Tied ODIs after adjusted targets

Aslam Siddiqui

unread,

May 23, 2013, 4:39:12 PM5/23/13

to

Here is a list of One-day International matches which ended in a Tie
after the target was adjusted.

SL (268-9) tied with SAf (229-6), Durban, Mar 3, 2003
Ind (280-5) tied with Eng (270-8), Lord’s, Sep 11, 2011
Pak (266-5) tied with Ire (275-5), Dublin, May 23, 2013

aslam
GO PACERS!!!

jzfredricks

unread,

May 23, 2013, 4:44:19 PM5/23/13

to

On Friday, May 24, 2013 6:39:12 AM UTC+10, Aslam Siddiqui wrote:
> Pak (266-5) tied with Ire (275-5), Dublin, May 23, 2013

Poor Ireland. It's always strange to see a team scoring 9 more runs not winning. (yeah, I understand why)

arahim

unread,

May 23, 2013, 5:15:29 PM5/23/13

to

You have SL scoring about 40 more than SA and not winning. (yeah, I know what you mean).

There must be some where you have scored more and lost as well (batting second). In the sam number of overs?

jzfredricks

unread,

May 23, 2013, 6:01:53 PM5/23/13

to

On Friday, May 24, 2013 7:15:29 AM UTC+10, arahim wrote:
> There must be some where you have scored more and lost as well (batting second). In the sam number of overs?

This very Pak-Ire match was that. 47 overs each.

arahim

unread,

May 23, 2013, 6:30:26 PM5/23/13

to

This one was a tie. I mean there must be matches in which the team batting second scored more than the team batting first (in equal or lesser number of overs)and still lost.

Unknown

unread,

May 23, 2013, 6:34:04 PM5/23/13

to

Ire bowled 2 more extras than Pak. Extras are the killer.

Last week our guys played a 20 overs game. League rules bats retire at
30 runs. We bowled dreadful 30 extras in the 20 overs. It was
difficult trying to explain to the younsters that 30 extras was the
same as allowing an extra opposition batsman to have an extra five
over bash to score 30 on top of the 20 overs innings.

max.it

jzfredricks

unread,

May 23, 2013, 6:59:52 PM5/23/13

to

On Friday, May 24, 2013 8:34:04 AM UTC+10, unk...@googlegroups.com wrote:
> Ire bowled 2 more extras than Pak. Extras are the killer.

Sorry mate, but in this game Ed Joyce was the killer.

Unknown

unread,

May 23, 2013, 8:42:01 PM5/23/13

to

You are wrong, Joyce had to fill in like for like for Porterfield who
got out at a really bad time in the master plan.
Mr extra was the winner.

max.it

Aslam Siddiqui

unread,

May 24, 2013, 9:36:40 AM5/24/13

to

I could find only one.

Ind (166-4) beat Eng (178-8), Bangalore, Nov 23, 2008 by 19 runs
Both sides batted 22 overs.

aslam
GO PACERS!!!

calvin

unread,

May 24, 2013, 9:05:53 PM5/24/13

to

On Fri, 24 May 2013 06:39:12 +1000, Aslam Siddiqui <asid...@iupui.edu>
wrote:

This should be impossible. If you take it to enough decimal places, in an
adjusted game one run rate will always* be higher than the other.

* - OK not always, but if the vast majority of cases.

--
cheers,
calvin

jzfredricks

unread,

May 25, 2013, 12:27:02 AM5/25/13

to

On Saturday, May 25, 2013 11:05:53 AM UTC+10, Calvin wrote:
> This should be impossible. If you take it to enough decimal places, in an
> adjusted game one run rate will always* be higher than the other.
> * - OK not always, but if the vast majority of cases.

It very well COULD be implemented just as you say.
As you can't score fractions of runs, DL target might be the target rounded up (ie 256.67 becomes a DL target of 257).
Keep in mind too that if the DL number is 257, then you must score 258 to win.

arahim

unread,

May 29, 2013, 9:46:54 AM5/29/13

to

In yesterday's news... in a bid to get back into Olympics wrestling has implemented a series of reforms...one of the chief among them was changing the scoring system so the wrestler with the most points wins since it was confusing for the audience to have results where someone could outscore his opponent 8-2 and still lose...One wonders what boxing will do with the knockout but imagine the DL being discussed for world wide audience for 2T if it gets to Olympics.