2. A RE THE I.C.C.- FINDINGS AND DECISION CORRECT ? V. Jayadevan (The one who developed the VJD system)

3. In the ICC press release, two reasons were pointed out to decide to continue with D/L system. There are no evidences of significant flaws in D/L system No improvements could be offered by the use of VJD method The committee also expressed satisfaction over the thoroughness and independence of the report submitted by the reviewer.

4. There are clear evidences of significant flaws in D/L results. Somehow the creators have developed an impression in the whole cricket community that it is a highly robust system, both mathematically and statistically The general inherent fear of people for mathematics discourages them from questioning D/L system beyond a limit But the truth is that it is just a mediocre system with several shortcomings.

5. Situation D/L target for team-2 50 over projected score of team-1, D/L VJD-target for team-2 50 over projected score of team-1, VJD Team-1, 50/0 when match interrupted after 20 overs. Team-2 get 20 overs 140231113191 Team-1, 50/1 when match interrupted after 20 overs. Team-2 get 20 overs 115188108181 Team-1, 50/2 when match interrupted after 20 overs. Team-2 get 20 overs 95156103172 An example indicating serious statistical flaw in statistical analysis.

6. Situation D/L target for team-2 VJD-target for team-2 Team-1 100/0 when match interrupted after 20 overs. Team-2 get 20 overs 179170 Team-1 100/1 when match interrupted after 20 overs. Team-2 get 20 overs 172164 Team-1 100/2 when match interrupted after 20 overs. Team-2 get 20 overs 163158 Difference in targets of team-2 for team-1’s score of 100 and team-1’s score of 50 for loss of wickets 0,1 and 2 D/LVJD For zero loss of wickets T(100/0)-T(50/0)39 (179-140)57 (170-113) For the loss of 1 wicket T(100/1)-T(50/1)57 (172-115)56 (164-108) For the loss of 2 wickets T(100/2)-T(50/2)68 (163-95)55 (158-103)

7. D/L target for 50/0 in 25 overs is 118 which looks OK, the projected score is 167 which also looks reasonable. But see the difference between 231 and 167; 64 runs just for a change of 5 overs. Again, for 100/0 in 25, the D/L target is 193 (looks very high). The difference in targets between 50/0 and 100/0 in 20 overs is just 39 runs. But the difference between 50/0 and 100/0 in 25 overs, is 75 runs.

8. Very serious errors in par scores in case of T20 matches. Situation: Comparison of par-scores corresponding to 5 overs (you can have a result at the completion of 5 overs) in high scoring T20 matches.

9. Overs completed Wickets down 0123456789 561636568738295118156210 89899101103106112121136165210 10123124125126129133139151172211 12148149 150152154159166182212 15186 187 188189190194201218

10. Sl.no SituationD/L VJD 1 England 176/5 after 36, 5 overs when match rescheduled to 46. Then after 37,5 overs when England were 181/5 again rescheduled to 40 overs. England make 193/6 in 40. Target for NZ in 40. 226212 2 SA 226/3 in 42. Four overs lost 250 in 46, Target for India in 46 overs 271260 3India 226/8 in 47, 1 overs. Target for Pakistan in 33. 202187 4New Zealand 212/5 in 44, 2 overs, Target for W.I. in 33 overs. 211201 5 Australia 96/1 in 19 when the interruption occurred. Rescheduled to 29. Australia makes 183 in 29. Target for South Africa in 29 (debut of Wincoda 3.0) 223209

11. There are very serious statistical and mathematical flaws in D/L system There are clear and definite advantages by switching over to VJD system The report of the reviewer is a shallow and prejudiced one and he was misleading the committee to protect his special interests.