Dr Robert wrote:clubcricketeradi wrote:Dr Robert wrote:clubcricketeradi wrote:Dr Robert wrote:Imagine going to watch a 50 over game, which changes into a t20 match because they think it might rain for an hour. I'd want my money back.
That is from the customers point of view and whether the customers want money back or not should not justify the use of this DL method.Solutions need to be found to that point as well.The ticket revenues are probably not even 5% to broadcast rights, so even if they refund full money back to ticket purchasers, it will not make much difference.The ground owners, the respective boards and ICC should find a way to share profits to cover up this loss for the grounds.
It's not just about the money, although the paying public are important in all this. To change a 50 over game into a 20 over one on the premise that it might rain is illogical. one, it might not rain, two, it may do for half an hour, in which case no harm done, and three, D/L is not perfect but is a pretty fair way of deciding a match.
In some cases we wont get a DL match. So it is better to go for a T20 atleast if rainfall is highly probable.I think one example of such occurrence was during CT2013 where a T20 could have been played .Sometimes we might miss the opportunity of a 50 over match, thats true.But rather than DL being used in 40 overs match, i would personally prefer a cricket match decide a result.
If rain is around the corner, ie, about to rain, and likely to most of the day, then yes fair enough. But regarding the recent match between India and NZ. The right thing was done.
They could have shortened it to 30 overs, 35 overs if not 20 depending on forecast.At least that would allow both teams to play well and better team would have won.Here after scoring more runs in less balls we lost.