skip to main |
skip to sidebar
So far in this World Cup, we have had just one match where the Duckworth Lewis System had to be used - Pakistan v. Zimbabwe at Pallekele. And there was just one match that had to be called off due to rain - Sri Lanka v. Australia at Colombo. This is quite good as compared to the last two editions of the World Cup.
In 2007, even though no match had to be called off, but there were 7 matches that were decided by the use of Duckworth Lewis System, including the infamous and farcical Finals between Australia and Sri Lanka.
In 2003, there were 5 matches decided with the use of Duckworth Lewis System (including that tie between hosts South Africa and Sri Lanka that resulted in the elimination of the former in the first round itself) and there were 2 matches that had to be called off due to rain. Amongst the D/L results, there was the First Semi-Final between Australia and Sri Lanka (yet again... rain seems to follow these two countries' matches in World Cups) at Port Elizabeth. There was a minor rain interruption in the Finals between Australia and India as well, though not enough to curtail the match or cancel it.
Now, there are 7 more matches left - all Knockouts. 3 of those MAY face bad weather. I know that these weather reports do end up being unreliable on a lot of occasions like this one, but still I cannot help having a look at them.
3rd Quarter Final - South Africa v. New Zealand at Dhaka on 25th March - Weather.
4th Quarter Final - Sri Lanka v. England at Colombo on 26th March - Weather.
1st Semi Final - Winner of 3rd QF v. Winner of 4th QF at Colombo on 29th March - Weather.
Not the best reading, but I am hoping that like they have done all through this tournament, the Weather Gods will be kind enough to let cricket take center stage. Considering how D/L Method haunted South Africa in 2003, and calculated Sri Lanka's elimination in 2003 and 2007, the fans of these two countries should mutter a silent prayer for an uninterrupted game. Rains have invariably shown themselves in the final stages of last two World Cups, but lets hope they stay away this time.
(Note - If you want to know what will happen in case rain intervenes and the match cannot be completed, read the procedure specified towards the end of this page.)
Cricket Australia's news that it will be staging a new format of List 'A' cricket by splitting one 50-over innings into two 20-25 over innings has attracted a lot of comments and blogs on the blogosphere. Well, I have a few suggestions...
I have had these suggestions ever since Sachin Tendulkar made the comment that ODIs should be split into 2 innings of 25 overs each. If an official from Cricket Australia ever stumbles upon this blog, you may want to try out some of these suggestions, mate!
Suggestion No. 1: Allow new balls for 2nd innings -
In ODI cricket, the balls are changed after 34 overs and newer 'old' balls are brought in to replace the used ones. Instead, I would like to see 'new' balls used at the start of 2nd innings. This will allow pace bowlers a chance to get more purchase from lifeless pitches, and for batsmen, it will mean better pace on the ball on slower pitches. But this suggestion makes more sense when you read my Suggestion No. 2...
Suggestion No. 2: Allow different batsmen to resume the 2nd innings -
There are talks that the 2nd batting innings will be resumed exactly where the 1st one ended. I have a different opinion. Let the score remain as it was. If Team A was 140-2 in 25 overs, they will resume at that score. But if the team does not want to resume with the batsmen who were unbeaten at the end of the 1st innings, it should be allowed to change. The unbeaten batsmen can be qualified as retired and can come in some other time later during the 2nd innings.
Coupled with the earlier suggestion, it brings a whole new set of strategies in place. Should you go in with 2 sets of openers? Should the middle order be shortened? Where to play your slog over specialists? In fact, the concept of slog overs itself may see a change. To those who think that the idea of two sets of openers is insane, read on the next suggestion...
Suggestion No. 3: Allow all bowlers a maximum of 12 overs -
I heard suggestions somewhere that 2 bowlers should be allowed to bowl a maximum if 12 overs in an ODI. My question is: why stop at 2 bowlers? Why are we so miserly when we want to create rules that favour bowlers? Allowing 4 bowlers a quota of 12 overs (assuming a 50-over game) means that only 2 overs have to be managed out of your part timers. And if your regular bowlers are taking a beating, it will pay to have a genuine all-rounder.
