• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Duckworth/Lewis

steds

Well-known member
Isn't it great? :D

It means England can win by 49 runs when it was really 156! (errm...right? :huh: )


It also means Harmy and Freddie only have to bowl half their alotted overs and then rest whilst the rain falls :D

It should rain more often!! :D


(I wonder, how many of you will take me seriously?? :p )
 

biased indian

Well-known member
steds said:
Isn't it great? :D

It means England can win by 49 runs when it was really 156! (errm...right? :huh: )


It also means Harmy and Freddie only have to bowl half their alotted overs and then rest whilst the rain falls :D

It should rain more often!! :D


(I wonder, how many of you will take me seriously?? :p )
:wacko: :wacko: :wacko: :wacko: :wacko:
 

JASON

Well-known member
steds said:
Isn't it great? :D

It means England can win by 49 runs when it was really 156! (errm...right? :huh: )


It also means Harmy and Freddie only have to bowl half their alotted overs and then rest whilst the rain falls :D

It should rain more often!! :D


(I wonder, how many of you will take me seriously?? :p )
You cannot be serious (Mc Enroe) :D
 
The Merits of the Duckworth-Lewis Method

I believe that the only thing inhibiting the Duckworth-Lewis method is the lack of understanding by the general public. From my twenty or so years of playing cricket at the highest level, I believe that it is the fairest possible way of measuring whether a team wins or not.

An example is the system used in the early days of limited overs cricket - how South Africa went from needing about a run a ball to needing more than twenty off the last ball. The Duckworth-Lewis method ensures that this does not occur. Now, here is the confusion.

In the original post, it was stated that: It means England can win by 49 runs when it was really 156!

As a matter of fact, the Sri Lankans only batted for half the time the English players did. So, this is a fair and equitable system. I don't personally see the viability for comment on that aspect.

Which reminds me, I really must change my details...I'm no longer playing, after all.
 

Waughney

Well-known member
I think that it is the best method for the moment.
PS: Wouldn't it be great if Steve Waugh actually became a member....
 

cbuts

Well-known member
its deffinatly the bestmethod ever used in cricket. im sure every one remebers the 1992 semi fiasco. its pretty fair as it takes in alot o f variables.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Anyone seriously doubting D\L needs their head examined IMO.
The 1992-semi is a never-will-again, thank God.
 
Top