FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

FAQ

Q: Can a batsman switch from batting right-handed to left-handed? Can the bowler do the same thing with their bowling hand?
There is nothing in the laws of the game to stop the batsman from changing their batting style.

A popular stroke in one-day cricket is the reverse sweep, where a right-handed batsman hits the ball like a left-handed batsman would and vice versa.

However, if the bowler wants to do the same, they must inform the umpire they are changing their bowling style.

The umpire must tell the batsman which arm the bowler will use to bowl, as well as which side of the wicket - 'over' or 'round' the wicket - they are coming from.

If the bowler changes his delivery style without informing the umpire, the umpire will call a no ball, adding a penalty run to the batting team's total.

Q: I've seen fielding teams leaving a helmet for the close-in fielder behind the wicket-keeper. But what happens if the ball hits the helmet?

If the ball hits the helmet, the batting side automatically receive five penalty runs which will be added onto their total in the extras section.


Q: Can you bowl under-arm? Can you bowl the ball all along the ground?
The laws of the game say: "Under-arm bowling shall not be permitted except by special agreement before the match."

So unless there is a prior agreement, the umpire will call a no ball if an under-arm ball is delivered, adding a penalty run to the batting side's total and another legitimate delivery must be bowled.

The umpire will also call a no ball if the ball rolls all along the ground.

This ruling was introduced after an infamous incident in 1981 when New Zealand needed six runs to tie the game off the last ball of a one-day match against Australia in Melbourne.

The then Australia captain (now India coach) Greg Chappell asked his brother Trevor to bowl the ball under-arm all along the ground to batsman Brian McKechnie.

Needless to say, New Zealand did not win the match.

Q: Can a runner be used all the time for a batsman who is not very good at running?
A runner is a player from the batting team who literally runs for an injured batsman.

But they can only be used if a player who they are running for has been injured during the course of a match.

The batting team must receive permission from the umpire to use a runner and they must wear exactly the same protective equipment as the player they are running for.

Q: Can the wicket-keeper take their pads off and bowl?
Yes, they do not need permission from the umpire or opposing captain to do so.

 

Q: Can a player kick the ball over the boundary?

Yes, but the batsman will also receive the runs they have run before the ball was kicked over the boundary.

So for example, if the batsman are in the process of running for a third run and have crossed when the ball was kicked over the boundary, the striker will receive seven runs.

Q: How many times can the ball bounce before it reaches the batsman?

 

The ball can only bounce a maximum of twice before it reaches batsman - any more than that and the umpire will call a no ball and another legitimate delivery must be bowled.
----------------------------------------------------------

ALL THE BEST

FAREWELL DAY

It's been almost 3 years now that he have played  here.
The years have passed by so quickly.....and we have built a million wonderful memories  together as a team.... 


For the time being, he is ''depart'' from us for his higher studies in UNITED KINGDOM 


 we don’t know when he will come back -but surely he will come back soon, and take some important responsibility  for  our team in the future, as all you know whom i am talking about ....
He is PRITHVI MURUGAN 
 young , talented,sincere , dedicated, simple, but power full cricket knowledgeable person  

The man whose wrist help us to wrest some famus wins in  DCAT LEAGUE he also makes us  proud  by PLAYING and "LEADING" THE DCAT UNDER 22 TEAM

He is also  the man leading from front to achieve  the success of his school team TEA PUPLIC SCHOOL to claim  the Trophy for school League

He have touched our lives more than we can say
We are going to miss him & his   smile everyday...
THANK YOU "PRITHVI"  ALL THE BEST FOR YOUR HIGHER STUDIES
You are leaving, and no matter how long it is....still everyone
 expect your service for our team as soon as possible .

Some words
from prithivi murugan.......


