Durham v Warwickshire (one day cup)

Status
Not open for further replies.
smoker said:
Massive wicket.

245 to win.

Warwickshire 6/4 Durham 8/15

DLS: 211 required in 36 overs.

Thoughts @brandon ?
Click to expand...

Still think DLS is a flawless system do you?

So they’ve taken 14 overs off our innings, which is just shy of a third - yet only taken 34 runs off their total........ Seems perfectly reasonable doesn’t it :rolleyes:

Shafted by DLS twice in three days. Can’t even play devils advocate - there were no variables with their innings because they batted their entire overs. f***ing ridiculous.
 
Last edited:


brandon said:
Still think DLS is a flawless system do you?

So they’ve taken 14 overs off our innings, which is just shy of a third - yet only taken 34 runs off their total........ Seems perfectly reasonable doesn’t it :rolleyes:

Shafted by DLS twice in three days. Can’t even play devils advocate - there were no variables with their innings because they batted their entire overs. f***ing ridiculous.
Click to expand...

In both cases, the odds on Durham winning shortened once the D/L target was announced.
 
Steak Pie said:
In both cases, the odds on Durham winning shortened once the D/L target was announced.
Click to expand...

Shortened considerably too.

The other day is more understandable, but to restrict a team to under 250 in this day and age should be considered cakewalk territory. I’d be laughing my cock off if I was a Warwickshire supporter.
 
brandon said:
Shortened considerably too.

The other day is more understandable, but to restrict a team to under 250 in this day and age should be considered cakewalk territory. I’d be laughing my cock off if I was a Warwickshire supporter.
Click to expand...

Shortened as in the books thought it more likely that Durham would win.

114-4 off 27 overs and 244-8 off 50 and both revised targets are around a run a ball.

It's reasonable enough IMO.
 
mackembhoy said:
@chunkylover53 explain this one

Doesn't seem logical at all. Surely we should be chasing more like 200 or even sub 200.
Click to expand...
I can’t explain the statistical decision on every duckworth Lewis calculation man

brandon said:
Shortened considerably too.

The other day is more understandable, but to restrict a team to under 250 in this day and age should be considered cakewalk territory. I’d be laughing my cock off if I was a Warwickshire supporter.
Click to expand...
Well then I don’t understand your comment the other day. You said that we may limp to 200. And then complained it was a cakewalk...
 
Last edited:
If there is no more rain play will resume at 4.15pm. Under D/L @DurhamCricket will chase 211 instead of 245 but have 14 less overs to do it in!
#bbccricket - what the fuck!!!
 
geeeet up, how many games in this format?

This is great stuff by Durham, could easy be 4 out of 4

Bancroft captaining the ODI side well

Maintain that someone else should have captained the first CC games like, he couldn't possibly know enough about the players yet
 
chunkylover53 said:
I can’t explain the statistical decision on every duckworth Lewis calculation man


Well then I don’t understand your comment the other day. You said that we may limp to 200. And then complained it was a cakewalk...
Click to expand...

I was talking about 244 in 50 overs today being a cakewalk.

I didn’t say the other day we’d have made 200, I said we ‘may’ only have limped to 200. I think the players would’ve been confident of making 250+ though - with 6 wickets in hand.

If you don’t understand it, I don’t think I will be able to explain it in a way you will understand.

Answer me this though, do you think both calculations, today and on Wednesday were fair?
 
Last edited:
brandon said:
Why would I top myself after a Durham win?

Not particularly classy to make fun of suicide either.



I was talking about 244 in 50 overs today being a cakewalk.

I didn’t say the other day we’d have made 200, I said we ‘may’ only have limped to 200. I think the players would’ve been confident of making 250+ though - with 6 wickets in hand.

If you don’t understand it, I don’t think I will be able to explain it in a way you will understand.

Answer me this though, do you think both calculations, today and on Wednesday were fair?
Click to expand...
Do you really think we would have made 250 from 114-4? We could have. But it’s unlikely

I thought today was harsher.

But I look at it quite simply

Wednesday - we were behind the game. We lost.
Today - we were ahead of the game. We won.

It’s far from perfect. It doesn’t take into account pitches or conditions or teams.

But it uses historical stats to provide balance. I’d say it’s worked over 2 games
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top