. Can't set them 84 - that would be a walk in the park - nor can w set them a chase based on that 278 (5.56rpo), which we would if they had a full 50 available: that would only be 112 to win, simple in a Twenty20.

So we work out how a twenty-over innings usually scores, compared to a fifty-over innings. The D/L tables say it's 56.6%. So they have an extra 31.7% of innings resource!

To calculate the target, we then add the extra percentage of a par ODI score (235) to the initial 83 scored by England, and get a target of 158 to win - something that's pretty much an equivalent proposition to that chase of 278.

Hope that makes sense!

Does make sense actually. I was going to post a question about this so I'm glad it's been answered.