I would like to thank you all .
I am leaving my duty at this mission and I will be starting a new journey


I have enjoyed my time here and I appreciate having had the opportunity
to work with you. Thank you for all the support, guidance, and help,
 you have provided me over the past 3 years
Even though I will leave this duty, and I am looking forward to a
 new challenge  of my career.
MY HEART ALL WAYS BEATS FOR ...ALL OF YOU... AND... OUR TEAM "TCA"
I wish all of you every success for the future.
Stay safe and maintain the passion!
Thank you very much.
YOURS
PRITHVI MURUGAN

THE WAY OF GETTING OUT

WAYS OF GETTING OUT

Cricket is a batsman's game. or is it? a bowler can bowl the worst ball of his life,
 yet he gets another chance whereas one bad shot from a batsman might end the match for him.
Often I wonder whether batsman (or bats they use)
 in world cricket have evolved lot more than the bowlers over the years.
 Even when there are 10 total ways in which a batsman can be dismissed in a cricket match, bowlers are failing to device methods to bring about a batsman's dismissal.
Now that we've made a note of the fact, in following, 
we repeat & explain  the  modes of dismissals there are in a game of cricket.
 read carefully all you bowlers out there.. 


1.Caught


If a fielder catches the ball on the full after the batsman has hit it with his bat. However, if the fielder catches the ball, but either during the catch or immediately afterwards touches or steps over the boundary, then the batsman scores six runs and is not out.

2.Bowled
If the batsman misses the ball and it hits and breaks the wicket directly from the bowler's delivery. The batsman is out whether or not he is behind his popping crease. He is also out bowled if the ball breaks the wicket after deflecting from his bat or body. The batsman is not out if the bails does not put down

3.Leg before wicket
If the batsman misses the ball with his bat, but intercepts it with part of his body when it would otherwise have hit the wicket, and provided several other conditions (described below) are satisfied. An umpire must adjudicate such a decision, and will only do so if the fielding team appeal the decision. This is a question asked of the umpire, usually of the form "How's that?" (or "Howzat?"), and usually quite enthusiastic and loud. If the ball bounces outside an imaginary line drawn straight down the pitch from the outside edge of leg stump, then the batsman cannot be out LBW, no matter whether or not the ball would have hit the stumps. If the batsman attempts to play a shot at the ball with his bat (and misses) he may only be given out LBW if the ball strikes the batsman between imaginary lines drawn down the pitch from the outside edges of leg and off stumps (ie. directly in line with the wicket). If the batsman does not attempt to play the ball with his bat, then he may be given out LBW without satisfying this condition, as long as the umpire is convinced the ball would have hit the wicket. If the ball has hit the bat before the hitting the batsman, then he cannot be given out LBW.

4.Run-out
If a batsman is attempting to take a run, or to return to his crease after an aborted run, and a fielder breaks that batsman's wicket with the ball while he is out of the crease. The fielder may either break the wicket with a hand which holds the ball, or with the ball directly. It is possible for the non-striker to be run out if the striker hits the ball straight down the pitch towards the non-striker's wicket, and the bowler deflects the ball on to the wicket while the non-striker is out of his crease. If the ball is hit directly on to the non-striker's wicket, without being touched by a fielder, then the non-striker is not out. If the non-striker leaves his crease (in preparation to run) while the bowler is running up, the bowler may run him out without bowling the ball. Batsmen cannot be run out while the ball is dead - so they may confer in the middle of the pitch between deliveries if they desire.

5.Stumped
If a batsman misses the ball and in attempting to play it steps outside his crease, he is out stumped if the wicket-keeper gathers the ball and breaks the wicket with it before the batsman can ground part of his body or his bat behind his crease.

6.Hit wicket

7.Obstructing the field

8.Handled the ball

9.Timed out

10.Double hit

There are ten ways a batsman can be out -
 five are very common and

 five arevery rare.

