22 runs of 1 ball

Hi Guys. Whilst watching the recent World T20 Cup, i was wondering when SA needed 22 runs of 13 balls, initially, if the Duckworth Lewis System was used at that stage, was SA ahead of the DL system at that stage?

7 wickets down I am sure we would have been behind on the DL system.

I didn't eat for 2 days after we got knocked out in the 1992 World Cup...I was still in school and stayed up all night to watch and either stayed away from school the next day or went to school and slept...

Likely behind on DL as it takes account of overs and wickets consumed / remaining at time of interruption and applies algorithm determined using data from previous ODI's...this was a criticism I raised when I wrote to the ICC many years ago...the fact that each match is a stand-alone where ground size, weather, pitch, etc are unique and applying data from previous ODI's to determine revised target is incorrect...

22 off 13 balls back then was very different to now. Par scores then were around 225-230.

@Davashan...did some searching on the net and found the following...SA would have needed 3 runs of the 1 remaining ball:

Since the Duckworth-Lewis method came into operation in 1997, their tables have been updated a few times to reflect changes in the game, specifically the overall increase in scoring rate and the change in scoring patterns.

Real Life Examples

We have seen how to apply the Duckworth-Lewis tables for all different stages of the match in which a rain interruption might occur. Let us have a look at some real match situations and how the Duckworth-Lewis method would be applied. We will start with that infamous and controversial World Cup match in 1992.

Situation 1

In the rain interrupted 1992 World Cup semi-final, each side was reduced to a maximum of 45 overs. England batted first and scored 6/252. South Africa in reply was 6/231 after 42.5 overs when rain interrupted play causing 2 overs of play to be lost. By the Duckworth-Lewis method what should South Africa's revised target have been?

Answer 1

The first rain interruption caused each team's innings to be reduced by 5 overs. As the resources of each team have both been depleted to 95% no correction is required for this interruption.

However, the rain interruption that occurred during South Africa's innings came with 2.1 overs remaining and 6 wickets lost. The loss of two overs at this stage of the innings cost South Africa approximately 6.8% of their resources by the Duckworth-Lewis tables at the time. Using Table 2, South Africa's target to tie should be



Rounding down gives the score for South Africa to tie as 233. Thus South Africa's target for victory would have been 234 and they would have required 3 runs of the remaining delivery. Recall this compares to the 21 runs required under the MPO method, which was actually in place at the time.