CricketArchive

Rain Rule Methods

If it is known that some sort of rain rule was used but the details of exactly which method was used is not the method is shown as unknown.
In the notes which follow team1 means the team batting first and team2 means the team batting second.
There are two possibilites, either a team was chasing a recalculated target following an interruption earlier in the match (in which case the target is calculated on the basis of the score needed by team2 in the revised number of overs) or else there is a terminal interruption (when there is an iunterruption and no further play is possible). A team could already be chasing a revised target because of an earlier interruption when a terminal interruption occurs necessitating a further recalculation.

 


ahso: Adjusted highest scoring overs

Compare the maximum runs scored by team1 in any set of overs (not necessarily consecutive) equal to the number of completed overs received by team2 factored down by 0.5% per over lost against the team2 in those completed overs. So if team2 received 36.3 overs in a 50 over match their score after 36 overs is compared to the highest scoring 36 overs of team1's innings (so could be any 36 of the 50 overs) factored down by 7%.
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive//Scorecards/58/58346.html
Play was halted when South Africa had scored 19/0 from 5 overs against New Zealand's 256/7 from 50 overs. When play was able to resume there was time for South Africa to receive 39 overs, so their target was revised to 229 as the highest scoring 39 overs of the New Zealand innings yielded 242 which was reduced by 5.5% for the loss of 11 overs.

 


cs: Clark curves method

For any interruption there are tables based on Clark Curves which give the revised target figure. In some types of interruption there is a calculation that involves a ratio of final score to wickets remaining to give a second figure and then using the lower of the two in the calculation.
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/63/63496.html
Rain between innings after South Africa had scored 278/8 from 50 overs resulted in an adjusted target for India of 251 in 40 overs.

 


corr: Consecutive overs or run rate

Team 2 had to exceed both the score achieved by team1 in their last number of overs received by team2 and also team1's overall runs per over through their complete innings. The latter was to allow for a team slowing down after a fast start to their innings. So if team2 were to receive 36 overs in a 50 over match they had to exceed team1's total runs for overs to 15 to 50 and also team1's runs per over for their 50 overs (still based on 50 overs if bowled out)
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/52/52523.html
Play was halted when New Zealand had scored 115/1 against Australia's 239/6 from 47 overs. When play resumed the New Zealand innings was reduced to 40 overs and the target revised to 204 as Australia had scored 203 in the last 40 overs of their innings. A further interruption ended play with New Zealand behind Australia's run rate.

 


cb: Countback to score at equivalent point of team1

Compare the team1 score after the exact number of overs received by team2.
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/30/30029.html
Play was halted when Essex had reached 40/3 from 10 overs so their score was compared to the Derbyshire score after 10 overs of their innings (38)

 


cbc: Countback to score at equivalent last completed over of team 1

Compare the team1 score after the number of completed overs received by team2, i.e. ignoring an incomplete over in the team2 innings.
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/30/30802.html
Play was halted when Northamptonshire had reached 108/4 from 17.4 overs so their score after 17 overs (105) was compared to the Hampshire score after 17 overs of their innings (90)

 


dl: Duckworth/Lewis Method

For any interruption there are tables which give the revised target based on the resources left at the time of any interruption. Unlike most other methods the Duckworth/Lewis tables take account of the number of wickets a team had left at the point of interruption. The tables have been revised over the years to follow trends in scoring rates in matches, and in early years a tie was not usually a possible result which it is now that the par score is rounded.
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/71/71495.html
Play was halted when West Indies had scored 235/6 from 47 out of their allocated 50 overs. When play was able to resume Zimbabwe's target was adjusted to 253 in 47 overs, the higher score being to compensate the West Indies for Zimbabwe having to bat for three less overs but still having their full 10 wickets to use.

 


rrfac: Factored run rate

The required run rate of the team batting second at the commencement of their innings is calculated by increasing the first team's run rate by a percentage factor per over lost. The required run rate at the start of the innings is unaltered if there is a subsequent interruption including the case where the team batting second's innings was still 50 overs. A tie is only possible if the calculation leads to an integer.
For example team batting first score 225 in 45 of their 50 overs when rain stops play and prevents a resumption until 40 overs remain the team batting second's required run rate is 102.5% in the case where each over lost is an increase of 0.5% (5 overs lost) so 225 * 102.5 /100 = 230.625 so 231 to win (and 230 is a loss).

