Bangladesh VS Srilanka | 3rd ODI | 28.03.13 | Bangladesh Innings

[Buffet]

The D/L target was 183 from 27 which is 6.78.

Rain came after SL innings and BD got above target?

Or

BD played lot of overs and then target was revised half way? If that's the case then calculating RR for 27 overs is wrong way to look at this.

 

[SL_Fan]

A target of around 200 off 27 overs (rrr 7.4) would have been fair game. D/L completely took SL out of the game. Only because Bangla panicked that things got a bit close. Otherwise it was a cakewalk.

 

[SL_Fan]

Rain came after SL innings and BD got above target?

Or

BD played lot of overs and then target was revised half way? If that's the case then calculating RR for 27 overs is wrong way to look at this.

Bangla were around 13 overs through their innings and were 70 odd. So they needed just 105 or so off 14 overs/80 balls (rrr of 7.5). Bangla got 2 extra Powerplay overs as well. Made it way too easy for them.

 

[shah_1]

what a upset by minnows

 

[GenericBrand]

Is this the same Perera who got a hattrick? lol!

SL's pace bowling is just crap, they are better than BD's atrocious pace duo(s) though and that shouldn't be a comforting thought. But alarms should also be ringing after the way SL's batting lineup fell like dominoes after Sanga and Dilshan were dismissed.

 

[leatherface58]

BD may not be the best out there. But in SC conditions, they are a good, sometimes brilliant team. BTW, they drew an ODI series in Lanka where Pakistan got thrashed 4-1. So, if Bangladesh is a minnow what does that make Pakistan?

 

[Buffet]

The original rpo required was 6.06 for 50 overs. No way 6.78 rpo for 27 overs with all wickets to play with is even remotely similar to 6.06 rpo for 50 overs.

OK , just read Cricinfo. Let's try to see it bit differently.

• BD had 6.06 asking rate at start of their innings.
  
• Rain came around 14 over mark. So with 6 an over , SL should have scored 84 runs.
  
• Target was revised for 183 runs in 27 overs. 13 overs were left.
  

If BD was just scoring around Required rate then they would have been around 84 runs and 100 more runs left to reach 183 target. So effectively, BD was told to score 100 runs in 13 overs at 7.7 runs an over.

So in short, BD had 50 overs game in start with required run rate of 6.06. Assuming, BD was just matching the RR for the first 14 overs and rain come. They were suddenly given next 13 overs with 7.7 required rate.

Others have pointed out, it doesn't take account of quality. It seems true but quantitatively, BD got revised target of 7.7 asking rate. That's seems big adjustment to me. If BD had batted very slowly then asking rate would have been closer to 9-10, so credit to them to bat at much faster rate for the first 14 overs. That's why they had easier time after the rain and adjustment looked less daunting.

 

[Maximas]

Having picked Nasir for SLPL and not giving any chance to play there was a big mistake. He definitely a better batsman for SL condition. SL almost took the match away if Nasir hadnt minded his own wicket strong. imo D/L made the match as usually interesting. Knowing rain a high possibility chose to bat after winning toss was bad idea. It aint the 300+ total, SL tried most with its spearhead bowler Malinga but failed in picking wickets enough before rain comes down; and thats where they actually lost their advantage and gave away match control to BD.

 

[SL_Fan]

OK , just read Cricinfo. Let's try to see it bit differently.

• BD had 6.06 asking rate at start of their innings.
  
• Rain came around 14 over mark. So with 6 an over , SL should have scored 84 runs.
  
• Target was revised for 183 runs in 27 overs. 13 overs were left.
  

If BD was just scoring around Required rate then they would have been around 84 runs and 100 more runs left to reach 183 target. So effectively, BD was told to score 100 runs in 13 overs at 7.7 runs an over.

So in short, BD had 50 overs game in start with required run rate of 6.06. Assuming, BD was just matching the RR for the first 14 overs and rain come. They were suddenly given next 13 overs with 7.7 required rate.

Others have pointed out, it doesn't take account of quality. It seems true but quantitatively, BD got revised target of 7.7 asking rate. That's seems big adjustment to me. If BD had batted very slowly then asking rate would have been closer to 9-10, so credit to them to bat at much faster rate than required rate for the first 14 overs. That's why they had easier time after the rain and adjustment looked less daunting.

7.7 rpo for 13 or so overs with all the wickets to play with is no biggie. ODI field restrictions are worse than T20 for the bowling side. Certainly doesn't equate to chasing a 300+ score. Plus SL had bowled Malinga for 5 overs before the rain so he could only bowl one more over in those 13 overs. As I said the D/L target was about 20 runs short.