Now, how does this compliment my Suggestion No. 2? If both the suggestions are implemented, then teams can go in with 3 genuine bowlers, 2 decent all rounders, 1 wicketkeeper, 4 openers and 1 solid middle order batsmen / another all rounder / bits-n-pieces player. There will be a lot more scope for flexibility if teams do not opt for 4 openers. They may even want to go for 3 openers and open the 2nd innings with the 3rd opener and one of the unbeaten well set batsmen.
There is a lot of scope for new strategies and there will be a need to change the laws relating to Powerplays as well as Duckworth - Lewis Method. A lot will need to be done. My suggestions might not go down well with everyone and I'd be delighted to read my readers' views on the same. I, for one, definitely feel, that it might just help One Day cricket survive.
It's raining everywhere...
It's raining in Pune, India... the place I stay! It's raining in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe... the place where Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe competed in a shortened ODI! And it's raining in Paris, France... disrupting the Men's Quarter Final match at the French Open 2010 between top seed and World No. 1 Swiss Roger Federer and the No. 5 seed Swede Robin Soderling in a repeat of last year's final!
Thankfully, tennis matches are suspended till the rain stops and are resume when the conditions permit unlike in cricket, where we apply the extraordinary brainwork of a certain Mr. Frank Duckworth and a certain Mr. Tony Lewis!
All I can say now is... rain rain go away, come again another day!
World Twenty20 Championship:
1st Semi - Final on 13th May at St. Lucia: England v Sri Lanka
2nd Semi - Final on 14th May at St. Lucia: Australia v Pakistan
World Women's Twenty20 Championship:
1st Semi - Final on 13th May at St. Lucia: Australia Women v India Women
2nd Semi - Final on 14th May at St. Lucia: West Indies Women v New Zealand Women
Preview of ENG v SL:
England are one of the two form teams of the tournament. Before their match against New Zealand, I had a feeling that they were over reliant on their star player Kevin Pietersen. But the way they went about dashing the Kiwi hopes of a semi-final was an eye opener. Rarely has the world seen an English cricket team so clinical and methodic in execution of its plans!
Apart from the limp to a mediocre 120 / 8 against Ireland, the English batting line up has never failed to cross 150, their best being 191 / 5 against West Indies in a match which they lost due to the anamolies of Duckworth Lewis method. Their bowling was untested during the initial group stages as the persistent rains at Guyana meant that their bowlers managed only 8.4 overs in the first 2 matches. However, the most striking feature of their bowling in the Super Eight stage has been the fact that they have managed to pick 25 wickets out of a possible 30. Its hard to imagine that at one stage of the tournament, they were in danger of being knocked out due to one bad batting performance and the numbers of Duckworth Lewis!
Sri Lanka, on the other hand, have had an up and down journey to the semis. They lost their first match - a low scoring thriller against New Zealand lost in the last over. Then they rode on the brilliance of Jayawardene to defeat Zimbabwe and West Indies, the latter in the Super Eight. But then came a very embarassing loss to the Aussies - a loss of 81 runs after being bundled out for 87. Fighting for survival, Sri Lanka then pulled off a last ball win with a six against India just after having knocked them out of the tournament. It was exactly the kind of win they needed to boost their confidence. Such close finishes intill in teams a new belief and a greater momentum. Sri Lanka will try to make the most of it.
The match promises to be an exciting affair. England will have the services of Kevin Pietersen once again... but there will also be a lot of expectations from them, a situation that they are not used to. Most observers believe that England deserve to be in the final... I feel the same - they deserve to be there, but I doubt that they will win the semis. Sri Lanka have a better track record at handling the kind of pressure that a semi-final carries. Mendis, dropped from the game against India, might make a return. Can KP be the talisman that many English sides of the past have longed for?
