Home 회사안내 제품안내 AL프로파일 제작사례 주문서 주문/문의 자료실 공지사항
	■ 제작사례 ■ 자료실 ■ 주문/문의 ■ 공지사항		글쓴이 e-mail Hom페이지 제 목 내 용 In this circumstance, there are insufficient data points (balls bowled) to reasonably predict the trajectory of an innings. A fairer approach would be to set a minimum number of overs before wickets lost are taken into consideration. For example, if that minimum number of overs in T20 were 5 overs (ie 25% of the innings completed), the wickets West Indies had lost in those 14 balls would be irrelevant. The target set would assume that no balls had been bowled. The West Indian target should then have been higher. After 5 overs, and only after 5 overs, the runs already scored and wickets already lost would be taken into account. A more suitable minimum number of overs might in fact be 8 or 10 overs. The alternative would be to increase the weighting in favour of the side batting first in these circumstances. 2 The spirit of cricket argument: Anybody who has played cricket at any level knows that it is much easier to score around ten runs an over for 6 overs than it is for 20 overs, especially when 10 wickets are available in both situations. It is wrong for Duckworth to suggest otherwise. 첨부파일 비밀번호