How can this practically impossible target be justified?
Suppose we are playing a 50-overs-per-side game where only 10 overs per side are needed for the match to count. Team 1 sends in pinch-hitters and gets off to a wonderful start making 100 for no wicket after 10 overs. There is then a prolonged stoppage and when play can resume Team 1's innings is closed and there is only just time for Team 2 to face the minimum 10 overs. The D-L calculation (Standard Edition) gives Team 2's target as 151 in 10 overs.
Answers:
Who will replace Ashraful in the 3rd ODI against India?
11 Same playing regulations as in Q10. Team 1 makes the excellent score of 350 in its 50 overs and Team 2 starts its reply cautiously and reaches 40-0 in 10 overs. The heavens now open (or the floodlights fail) and further play is ruled impossible. Under the Standard Edition of the D-L system Team 2 is declared the winner by three runs. It was clearly already falling behind the run rate it needed even allowing for the fact that it had all its wickets intact, so how can this result be justified?The above represent the two worst-case scenarios for treatment by the Standard Edition of the D-L method. They could only give such extreme consequences with playing regulations that allow a minimum of 10 overs per side for the match to count. But a similar, though less exaggerated, injustice could still arise even with a minimum of 20 overs per side required.
The Standard D-L method was devised so that anyone could perform the calculations with nothing more than the single table of resource percentages and a pocket calculator. This was regarded as an essential requirement for the method. It was considered that to be totally dependent on a computer would mean that the method could not be used universally, it would be vulnerable to computer failure and it would be more difficult to explain how the targets were calculated.
The use of the simplifying single table of resource percentages meant that actual performance must necessarily be assumed to be proportional to average performance. In 95 per cent of cases this assumption is valid, but the assumption breaks down when an actual performance is far above the average, as is the case in the scenarios of Q10 and Q11 and in the record-breaking match between South Africa and Australia (March 2006) in which South Africa scored 438/9 to beat Australia’s 434 in 50 overs.
This problem has now been overcome by use of the Professional Edition and this has been in general use for most matches at the top level of the game, including ODIs since early in 2004. It can only be operated by using a computer program.
When does the Cricket season start and end, and the same goes for Football ?
The above represent the two worst-case scenarios for treatment by the Standard Edition of the D-L method. They could only give such extreme consequences with playing regulations that allow a minimum of 10 overs per side for the match to count. But a similar, though less exaggerated, injustice could still arise even with a minimum of 20 overs per side required.The Standard D-L method was devised so that anyone could perform the calculations with nothing more than the single table of resource percentages and a pocket calculator. This was regarded as an essential requirement for the method. It was considered that to be totally dependent on a computer would mean that the method could not be used universally, it would be vulnerable to computer failure and it would be more difficult to explain how the targets were calculated.
The use of the simplifying single table of resource percentages meant that actual performance must necessarily be assumed to be proportional to average performance. In 95 per cent of cases this assumption is valid, but the assumption breaks down when an actual performance is far above the average, as is the case in the scenarios of Q10 and Q11 and in the record-breaking match between South Africa and Australia (March 2006) in which South Africa scored 438/9 to beat Australia’s 434 in 50 overs.
This problem has now been overcome by use of the Professional Edition and this has been in general use for most matches at the top level of the game, including ODIs since early in 2004. It can only be operated by using a computer program.
More Questions & Answers...