 

[SL_Fan]

Having picked Nasir for SLPL and not giving any chance to play there was a big mistake. He definitely a better batsman for SL condition. SL almost took the match away if Nasir hadnt minded his own wicket strong. imo D/L made the match as usually interesting. Knowing rain a high possibility chose to bat after winning toss was bad idea. It aint the 300+ total, SL tried most with its spearhead bowler Malinga but failed in picking wickets enough before rain comes down; and thats where they actually lost their advantage and gave away match control to BD.

But before the rain SL were still the firm favourites to win (betting odds were like 6/1). Next thing they know it was Bangla's game to lose thanks to D/L. It's only a bilateral series so it's no biggie but if this was some big game in a tourny it would have been a joke. D/L just took SL out of the game.

 

[H2O1]

A target of around 200 off 27 overs (rrr 7.4) would have been fair game. D/L completely took SL out of the game. Only because Bangla panicked that things got a bit close. Otherwise it was a cakewalk.

LOL , your post got no logic at all

 

[SL_Fan]

LOL , your post got no logic at all

Really? What part of it don't you understand?

 

[Buffet]

7.7 rpo for 13 or so overs with all the wickets to play with is no biggie.

Credit goes to BD for not losing wickets.

Adjustment of required run rate shouldn't depend on how many wickets the team batting second had before rain came. That will be ridiculous. If BD had lost 9 wickets before rain , do you think it would have been all right to adjust the target to 2 runs an over? Off course not. It will be sense less. About Malinga, tough luck. Any rule can't take account of quality of players. Rules can only do qualitative adjustment.

Betting odds changed because on average a shorten game will indirectly help a weaker side specially if they batted very well before the interruption and lost only one wicket. There is good reason that BD can think about beating SA in 20-20 but not in test matches.

 

[SL_Fan]

Credit goes to BD for not losing wickets.

Adjustment of required run rate shouldn't depend on how many wickets the team batting second had before rain came. That will be ridiculous. If BD had lost 9 wickets before rain , do you think it would have been all right to adjust the target to 2 runs an over? Off course not. It will be sense less. About Malinga, tough luck. Any rules can't take account of quality of players. It simple qualitative adjustment.

You have taken it the wrong way there. I was implying that given the shortened game with no deduction of batting resources (as opposed to the bowling side) the D/L target set was a joke given the position SL was in.

 

[SL_Fan]

Credit goes to BD for not losing wickets.

Adjustment of required run rate shouldn't depend on how many wickets the team batting second had before rain came. That will be ridiculous. If BD had lost 9 wickets before rain , do you think it would have been all right to adjust the target to 2 runs an over? Off course not. It will be sense less. About Malinga, tough luck. Any rule can't take account of quality of players. Rules can only do qualitative adjustment.

Betting odds changed because on average a shorten game will indirectly help a weaker side specially if they batted very well before the interruption and lost only one wicket. There is good reason that BD can think about beating SA in 20-20 but not in test matches.

Yes in a shortened game you would expect for the team chasing to have the upper hand. But the issue here is that they were given too much of an upper hand. As someone else who posted earlier said betting odds went from 1:5 to SL to 1:1 straight after resumption. That's too much of a swing in one direction. It probably changed to 1:5 to Bangla minutes later.

 

[SL_Fan]

As I posted in the other thread what aggrieved me is not that SL lost. I mean when there's a substantial rain interruption after an inning has already been completed you would expect the side chasing to have a bit of an advantage. But what I couldn't stand is the way D/L just took SL completely out of the game. Another 15-20 runs more and imho it would have been a fair game to both sides. Bangla still would have been the favourites to win but that would have given SL a chance as well. It's not like SL posted a 220 or something. They scored 300+ so for D/L to take them out of the game just like that is ridiculous.

 

[Buffet]

You have taken it the wrong way there. I was implying that given the shortened game with no deduction of batting resources (as opposed to the bowling side) the D/L target set was a joke given the position SL was in.

Bowling side also didn't face any resource deduction. Malinga did bowl his full quota. Every SL bowlers bowled their full allowed quota. Unfortunately, with rain coming in middle, captain didn't have luxury to plan Malinga full quota but he did bowl his full allotted overs.

If by chance SL had bowled only 1 over for Malinga before rain then SL would have had huge advantage. Best ODI bowler of a specific team doesn't always bowl in first 10 overs. You can't blame DL for Malinga being left with only 1 over.

I am not saying that BD didn't have advantage due to shorten game. I am saying that adjustment was big enough and there is no way for rules to take account of quality of players. Rules assumes that SL had 5 bowlers, all having same skills. It doesn't differentiate between Malinga and Parera.

