Official ICC 2015 CWC thread

[Unhappy1]

oops. i mean 1996

No i think you were right with 1992?

 

[Pegging]

oops. i mean 1996

Nope, that was Brian Lara.

 

[The_Ogre]

1992. that is all.

D/L didn't exist then

 

[Unhappy1]

The 1992 happened in NZ/Aus as well if im not mistaken?

 

[Drifter]

So, 43 overs a side. We going to have to put on a LOT, otherwise it will be a doddle for NZ

Five overs to go. Southee can bowl two, Henry one. Anderson and friends will have to bowl the remaining two. And only one over of Powerplay left

 

[Creag]

6.27pm Hearing that game resumes at 6.45pm. Reduced to 43 overs a side. Five overs to go. Southee can bowl two, Henry one. Anderson and friends will have to bowl the remaining two

Going to be a bun fight and run fest. Has to be with 7 wickets in hand.

 

[Lament]

So, 43 overs a side. We going to have to put on a LOT, otherwise it will be a doddle for NZ

But does this mean our current total of 216 will increase automatically?, if not that's not very fair....

 

[Neoprod]

1992. that is all.

There was no Duckworth Lewis in 1992, Mr Dry...they actually used our loss as a use case for developing DL.

 

[OzzieCapie]

1992. that is all.

That wasnt Duckworth Lewis...it was one of the reasons for implementing DLS

Edit...touche, beaten to punch

 

[Drifter]

Yes, we have 5 more overs to score runs, but we are being penalized for our slow start.

 

[krycor]

Bleh.. 5overs more

 

[thestaggy]

So, 43 overs a side. We going to have to put on a LOT, otherwise it will be a doddle for NZ

Rain shafted us proper. AB and Faf were looking ominous, especially with 7 overs of less than stellar bowling looming.

 

[thestaggy]

That wasnt Duckworth Lewis...it was one of the reasons for implementing DLS

Edit...touche, beaten to punch

Meh

As a point of clarity, ESPN points out that England's innings was cut short when the overs weren't completed by 6:10pm (the rescheduled close of innings time),[8] Cricinfo say that had Duckworth–Lewis been applied to the entire game, South Africa's target from the original 45 overs would have been 273, which would then have been reduced to 257 from 43 overs, i.e. five runs more than they were set under the most productive overs rule.

 

[Neoprod]

Could have been worse for us if the rain came after 25 overs.

*looking for positives*

 

[krycor]

But does this mean our current total of 216 will increase automatically?, if not that's not very fair....

They will play to 43 overs, then DwL will determine the target for Nzl. Typically if they score a large number more the target goes up I think?

 

[Kilgore_Trout_Redux]

Unfortunately rain has cost us another World Cup

 

[Kilgore_Trout_Redux]

Could have been worse for us if the rain came after 25 overs.

*looking for positives*

Ok. Let's try this.

Outfield will also be slower?

Damn this is hard.

 

[Neoprod]

They will play to 43 overs, then DwL will determine the target for Nzl. Typically if they score a large number more the target goes up I think?

It goes up in.any event...on the theory the team batting first would have batted faster if they knew the game was shortened from the start (an advantage the team batting second has from the start).

 

[Lament]

They will play to 43 overs, then DwL will determine the target for Nzl. Typically if they score a large number more the target goes up I think?

So we have to try and not loose wickets i assume. Really fcked up situation, Faf and AB will probably lose their rhythm because of this.

 

[Drifter]

They will play to 43 overs, then DwL will determine the target for Nzl. Typically if they score a large number more the target goes up I think?

Nope, they just have to beat what we get in our 43. The perils of starting slowly.

I stand corrected : 6.40pm A reminder that whatever South Africa will be adjusted. For example if they end up with 280, the revised target will be 297 in 43 overs