More often than not a batsman will be caught,

 bowled, given leg before wicket (lbw), run out and  stumped.
so we  will give some small   tips from above  for the first five common outs .


for the remaining five other ways to lose your wicket range from the uncommon and  almost unseen.we will see the uncommon items with detail reports , laws, and some examples 

1. Hit wicket

This method of dismissal is governed by Law 35 of
the laws of cricket. The striker is out "hit wicket" if, 
after the bowler has entered his delivery stride and while the ball is in play,
 his wicket is put down by his bat or his person. 
The striker may do this whilst preparing to receive or receiving 
a delivery or in setting off for his first run after playing the delivery. 
In simple language if the striking batsman knocks the bails off the 
stumps or uproots the stumps, while attempting to hit the ball or take off for a run,

he is out hit wicket

Although a bowler is given credit for the wicket,it is not a method of
dismissal that bowler actively seeks. A batsman not be given out
 "hit wicket" if the ball is not actually delivered by the bowler or if 
the delivery is  a noball
This method is the sixth most common method of dismissal
 after caught, bowled, leg before wicket, run out and stumped.
 It is significantly rarer than any of these, which constitute
 the five conventional methods, but still much more common than
the other four (timed out, handled the ball, obstructing the 
field and hit the ball twice), which are extremely rare.

2. Obstructing the field
Inzamam was given out 'obstructing the field' in Peshawar in 2006
The umpire can give a batsman out "obstructing the field" if he 
feels the batter has got in the way of a fielder who is about to 
take a catch or attempt a run-out.
But the obstruction has to be seen to be a deliberate act to be
 given out, and the bowler does not get the credit for the 
dismissal.
This is a very uncommon method of dismissal hardly ever seen 
in club or international cricket.

However Pakistan's Inzamam-ul-Haq was controversially dismissed 
in this fashion during Pakistan's one-day international against 
India in Peshawar in February 2006.
The Pakistan batsman was out of his crease when he "defended" 
Suresh Raina's throw at the stumps from the outfield.

The Indian fielders rightly appealed and Inzamam was given his 
marching orders, much to his chagrin.
He was only the third batsman in the history of limited-overs 
internationals to be given out obstructing the field.
More recently, former England batsman Mark Ramprakash 
was given out obstructing the field while playing for Surrey
 against Gloucestershire in the County Championship in 2011.

Law 37 of the Laws of cricket provides that :

"Either batsman is out Obstructing the field if he wilfully obstructs or distracts the opposing side by word or action. It shall be regarded as obstruction if either batsman wilfully, and without the consent of the fielding side, strikes the ball with his bat or person, other than a hand not holding the bat, after the ball has touched a fielder."

If the obstruction is accidental, then it is not wilful, and so the batsman cannot be given out Obstructing the field.

Other provisions of Law 37

If either batsman is out 'obstructing the field', any runs completed before the offence, together with any penalty extras and the penalty for a No ball or Wide are still scored, except when the offence stopped a catch being caught when only penalties are still scored.

The bowler does not get credit for the wicket.

---------------------------------------------xxxxxxxxx---------------------------------------

3. Handled the ball

Gooch was given out handled the ball against Australia in 1993

If a batsman is worried the ball will roll back on to the 

stumps after playing a shot, they can knock the ball away with 

the bat, feet or pads.

But if they use their hands they can be given out handled the 

ball.Again this is another type of dismissal you see rarely - but it 

does happen.Former England captain Michael Vaughan has been dismissed this way.

When a batsman picks the ball up off the pitch to pass the

 ball back to the fielding side though, this is fine.

Normally, the batsman will check with the fielding side that

 they are happy for him to do this.

The bowler does not get credit for the wicket.

Law 33 of the Laws of cricket provides that " Either batsman is out Handled the ball if

he wilfully touches the ball while in play with hand or hands not holding the bat unless he does so with the consent of the opposing side."

A batsman is not out 'handled the ball' if: (i) He handles the ball in order to avoid injury; OR (ii) He uses his hand or hands to return the ball to any member of the fielding side with the consent of that side.

Though a batsman is out handled the ball if he uses his hand or hands to return the ball to any member of the fielding side without the consent of that side when the ball is still in play.

Other provisions of Law 33

If either batsman is out 'handled the ball', any runs completed before the offence, together with any penalty extras and the penalty for a No ball or Wide are still scored.

The bowler does not get credit for the wicket.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Timed out

Unusual dismissal

The purpose of the law is to ensure there are no unnecessary 

delays to the game. It is easily avoided and so it is very 

unusual for a batsman to get out 'timed out'. 

As of august 2011,

 there have been no instances of this type of dismissal 

in Test match or One Day International cricket and there 

have only been four instances in first-class cricket as a 

whole.

Batsmen dismissed 'timed out' in first-class cricket

Andrew Jordaan - Eastern Province v Transvaal at Port Elizabeth

 in 1987–88

Hemulal Yadav - Tripura v Orissa at Cuttack in 1997

Vasbert Drakes - Border v Free State at East London in 2002

AJ Harris - Nottinghamshire v Durham UCCE at Nottingham in 2003

Law 31 of the Laws of cricket provides that an incoming batsman must be in position

 to take guard or for his partner to be ready to receive the next ball within 

three minutes of the fall of the previous wicket. If this requirement is not met, 

the incoming batsman will be given out, timed out,on appeal.

The "incoming batsman" may be any batsman who has not yet batted.

 There is no prescribed batting order in cricket. 

If no batsman has set foot on the field when the appeal is made, 

the batting captain may pick any player who has not yet batted as the one to be given out.

[1] As a result, if the next batsman was only slightly delayed,

 the captain would be expected to sacrifice his worst batsman—usually the No. 11.

If there is protracted delay in which no batsman comes to the wicket 

so that the umpires consider that the batting team is refusing to play,

 the umpires will award the match to the other team. If, however,

 no player comes to the wicket because all eligible players are unable to bat 

(e.g. through injury or illness) then they are not given out timed out; 

instead the innings is declared closed and 'absent ill/injured/hurt/dead[2]' is noted 

next to those players' names as appropriate.

A new shortened version of cricket, Twenty20 cricket, 

stipulates that a batsman must be on the field within 90 seconds, 

rather than the three minutes specified in the Laws, 

although the batsman is not automatically out in this instance;

 the bowler is allowed to bowl the ball without the batsman there 

in an attempt to bowl him out. As a result of this rule,

 rather than sitting in the pavilion, the batsman next 

in are positioned on a bench on the boundary rather like other team sports 

such as association football and rugby.

5. hit the ball twice

Law 34 (Hit the ball twice)

1. Out Hit the ball twice

(a) The striker is out Hit the ball twice if, 

while the ball is in play, it strikes any part of 

his person or is struck by his bat and, before the ball 

has been touched by a fielder, he wilfully strikes it

 again with his bat or person, other than a hand not holding the bat,

 except for the sole purpose of guarding his wicket. 

See  above and Laws 33 (Handled the ball) and 37 (Obstructing the field).

(b) For the purpose of this Law, 'struck' or 'strike' shall include contact with the person of the striker.

The bowler does not get credit for the wicket.

Unusual dismissal

An example of the dismissal occurred in 1906 when John King,

 playing for Leicestershire against Surrey at The Oval tried 

to score a run after playing the ball twice to avoid getting bowled.

 Had he not tried to score a run, he would not have been out. 

Based on the history of the game, this method of dismissal is the second rarest 

after timed out, although in modern times timed out has become more common.

One relatively recent example of a batsman being out "Hit the ball twice" was 

Kurt Wilkinson's dismissal when playing for Barbados againstRest of Leeward 

Islands in the 2002-03 Red Stripe Bowl. 

The dismissal was controversial as 

there was doubt as to whether Wilkinson had "wilfully" struck the ball twice

 as required under the relevant law of cricket.

John King

   

King is the last batsman to have been given out Hit the ball twice in a first-class game

 in England, when in the match against Surrey at the Oval in 1906 King 

stopped the ball from running onto his stumps by hitting it a second time, 

and then attempted to run a single.