 


hsco: Highest scoring consecutive overs

Compare the maximum runs scored by team1 in any consecutive set of overs equal to the number of completed overs received by team2 against the team2 in those completed overs. So if team2 received 36.3 overs their score after 36 overs is compared to the highest consecutive 36 overs of team1's innings (so that might be overs 1 to 36, 2 to 37, ...., 15 to 50). An incomplete team2 over was counted if there were more runs scored in it than the corresponding extra full over that would have been counted for team1. Any further interruptions resulted in a target being calculated on the average runs per over derived from the first interruption.
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/59/59839.html
Play was halted when Sri Lanka had scored 101/5 from 29 overs against South Africa's 237/8 from 50 overs. When play was able to resume there was time for Sri Lanka to receive 34 overs in total, so their target was revised to 184 which was the most runs scored by South Africa in a consecutive set of 34 overs.

 


hso: Highest scoring overs

Compare the maximum runs scored by team1 in any set of overs (not necessarily consecutive) equal to the number of completed overs received by team2 against the team2 in those completed overs. So if team2 received 36.3 overs their score after 36 overs is compared to the highest scoring 36 overs of team1's innings (so could be any 36 of the 50 overs).
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/55/55605.html
Play was halted when South Africa had scored 231/6 from 42.5 overs against England's 252/6 from 45 overs. When play was able to resume there was time for South Africa to receive only one more ball, 43 overs in total, so their target was revised to 252 by discarding the two maiden overs in the England innings, one of which yielded one extra.

 


ll: Lancashire League adjusted target

The adjusted target for the side batting second is calculated by taking the number of overs by first computing the run rate of the side batting first from runs scored divided by overs received (a part over is counted as a full one). If all out, then full allocation used for overs. 75% of this runs per over is then computed. The runs adjustment is then caclulated from the adjusted runs per over multiplied by the number of overs lost. The target is the side1 total minus the runs adjustment truncated plus 1.
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/82/82038.html
Burnley scored 163 from 48.3 overs, but their allocation was 50 overs. So runs per over is 3.26. 75% of this is 2.44. When rain finally ended play Haslingden had faced 28 overs - so 22 overs lost. The runs adjustment is 53.68 (2.44 times 22). So the target is 110 (163 minus 53.68 plus 1).

 


mrr: Maidens ignored run rate

Compare the runs per over of team1's complete innings against that of team2 for the number of overs they received but ignoring maiden overs.
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/47/47948.html
Play was halted when Pakistan had scored 155/6 from 43.5 overs of which 6 were maidens (4.096 runs per over) against West Indies 196/7 from 50 overs of which 7 were maidens (4.558 runs per over).

 


pb: Parabola (or norm - normal performance) method

The revised target for team2 is based on a parabolic equation based on the number of overs and team1's score (called the normal method as the equation was intended to simulate the norm in a particular situation).
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/65/65621.html
A sandstorm during the interval reduced the number of overs for India to 46 in reply to Australia's 284/7 in 50 overs. The parabola equation has the factor for a reduction to 46 overs to be 96.7% so the target was adjusted to 276.

 


rr: Run rate

Compare the runs per over of team1's complete innings against that of team2 for the number of overs they received.
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/31/31676.html
Play was halted when Leicestershire had scored 129/7 from 34 overs (3.794 runs per over) against Derbyshire's 149/8 from 40 overs (3.725 runs per over).

 


rwcb: Runs per wicket on countback to score at equivalent point

Compare the team1 runs per wicket figure after the exact number of overs received by team2 against that of team2.
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/32/32911.html
Play was halted when Northern Transvaal had scored 92/2 from 32 overs against Rhodesia's 235 all out from 59.2 of their 60 overs. Northern Transvaal's runs per wicket (46) was superior to the Rhodesia runs per wicket after 32 overs of their innings.

 


vjd: VJD Method

For any interruption there are tables which give the revised target based on the resources left at the time of any interruption. Unlike most other methods the VJD tables take account of the number of wickets a team had left at the point of interruption. The tables also take account of the number of overs for which fielding restrictions apply.
Example:
http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/85/85164.html
 




LATEST SCORES





We would like to thank all our contributors. Click here to see how to you can help.
Copyright © 2003-2014 CricketArchive