Weaker teams will always have better chance with shorter game, be it due to rain in middle or simply having less overs from start. In this case, BD was in very good situation due to losing only 1 wicket with decent run rate, so you got to give them some credit for that.

 

[SL_Fan]

Bowling side also didn't face any resource deduction. Malinga did bowl his full quota. Every SL bowlers bowled their full allowed quota. Unfortunately, with rain coming in middle, captain didn't have luxury to plan Malinga full quota but he did bowl his full allotted overs.

If by chance SL had bowled only 1 over for Malinga before rain then SL would have had huge advantage. Best ODI bowler of a specific team doesn't always bowl in first 10 overs.
You can't blame DL for Malinga being left with only 1 over.

I am not saying that BD didn't have advantage due to shorten game. I am saying that adjustment was big enough and there is no way for rules to take account of quality of players. Rules assumes that SL had 5 bowlers, all having same skills. It doesn't differentiate between Malinga and Parera.

Weaker teams will always have better chance with shorter game, be it due to rain in middle or simply having less overs from start. In this case, BD was in very good situation due to losing only 1 wicket with decent run rate, so you got to give them some credit for that.

Full quota in an ODI is 10 overs.

 

[SL_Fan]

From the other thread

Let's look at the recently concluded SL v Bangla series here.

1st ODI

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sri-lanka-v-bangladesh-2013/engine/current/match/602474.html

Bangla makes 259 off their 50 overs batting first (so the required run rate is 5.2 for SL)

Then the floodlights play up and SL's overs gets reduced by 9 to 41 overs, and the D/L target given is 238. So that's 25 runs over what SL are required to be at the 41 over mark had the game been a full 50 over game (ie 238-5.2x41). So essentially 25 runs are added for the loss of just 9 overs. Plus SL are also deducted 3 power play overs by D/L.


Then we have the 3rd ODI which took place just hours before

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sri-lanka-v-bangladesh-2013/engine/current/match/602476.html

SL makes 302 off their 50 overs batting first (so the required run rate is 6.06 for Bangla)

Then the stupid rain come in and Bangla's overs gets reduced by 23 to 27 overs, and the D/L target given is 183. So that's 20 runs over what Bangla are required to be at the 27 over mark had the game been a full 50 over game (ie 183-6.06x27). So essentially only 20 runs are added for the loss of 23 overs even though Bangla have all their wickets to play with. Plus Bangla also received 2 additional power play overs (ie 30% of an ODI are PP overs in a full game, so in a 27 over game the number of PP overs should be 8 but Bangla received their full quota of 10 in the 1st PP).

9 overs lost -> Run rate required per over went from 5.2 to 5.8 (ie increase of 0.6)
23 overs lost -> Run rate required per over went from 6.06 to 6.78 (ie increase of 0.72)

You don't have to play out 14 extra overs (ie around 2.5 times as much) but the run rate required per over only goes up by 0.1?

So in conclusion how does 25 runs get add on to the par total when a team doesn't have to play out just 9 overs, but only 20 runs are added to the par total when a team doesn't have to play out a whopping 23 overs?

 

[Buffet]

But what I couldn't stand is the way D/L just took SL completely out of the game.

They scored 300+ so for D/L to take them out of the game just like that is ridiculous.

Assuming that game is only for 27 overs under some new rule and BD-SL get to play 100 games. Do you think that SL will lose 90 times out of 100 if they set a target of 185 odd runs in 27 overs for BD? I think SL will win most of the times.

In this game it just happened that BD was batting well before interruption. If they bat like that for first 13 overs on 100 games then SL will not win most of the times. I don't expect BD to score 70-80 odd runs in 13 overs with only 1 wicket on an average day.

BD did get an advantage for sure due to shorter game but this impression of DL totally taking SL out of the game comes due to good batting by BD before interruption. If BD was 50/4 then exact same adjustment will never give you that impression. You can't say that DL took it totally out of SL. You will be right in saying that DL + strong batting situation of BD before interruption, took SL out of the game. I hope I am able to communicate here, because I can't put it more clearly.

 

[Buffet]

Full quota in an ODI is 10 overs.

Not for a game having 27 overs.

 

[SL_Fan]

Not for a game having 27 overs.

Hence, bowling side's resources are deducted as opposed to the batting side.

 

[Buffet]

Hence, bowling side's resources are deducted as opposed to the batting side.

I give up.

 

[SL_Fan]

Assuming that game is only for 27 overs under some new rule and BD-SL get to play 100 games. Do you think that SL will lose 90 times out of 100 if they set a target of 185 odd runs in 27 overs for BD? I think SL will win most of the times.