(Thanks to bbcsport , wikipedia, and some web source)

CHAMPIONS ONCE AGAIN

2010-2011


WE RETAIN OUR CHAMPIONSHIP

CLOUD NINE

DUCKWORTH-LEWIS D/L

Understanding the Duckworth-Lewis system in cricket


HISTORY

Over the years if a one day cricket match 
was shortened by poor weather calculations
 were made about how many runs the team chasing the total
 needed. This total was based on the average runs scored by 
the other side over all their overs. this wasn't always fair 
so another way was needed. One that was fair and could work 
ball by ball as the target total, one that could be known all 
the way through the game. The solution was the famous and sometime 
infamous Duckworth-lewis system, a system not everyone understands.

The D/L method was devised by two British statisticians, Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis.

It was first used in international cricket in the second game of the 1996/7 Zimbabwe 

versus England One Day International series, which Zimbabwe won by seven runs, 

and was formally adopted by the International Cricket Council in 2001 as the standard

 method of calculating target scores in rain shortened one-day matches.

Various different methods had been used previously, including run-rate ratios, 

the score that the first team had achieved at the same point in their innings, 

and targets derived by totaling the best scoring overs in the initial innings. 

All these methods have flaws that are easily exploitable.

 For example,

 run-rate ratios take no account of how many wickets the team batting second have lost, 

but simply reflect how quickly they were scoring when the match was interrupted;

 so, if a team felt a rain stoppage was likely they could attempt to force the scoring 

rate without regard for the corresponding highly likely loss of wickets, 

skewing the comparison with the first team. Notoriously, the "best-scoring overs" method,

 used in the 1992 Cricket World Cup, left the South African cricket team requiring 21 runs

 from one ball (when the maximum score from one ball is generally six runs). 

Before a brief rain interruption, South Africa was chasing a target of 22 runs from 13 balls but,

 following the stoppage, the team's amended target became 21 (a reduction of only one run)

 to be scored off just one ball (a reduction of 12 balls).

 The D/L method avoids this flaw: in this match, 
the revised D/L target would have been four runs to tie or five to win from the final ball.

Basis of the method
The D/L method works using the notion that teams have two resources with which to make as many runs as they can - these are the number of overs they have still to receive and the number of wickets they have in hand. From any stage in their innings, their further run-scoring capability depends on both these two resources in combination. 
The single table gives the percentage of these combined resources that remain for any number of overs left and wickets lost. An extract of the over-by-over table is given in Table 1. (A ball-by-ball version of the table has also been produced to enable scorers to deal with instances when play is interrupted mid-over.)

When a match is shortened after it has begun, the resources of one or both teams are depleted and the two teams usually have different amounts of resource for their innings.
In this case a revised target must be set. The D/L method does this in accordance with the relative run-scoring resources available to the two teams. If stoppages cause the team batting second (referred to here as Team 2) to have less resources available, as is more often than not the case, then their target will be revised downwards. If, on the other hand, as often happens when Team 1's innings has been interrupted, the stoppages result in Team 2 having more resources available, then their target is revised upwards to compensate for the extra resources they have at their disposal.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

For example: a team have lost five wickets after receiving 25 of their 50 overs 
when rain stops play.
At this point, using the table produced by the Duckworth-Lewis method, the team's 
remaining resources are valued at 42.2%.
If 15 overs are then lost because of the weather, the innings will be completed 
after only 10 more overs.
The D/L method says that, with 10 overs left and five wickets lost, the team has 
26.1% of their resources left.
To compensate for the lost overs, we must calculate the resource
 % lost.
This works out to 42.2 - 26.1 = 16.1.
If the team had been chasing a total of 250 runs, their new target is calculated in 
the following way.
Resources available at the start = 100%
Resources lost = 16.1
Resources available after rain interruption = 83.9%
Then reduce team one's score in the following way. Multiply team one's runs scored 
by the recalculated resources divided by the resources available at the start.
That is: 250 x 83.9/100 = 209.75.
The target is then rounded to the nearest whole number, so the team batting second 
would be set a target of 210 to win.
Simple! 


STILL YOU HAVE SOME DOUBTS..?

See this examples

Example 1: 
Premature curtailment of Team 2's innings
Team 1 have scored 250 runs from their 50 available overs and Team 2 lose 5 wickets in scoring 199 runs in 40 overs. Play is then stopped by the weather, the rain refuses to relent and the match is abandoned. A decision on the winner is required.
Team 1's innings: this was uninterrupted, so the resource percentage available is 100%.
Team 2's innings: resource % available at start of innings = 100%
After 40 overs Team 2 have 10 overs left and have lost 5 wickets.
From table, resource % left at suspension of play = 27.5%
As play is abandoned all this remaining resource is lost.
Hence resource % available for Team 2's innings = 100 - 27.5 = 72.5%
Team 2 had less resource available than Team 1 so their target must be scaled down by the ratio of resources, 72.5/100 
Team 1 scored 250, so Team 2's 'target' is 250 x 72.5/100 = 181.25
As there is to be no further play, the winner is decided according to whether or not this target has been exceeded. With 199 runs on the board, they have exceeded their required target by 17.75 and so are declared the winners by 18 runs.
Note : The above result is quite fair as Team 2 were clearly in a strong position when play was stopped and would very likely have gone on to win the match if it hadn't rained. Most other methods of target revision in use would, unfairly, make Team 1 the winners. The average run rate method gives 201 to win, the Current ICC method gives 227 and the parabola method gives 226. [Setting the target by the method of Discounted Total Runs - the Australian rain-rule - requires knowledge of the runs made by Team 1 from their most productive overs but the target would almost certainly be no lower than that required under average run rate and would probably be much higher so that Team 2 would very probably lose by this method as well.

Example 2:
 Interruption to Team 2's innings
In an ECB Axa Life (Sunday) League match Team 1 have scored 200 runs from their 40 available overs and Team 2 lose 5 wickets in scoring 140 runs in 30 overs. Play is then suspended and 5 overs are lost. What is Team 2's revised target?


Team 1's innings: At the start of 40 over innings resource percentage available = 90.3%
Team 2's innings: resource % available at start of 40 over innings = 90.3%
After 30 overs Team 2 have 10 overs left and have lost 5 wickets. 


From table, resource % left at start of suspension = 27.5%
5 overs are lost, so when play is resumed 5 overs are left.
From table, resource % left at resumption of play = 16.4%
Hence resource % lost = 27.5 - 16.4 = 11.1%
so resource % available for Team 2's innings = 90.3 - 11.1 = 79.2%


Team 2 had less resource available than Team 1 so their target must be scaled down by the ratio of resources, 79.2/90.3
Team 1 scored 200, so Team 2's target is 200 x 79.2/90.3 =175.42, or 176 to win, and they require a further 36 runs from 5 overs with 5 wickets in hand.


Example 3:
 Interruption to Team 1's innings
In an ODI, Team 1 have lost 2 wickets in scoring 100 runs in 25 overs from an expected 50 when extended rain leads to Team 1's innings being terminated and Team 2's innings is also restricted to 25 overs. 
What is the target score for Team 2?
Because of the different stages of the teams' innings that their 25 overs are lost, they represent different losses of resource. Team 1 have lost 2 wickets and had 25 overs left when the rain arrived and so from the table you will see that the premature termination of their innings has deprived them of the 61.8% resource percentage they had remaining.
 Having started with 100% they have used 100 - 61.8 = 38.2%; in other words they have had only 38.2% resources available for their innings.
Team 2 will also receive 25 overs. With 25 overs left and no wicket lost you will see from the table that the resource percentage which they have available (compared to a full 50 over innings) is 68.7%. Team 2 thus have 68.7 - 38.2 = 30.5% greater resource than had Team 1 and so they are set a target which is 30.5% of 225, or 68.63, more runs than Team 1 scored. [225 is the average in 50 overs for ODIs]
Team 2's revised target is therefore set at 168.63, or 169 to win in 25 overs, and the advantage to Team 2 from knowing in advance of the reduction in their overs is neutralised.
Note: Most of the other target resetting methods in use make no allowance for this interruption. They set the target of 101 to win simply because both teams are to receive the same number of overs. This is clearly an injustice to Team 1 who were pacing their innings to last 50 overs when it was curtailed, whereas Team 2 knew in advance of the reduction of their innings to 25 overs and have been handed an unfair advantage. D/L allows for this by setting Team 2 a higher target than the number of runs Team 1 actually scored, as described above.


SO FROM ABOVE EXAMPLES ONE MUST SATISFIED WITH THIS LAW..?


NO WAY 

Here are some famous bad examblesQ1.
Suppose we are playing a 50-overs-per-side game where only 10 overs per side
are needed for the match to count. Team 1 send in pinch hitters and get off 
to a wonderful start making 100 for no wicket after 10 overs. 
There is then a prolonged stoppage and when play can resume Team 1's innings is closed and there is only just time for Team 2 to face the minimum 10 overs. 
The D/L calculation (Standard Edition) gives Team 2's target as 151 in 10 overs. 
How can this practically impossible target be justified?


 Q2
 Same playing regulations as in Q1 Team 1 make the excellent score of 350 in their 50 overs
 and Team 2 start their reply cautiously and reach 40/0 in 10 overs.
 The heavens now open (or the floodlights fail) and further play is ruled impossible.
 Under the Standard Edition of the D/L system Team 2 are declared the winners by 3 runs.
 They were clearly already falling behind the run rate they needed even allowing for the
 fact that they had all their wickets intact, so how can this result be justified?
The above represent the two worst-case scenarios for treatment by the Standard Edition of the D/L method. They could only give such extreme consequences with playing regulations that allow a minimum of 10 overs per side for the match to count. But a similar, though less exaggerated, injustice could still arise even with a minimum of 20 overs per side required.


The Standard D/L method was devised so that anyone could perform the calculations with nothing more than the single table of resource percentages and a pocket calculator. This was regarded as an essential requirement for the method. It was considered that to be totally dependent on a computer would mean that the method could not be used universally, it would be vulnerable to computer failure and it would be more difficult to explain how the targets were calculated.
The use of the simplifying single table of resource percentages meant that actual performance must necessarily be assumed to be proportional to average performance. In 95% of cases this assumption is valid, but the assumption breaks down when an actual performance is far above the average, as is the case in the scenarios of Q10 and Q11 and in the record-breaking match between South Africa and Australia (March 2006) in which South Africa scored 438/9 to beat Australia's 434 in 50 overs.
This problem has now been overcome by use of the Professional Edition and this has been in general use for most matches at the top level of the game, including ODIs, since early in 2004. It can only be operated by using a computer program.


FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS


1. What is the difference between the Standard Edition and the Professional Edition?
At the top level of the game, the Professional Edition of the D/L method is now used.
 This requires use of a computer program. At lower levels of the game, where use of a computer cannot always be guaranteed, the Standard Edition is used. This is the method which was used universally before 2004; it is operated manually using the published tables of resource percentages.
2. How do the results of the Professional Edition differ from those of the previous 
(Standard) Edition?
For innings when the side batting first (Team 1) score at or below the average for top 
level cricket (which would be about 235 for an uninterrupted 50-over innings), 
the results of applying the Professional Edition are generally similar to those from 
the Standard Edition. For higher scoring matches, the results start to diverge and the
 difference increases the higher the first innings total. In effect there is now a 
different table of resource percentages for every total score in the Team 1 innings,
 and so a computer is essential to operate the system.
3. How do we know whether to use the Professional Edition or the Standard Edition?
The decision on which edition should be used is for the cricket authority which runs
 the particular competition. The Professional Edition can only be operated by running
 the computer software CODA.


Playing conditions for ODIs and for most countries' national competitions require that
 the Professional Edition is used where a computer can be guaranteed to be available 
for all matches; otherwise, or in the unlikely event of the computer failing to be 
available and operable, the Standard Edition is used (see Q1).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------