Preview of AUS Women v IND Women:
I have not followed the Women's version of this tournament as closely as the men's... but I have kept an eye on all the results. Australia has been unbeaten so far. They were lucky to take the 2 points in their opening match against the defending champions England after a tie even in the Super Over (they won on the rule of Sixes Countback). However, they were exemplary in their next match, beating the South Africans by 24 runs - the only blemish being that they couldn't bat out the 20 overs (bowled out with 3 balls to spare). They then went on to defeat the hosts West Indies by 9 runs to determine the group toppers and the chance to play in the 1st semi-finals.
India started disappointingly, losing to the Kiwis by 10 runs. However, they followed it up with demolition jobs over the neighbours - Pakistan and Sri Lanka. For the second time in as many years, this team has outperformed their more fancied male counterparts. In the semi-finals, the key will be to target the fragile, yet combustible, batting line up of the Australians. The Australians have been dismissed twice and have lost 27 wickets out of a possible 30 on their way to the semis.
India, on the other hand, have lost only 12 wickets in the tournament so far and the top order has clicked well. The flip side is that the middle order has had only one below par outing against the Kiwis. Their batters, revolving around Mithali Raj, will have to be wary of the fact that Australians are capable of scoring at a very fast clip. They will be hoping that their bowling partnership of captain Jhulan Goswami and Amita Sharma will take care of that problem.
I was on the Cricinfo home page when my friend asked me to check what is the weather expected to play like at St. Lucia when India takes on Sri Lanka in the penultimate Super Eight fixture today.
I went to the 'Live Scorecard' page of the match and checked the weather. It read 'Mostly Cloudy' at 29 degrees Celcius. Is that supposed to indicate that there are fair chances of rain during the day when two matches are to be played?
St. Lucia has been one of the 'wetter' Carribbean islands... and if any of the two matches today were to be rained out, it would be the end of the road for India's campaign. Even if the matches are not rained out, but affected by rain, then the lovely couple called Duckworth - Lewis comes into the picture.
Now, I have not idea whatsoever as to what happens at the time of Net Run Rate calculations if the results are based on D/L calculations. I welcome anyone who knows about this to enlighten me.
I just hope that the D/L angle, if it does come into play, does not jeopardise India's slim chances of qualifying for the semi-finals. There is certain optimism in Indian fans about today's match. The reasons are manifold.
First, a 20-run win does not sound too much of a task to achieve. It is not something that requires extraordinary effort. Secondly, most Indian fans do not consider Sri Lanka as a tough opponent (I don't know why!) and the fact that Sri Lanka themselves are struggling a bit helps the optimism in India. Lastly, the fact that Pakistan got through from a seemingly impossible situation yesterday has created some more flutters of hope.
In about 4 and a half hours from now, the situation will be clear. Or atleast as clear as it can be! We will still have to wait for the result of WI - Aus match. Keeping the fingers crossed!
A lot has happenned around the world since my last blog. A few more matches have been completed (subject to the moods of the Weather Gods) at the World Twenty20 Championship. No upsets yet... though Ireland almost managed one against England yesterday. Sachin Tendulkar has joined Twitter... stormed into Twitter would be more apt. He has 87552 followers when I last checked. That was in 37 hours and 19 minutes from his first tweet. And since I practice Sachinism, I decided to join twitter as well (http://twitter.com/cricsis).
Now back to the cricket that is happenning. Australia have just about wrapped up a win over Bangladesh... a commendable effort considering that they were looking down the barrel in the early stages of the match. Bangladesh showed promise, but once again the batting let them down. Sounds like a very similar story!
But its yesterday's match between England and Ireland that fascinated me a lot. In the end, the score books would show the result as "No Result", and the records would state that England have gone through to the next round. On one hand, the English team would feel that justice was served (they were unfairly declared losers by D/L Method against the Windies), whereas on the other hand, the Irish would feel that they were hard done by. They did extremely well to restrict the English team to a very gettable target. When the match was about the recommence, they would have needed 47 runs from 33 balls.
It would have been unfair for England had they been knocked out... but its not fair for Ireland either. But when was sport ever fair?
