Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Time to trial VJD method instead of D/L?

MUMBAI: Ten years after an engineer from Thrissur in Kerala, V Jayadevan, first introduced his self-invented VJD method for weather-affected cricket matches, the formula may gain some kind of recognition at last.

The technical committee of the International Cricket Council (ICC) is expected to call Jayadevan later this month to give an official presentation of how his system works and will take a call on it after understanding all its implications.

Senior cricketers have been asked for their views on Duckworth-Lewis and many have come forward giving it a thumbs-down in recent past. That, in turn, has encouraged certain ICC members to give the VJD method a fair hearing.

For Jayadevan, this is a huge and emphatic step forward to help introduce the VJD method to the world, especially because in the last ten years, all his efforts to do so have been in vain.

The Duckworth-Lewis Method, first introduced by two English statisticians Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis in 1996-97, has been used by the ICC in all international matches officially since 2001 and no other system, including the VJD method, has been given a try. In 2005, the Duckworth-Lewis method was revised and updated and once again the VJD method was left in the cold without a hearing.

The D/L method — as Duckworth-Lewis is called — is a mathematical formula designed to calculate the target score for team batting second in shorter formats of the game interrupted by weather. Experts have generally accepted the D/L method to be fair and accurate in setting a target score, but it has not happened without controversies.

Experts say D/L's G50 rule — in which the possible target is calculated based on the whole 50 overs of play in the first innings — is the method's biggest weakness because it does not take into account the possibility of a team scoring less than the set score that is projected by the computer-generated program.

"When the interruption comes in the first innings, you have to find out a projected score through a more validated method. D/L does not provide that," says an expert. VJD's biggest strength, he says is: "It assumes various milestones in a match. The advantage is that the VJD model lies much closer to the actual situation than the D/L model."

The D/L is universally accepted and regardless of how players themselves view it, the model has stood the test of time. However, it is unfair if the concerned authorities have refused to give the other method — equally good and one that claims to be better in certain situations of the shorter format of the game — a fair opportunity to present itself.

"It is primarily the BCCI's responsibility to ask for a VJD presentation and forward it to the technical committee to study it," says the expert.

The technical committee of the BCCI, headed by Sunil Gavaskar, has studied the VJD method in the past and has recommended it to the BCCI, particularly asking that the method be introduced in the Indian Premier League. The Indian Board, however, has steadfastly refused to consider it. It gets worse because neither the BCCI nor ICC has even bothered to inform Jayadevan why the VJD has not been considered.

Asking Jayadevan to give a presentation of his model is the least the board or ICC can do. The first step has been taken in that direction.

toi

No comments: