Confused about Duckworth Lewis Cricket Rules? Here is Explanation new

The Duckworth-Lewis Stern Method Mystery: Explained

Are you always confused about the complicated DLS system that governs weather interrupted second innings in a cricket match? You are not the only one though…

Here I will be explaining in simple ways that;

  • When & why was this Duckworth- Lewis Stern (DLS) method applied in cricket?
  • How were things being managed before DLS method in cricket?
  • In which conditions DLS method is applicable and where it is not?
  • Some calculation examples with tables & graphs
  • And why this method is criticized?

The Duckworth–Lewis–Stern method (DLS) is a mathematical formulation designed to calculate the target score for the team batting second in a limited overs cricket match interrupted by weather or other circumstances.

Who developed the DLS Method?

The method was devised by two English statisticiansFrank Duckworth and Tony Lewis and was formerly known as the Duckworth–Lewis method (D/L).

When was DLS Method introduced in Cricket?

It was introduced in 1997, and adopted officially by the ICC in 1999.

 

When DLS is applicable?

  • For 50-over matches decided by D/L, each team must face at least 20 overs for the result to be valid.
  • For Twenty20games decided by D/L, each side must face at least five overs. These minimum limits do not apply to innings where a team is bowled out or reaches its target early.
  • If the conditions prevent a match from reaching this minimum length, it is declared a no result.

Which methods were being used before DLS?

Various methods had been used previously to resolve rain-affected cricket games, with the most common being the Average Run Rate method and the Most Productive Overs method.

These earlier methods, while simple in nature, had intrinsic flaws that meant they produced unfair revised targets that altered the balance of the match, and were easily exploitable:

  • The Average Run Rate method took no account of how many wickets were lost by the team batting second, but simply reflected how quickly they were scoring when the match was interrupted. So, if a team felt a rain stoppage was likely, they could attempt to force the scoring rate without regard for the corresponding highly likely loss of wickets, skewing the comparison with the first team.
  • The Most Productive Overs method also took no account of wickets lost by the team batting second, and effectively penalized the team batting second for good bowling by ignoring their best overs in setting the revised target.

Calculations & Simple Examples:

The essence of the D/L method is ‘resources‘. Each team is taken to have two ‘resources’ to use to score as many runs as possible:

  • The number of oversthey have to receive;
  • And the number of wicketsthey have in hand.

At any point in any innings, a team’s ability to score more runs depends on the combination of these two resources they have left. Looking at historical scores, there is a very close correspondence between the availability of these resources and a team’s final score, a correspondence which D/L exploits.

Team2’s Par Score = Team1’s Score x (Team2’s Resources/Team1’s Resources)

If it is a 50-over match and Team 1 completed its innings uninterrupted, then they had 100% resource available to them, so the formula simplifies to:

Team2’s Par Score = Team1’s Score x Team2’s Resources

The par score increases with every ball bowled and every wicket lost, as the amount of resource used increases

 

Example – 2003 Cricket World Cup Final (Australia vs India){\displaystyle {\text{Team 2’s par score }}={\text{ Team 1’s score}}\times {\text{Team 2’s resources}}.}

Australia batted first and scored 359 from 50 overs. As Australia completed their 50 overs, their total resources used R1=100%, so India’s par score throughout their innings was: 359 x R2/100%, where R2 is the amount of resource used to that point.

  • As shown in the first line of the table below, after 9 overs India were 57-1, and 41 overs and 9 wickets remaining equates to 85.3% of resources, so 100% − 85.3% = 14.7% had been used.
  • India’s par score after 9 overs was therefore 359 x 14.7%/100% = 52.773, which is rounded down to 52.
  • During the six balls of the 10th over India scored 0, 0, 0, 1 (from a no ball), loss of wicket, 0.[46]
  • At the start of the over India were ahead of the par score, but the loss of the wicket caused their par score to jump from 55 to 79, which put them behind the par score.

When DLS is applicable?

  • For 50-over matches decided by D/L, each team must face at least 20 overs for the result to be valid.
  • For Twenty20games decided by D/L, each side must face at least five overs. These minimum limits do not apply to innings where a team is bowled out or reaches its target early.
  • If the conditions prevent a match from reaching this minimum length, it is declared a no result.

Which methods were being used before DLS?

Various methods had been used previously to resolve rain-affected cricket games, with the most common being the Average Run Rate method and the Most Productive Overs method.

These earlier methods, while simple in nature, had intrinsic flaws that meant they produced unfair revised targets that altered the balance of the match, and were easily exploitable:

  • The Average Run Rate method took no account of how many wickets were lost by the team batting second, but simply reflected how quickly they were scoring when the match was interrupted. So, if a team felt a rain stoppage was likely, they could attempt to force the scoring rate without regard for the corresponding highly likely loss of wickets, skewing the comparison with the first team.
  • The Most Productive Overs method also took no account of wickets lost by the team batting second, and effectively penalized the team batting second for good bowling by ignoring their best overs in setting the revised target.

Calculations & Simple Examples:

The essence of the D/L method is ‘resources‘. Each team is taken to have two ‘resources’ to use to score as many runs as possible:

  • The number of oversthey have to receive;
  • And the number of wicketsthey have in hand.

At any point in any innings, a team’s ability to score more runs depends on the combination of these two resources they have left. Looking at historical scores, there is a very close correspondence between the availability of these resources and a team’s final score, a correspondence which D/L exploits.

Team2’s Par Score = Team1’s Score x (Team2’s Resources/Team1’s Resources)

If it is a 50-over match and Team 1 completed its innings uninterrupted, then they had 100% resource available to them, so the formula simplifies to:

Team2’s Par Score = Team1’s Score x Team2’s Resources

The par score increases with every ball bowled and every wicket lost, as the amount of resource used increases

Example – 2003 Cricket World Cup Final (Australia vs India){\displaystyle {\text{Team 2’s par score }}={\text{ Team 1’s score}}\times {\text{Team 2’s resources}}.}

Australia batted first and scored 359 from 50 overs. As Australia completed their 50 overs, their total resources used R1=100%, so India’s par score throughout their innings was: 359 x R2/100%, where R2 is the amount of resource used to that point.

  • As shown in the first line of the table below, after 9 overs India were 57-1, and 41 overs and 9 wickets remaining equates to 85.3% of resources, so 100% − 85.3% = 14.7% had been used.
  • India’s par score after 9 overs was therefore 359 x 14.7%/100% = 52.773, which is rounded down to 52.
  • During the six balls of the 10th over India scored 0, 0, 0, 1 (from a no ball), loss of wicket, 0.[46]
  • At the start of the over India were ahead of the par score, but the loss of the wicket caused their par score to jump from 55 to 79, which put them behind the par score.

 

Criticism on DLS Method

The D/L method has been criticized on the grounds that wickets are a much more heavily weighted resource than overs, leading to the suggestion that if teams are chasing large targets and there is the prospect of rain, a winning strategy could be to not lose wickets and score at what would seem to be a “losing” rate (e.g. if the required rate was 6.1, it could be enough to score at 4.75 an over for the first 20–25 overs).The 2015 update to DLS recognized this flaw, and changed the rate at which teams needed to score at the start of the second innings in response to a large first innings.

Another criticism is that the D/L method does not account for changes in proportion of the innings for which field restrictions are in place compared to a completed match.

More common informal criticism from cricket fans and journalists of the D/L method is that it is unduly complex and can be misunderstood.

Concerns have also been raised as to its suitability for Twenty20 matches, where a high scoring over can drastically alter the situation of the game, and variability of the run-rate is higher over matches with a shorter number of overs.

 

 

References:

A decade of Duckworth- Lewis (BBC Sports)

Wikipedia

ICC Playing Handbook

 

 

2 Reviews

Florian Sterling
1

DOMAIN SERVICES EXPIRATION NOTICE FOR cricketeagle.com Domain Notice Expiry ON: Jan 14, 2021 We have not gotten a payment from you. We have actually attempted to call you yet were not able to contact you. Browse Through: https://bit.ly/39slhfw For details as well as to make a discretionary payment for your domain website solutions. 011420212211513753688578798cricketeagle.com

Write a Review

Irfan ali

Read Previous

Guide Of Ra Without charge Revolves 2017

Read Next

A beneficial Veteran Gambler’s Penning About As to why That Can be Outstanding To be able to Undertake Obtained in An Online Casino

Leave a Reply