The match between the West Indies and England was as good as a quarter final wherein the team which wins would advance to the next round and the team that loses would have to forfeit all hopes of winning the tournament anymore. At the end of the day, it was the west Indies who came out victorious but, not in a manner that most of us would agree. Of course, nothing could be done for the showers that pour down. But, a lot more can still be done for the teams out there to see to that they play 20 overs of cricket uninterrupted by weather. Had it been a one day match, nothing could be done much. At the most, the match could be played fresh the next day.
However, the T20 format of the game is not bound to this condition. A delay of even 3 to 4 hours can still ensure justified cricket, without denying either of the team of its overs or the powerplay. In other words, I don't see the Duckworth-Lewis playing such an important role in the T20 game. One can as well wait for the showers to completely pour down and then start the play afresh. And that too in such a competition that involves all the major cricket playing nations from the world, the Duckworth-Lewis can never satisfy all. Perhaps! Even the West Indies would not have been satisfied despite winning and advancing to the semis.
It was ad to see all the hard work that England put in to put up a decent total of 161 on the board going in vain. The man of the match was not given to either Ravi Bopara who struck a magnificient half century aided with 5 hits to the fence or to Kevin Pietersen who scored 31 runs with a strike rate 164, but was given to Ramnaresh Sarwan first for belonging to the winning team and then for scoring 19 runs at a strike rate of 211. Don't you guys think that it is just foolish to shorten the shortest version of the game of cricket? If the rules for T20 are same as that for ODI, the T20 can rather be called as a reduced version of fifty overs cricket.
Some twenty years back, the one day match used to be played for 60 overs a side, which was then reduced to 55 overs a side. And now the same is played with each team having been prepared to bowl 50 overs. I don't see the T20 format as something special if not for the fact that a team bowls just 20 overs and in some cases, the boundary is shortened. If such is the thiking, there could be four other formats of cricket namely 60-60, 55-55, ODI and the T20. In case the game of T20 is to be enjoyed by the fans all over, I suggest that the ICC drop the Duckworth-Lewis method from this format. When the ICC can come out with a solution in case of matches ending up in a tie, I don't find the reason for ICC to go in for the same D-L method in T20 as well.