who is duckworth lewis?

[HILTS3188]

point 1/ who is duckworth lewis?

point 2/ how does this system work?

and lastly point 7/ how can this be fair to the opening team who have credited a high score?

please discuss

 

[cogzzi]

who is duckworth lewis?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

point 1/ who is duckworth lewis?


Surely he means either who ARE duckworth and Lewis??
Or
WHAT is Duckworth/Lewis

Turnip!

 

[cogzzi]

As any South African will tell you after the last world cup's Duckworth/Lewis fiasco..

Its also unfair on the team batting second

 

[xanderbiscuits]

Ok so here are a couple of web pages which explain it all

http://www.jritson.demon.co.uk/dl.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duckworth-Lewis_method

It is fair for both sides because of wickets in hand. If you compare twenty20 scores to 50 overs game scores.

highest score for international 50 over match is 443/9 by Sri Lanka. This is 8.86 runs an over.

The highest twenty20 score is 250/3 by Somerset. this is 12.5 runs an over.

So because of this if a chasing team has reduced overs then they will be asked to get more runs per over the less time they have to bat.

I hope this makes sense, if not you have the links to check.

 

[Richard]

Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis are those who had the sense to realise that a simple scoring-rate method was an unfair way to judge a one-day game.

IE, 120\7 off 20 overs chasing 299 on the scoring-rate method would mean the 120\7 team won. Which is ludicrous.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Completely fair, completely transparent and anyone who continues to claim that there is a better way of determining the winner of a rain-affected match than the resource proportion method is showing themselves utterly short in understanding the dynamics of the game

As for explanations, you can't go much wrong with Stefano's quality call in the Intro to Cricket thread.

 

[Richard]

Completely fair, completely transparent and anyone who continues to claim that there is a better way of determining the winner of a rain-affected match than the resource proportion method is showing themselves utterly short in understanding the dynamics of the game

Those being?

 

[C_C]

Completely fair, completely transparent and anyone who continues to claim that there is a better way of determining the winner of a rain-affected match than the resource proportion method is showing themselves utterly short in understanding the dynamics of the game

I agree that it is the best system out there but it is far from being completely fair. Ask South Africa in 1992 world cup if scoring 22 runs off 1 ball was 'fair' when they were coasting to victory.

D/L method is most often unfair to the side batting second- since the variables are stacked against them.

 

[Richard]

I agree that it is the best system out there but it is far from being completely fair. Ask South Africa in 1992 world cup if scoring 22 runs off 1 ball was 'fair' when they were coasting to victory.

D\L was 5 years from being invented at that time and 7 from being adopted into the international game.

 

[C_C]

D\L was 5 years from being invented at that time and 7 from being adopted into the international game.

Doh!

 

[Richard]

Yeah, that game was the best possible example of why D\L was needed.

 

[Barney Rubble]

The highest twenty20 score is 250/3 by Somerset. this is 12.5 runs an over.

I'd just like to (completely unnecessarily and irrelevantly) point out that I was there at that game.

 

[rafa5times]

I'd just like to (completely unnecessarily and irrelevantly) point out that I was there at that game.

yeah i will explain who they arehilts3188 jack duckworth former england schoolboy player just didnt make the grade at the highest level and carl lewis specialist subject on celebrity sports mastermind was cricket yeah think thats all you need to no.

 

[Richard]

I'd just like to (completely unnecessarily and irrelevantly) point out that I was there at that game.

And I was watching on TV.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis are those who had the sense to realise that a simple scoring-rate method was an unfair way to judge a one-day game.

IE, 120\7 off 20 overs chasing 299 on the scoring-rate method would mean the 120\7 team won. Which is ludicrous.

I always thought it was Jack Duckworth tbh

 

[Zinzan]

As any South African will tell you after the last world cup's Duckworth/Lewis fiasco..

Its also unfair on the team batting second

Not always ...the majority of the time yes, but i've also seen several occasions where in favours the team batting 2nd

 

[Richard]

I always thought it was Jack Duckworth tbh

.

The D/L method was devised by two English statisticians, Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis. It was first used in international cricket in the second game of the 1996/7 Zimbabwe versus England One-day International series, which Zimbabwe won by 7 runs.

 

[marc71178]

I agree that it is the best system out there but it is far from being completely fair. Ask South Africa in 1992 world cup if scoring 22 runs off 1 ball was 'fair' when they were coasting to victory.

Erm, how exactly were they coasting to victory?

23 from 13 balls is not coasting.

 

[Richard]

The misperceptions about that game are truly amzing.

 

[Neil Pickup]

I ran it through the D/L machine the other year - the last time someone trotted out the "poor old hard-done-by South Africa" line, and England would have won by a convincing margin.

Statistics, unlike so many, don't forget the way SA slowed the over rate to such an extent that England could only use 45 of their 50 allotted overs.