In this game it just happened that BD was batting well before interruption. If they bat like that for first 13 overs on 100 games then SL will not win most of the times. I don't expect BD to score 70-80 odd runs in 13 overs with only 1 wicket on an average day.

BD did get an advantage for sure due to shorter game but this impression of DL totally taking SL out of the game comes due to good batting by BD before interruption. If BD was 50/4 then exact same adjustment will never give you that impression. You can't say that DL took it totally out of SL. You will be right in saying that DL + strong batting situation of BD before interruption, took SL out of the game. I hope I am able to communicate here, because I can't put it more clearly.

I understand what you are saying but my issue is D/L made it far too easier for them. As I said something like 200 off 27 overs would have still given Bangla the edge on wet conditions but SL would have had a fair chance as well. SL deserved to have a fair chance after posting 300+. It's not like Bangla were 1/100 off 15 overs and running away with the game. I don't see the need for D/L to take into account what postinon the chasing team was in before the interruption. It should just set a par target depending on the opposition total and the number of overs lost. Maybe that's why this target was off. Another 15-20 runs more and it would have been a fair game to both.

 

[Buffet]

As I said something like 200 off 27 overs would have still given Bangla the edge on wet conditions but SL would have had a fair chance as well.

I really don't know how it is calculated and at times, I have felt that it was unfair for team batting first. But 300 in 50 overs can't be translated to 200 in 27 overs on average day. That's too steep a target in my opinion. Ind/SA are strong batting sides but I don't fancy them to chase 200 in 27 overs on average day. 150 is very good score in 20 over match. Scoring at same rate for 27 over game is huge task on average day for even a strong batting sides. I think SA/Ind will have much higher chance in chasing 300 in 50 overs. Anyway, it's subjective , so people can have different opinion.

 

[SL_Fan]

I really don't know how it is calculated and at times, I have felt that it was unfair for team batting first. But 300 in 50 overs can't be translated to 200 in 27 overs on average day. That's too steep a target in my opinion. Ind/SA are strong batting sides but I don't fancy them to chase 200 in 27 overs on average day. 20 overs games have 140-150 score as very good score. Scoring at same rate for another 27 overs is huge task on average day. I think SA/Ind will have much higher chance to chase 300 in 50 overs. Anyway, it's subjective , so people can have different opinion.

In a T20 you would generally expect a score of around 180 to be along similar lines to that of a 300 in an ODI. The field restrictions are much tougher for the bowling side with the new ODI rules, way tougher than in a T20 even. Plus here 10 of the 27 overs were power play overs for Bangla. Bowling side also has to put up with wet conditions finding it hard to grip the ball. The wicket was flat and usually the ball skids on to the bat when there's a bit of moisture around as well. So all in all I would definitely put my money on the side batting.

 

[SL_Fan]

Any way we are just going around in circles bro. Let's call it a day.

 

[BDfanforever]

Dude no need to ponder over it. if the case was revised you would see many posts on DL by BD posters.
105 in 14 with 9 wickets is too easy. What shocked me was that our batsman almost threw away the game.

 

[SL_Fan]

Dude no need to ponder over it. if the case was revised you would see many posts on DL by BD posters.
105 in 14 with 9 wickets is too easy. What shocked me was that our batsman almost threw away the game.

Exactly. The only reason it got even a bit tense was because Bangla did their best to try and lose it. Nasir Hossain stepped in and steadied the ship and game over. I've been very impressed with him this whole tour. looks a class act.
Yeah I've gone a bit too far haven't I. Just kept replying and didn't even realise

 

[Executioner]

SL fan probably didnt watch the match because of a different time period. Was probably sleeping.

I think Bangladesh won the match when they scored about 70 runs with no wickets lost, and malinga having bowled 5 overs already. Which meant that the revised target was less considering that we had lost few wickets. But honestly speaking, SL deserved to lose this match

SL fielded exceptionally, easily the best fielding side in the SC. But the bowling was pathetic. Kulasakera, mathews, perera were gifting our batsman with half vollies. Malinga bowled exceptionally well in the 3rd last over.

 

[Executioner]

SL fan probably didnt watch the match because of a different time period. Was probably sleeping.

I think Bangladesh won the match when they scored about 70 runs with no wickets lost, and malinga having bowled 5 overs already. Which meant that the revised target was less considering that we had lost few wickets. But honestly speaking, SL deserved to lose this match

SL fielded exceptionally, easily the best fielding side in the SC. But the bowling was pathetic. Kulasakera, mathews, perera were gifting our batsman with half vollies. Malinga bowled exceptionally well in the 3rd last over.

 

[salmanno1]

BD for CT?