Ireland has taken big strides in international cricket over the past 3-4 years. Their progress has looked even more impressive after considering the fact that some of their promising players have been 'stolen' by England (Ed Joyce, Eoin Morgan). The contribution of guys like Trent Johnston and Niall and Kevin O'Brien has been very commendable and these guys deserve a pat on their backs.
One of my biggest reasons of me liking Twenty20 cricket is that it gives an opportunity to the lesser teams to shine on the big stage... if not shine, atleast show the promise (like Afghanistan). I really wish to see the Twenty20 World Cup expand to a 16-team format. It is difficult to play 16 teams in an ODI tournament, but can be managed in Twenty20s. So why not try it and allow more nations a chance to impress!
New Zealand 43 / 3 in 8.4 overs. The heavens open up. Mr. Duckworth and Mr. Lewis are invited to use their mathematics.
Before rain: 231 runs required from 248 balls at 5.59 runs per over.
After rain: 223 runs required from 218 balls at 6.14 runs per over.
The required run rate went up by 0.55 runs per over AND the Kiwis were denied the use of 12 Powerplay balls. Why? Just because the Aussies had managed to grab 3 wickets before the heavens opened up.
Vettori aptly said it: "There are a lot of things I don't understand about cricket, and that (D/L Method) is one of them. To lose two Powerplay overs and only have eight runs taken off, I don't know how that works. It makes things incredibly tough. It would have been better had the game gone the full 50 overs, it would have been a lot better for us."
So I decided to do a bit of research about this D/L Method. Using the official D/L Website, and the tables provided there, I found that I manually calculated the revised target at 265, which was 1 less than the actual target for the Kiwis today. So I made assumed that my calculations are sufficiently accurate, and I can proceed with my research. Here are my computations.
After 8.4 overs, having scored 43, had New Zealand lost fewer wickets, they would have had the following targets:
2 wickets down - Target 262.
1 wicket down - Target 259.
0 wickets down - Target 256.
So, here you go. Even if New Zealand had lost no wicket at the time of interruption, the target would have reduced by just 18 runs in 30 balls. The logic behind putting the 2nd Batting team in a numerically disadvantageous position is sound. In simple terms, the team batting 2nd has a target ahead and can pace the innings accordingly. The team batting 1st did not have any idea that there might be interruption in play later and therefore, their lack of such knowledge need to be compensated numerically.
However, such a reduction in target did not compensate New Zealand for their loss of 2 Powerplay overs. And that is where Daniel Vettori has a problem.
There are many issues that Duckworth Lewis method fails to consider:
1. In some cases, both the teams are aware that there might be an interruption in play later in the game, given the overhead conditions. In such a case, is there a need to compensate the team batting 1st?
There might be a case for using the weather forecasts and percentage chances of rain as numerical variables in calculations.
2. The method of dealing with the Powerplay overs also remains a concern, especially now when there is a Batting Powerplay and a Bowling Powerplay. There is also an added factor of only 2 fielders allowed outside the circle in the first 10 overs and 3 allowed in the other 2 Powerplays. As if this was not enough, we also have a rule of 2 compulsary catchers required in the first 10 overs.
If we assume that the catchers are used to take wickets (in normal cricket, they are!), then we might have to consider the number of wickets that could have gone down in the overs lost from the compulsary first 10-overs Powerplay.
There are various other factors that cannot be stated numerically, so I'll just count them: Pitch, Slower outfield after rain, Length of boundaries, Ball change after 34 overs, et cetera. You can help me with more of such shortcomings of the D/L Method.
I agree that all factors cannot be considered in setting revised targets. There will always be shortcomings, be it in the Duckworth-Lewis Method or the Jayadevan's Method (adopted by ICL in their competition). However, some of these concerns can be addressed because they can be quantified. And once we have some numbers, mathematicians simply love playing with them.
I do not have the intelligence of Mr. Frank Duckworth or Mr. Tony Lewis, both mathematicians par excellence. But I do believe that with their brains, they can address the concerns faced by a lot of cricket followers like me and indeed, captains like Dan.
