Editing Duckworth–Lewis–Stern method (section)

==Examples==
===Stoppage in first innings===
====Increased target====
In the [[English cricket team in India in 2008–09#4th ODI|4th India–England ODI in the 2008 series]], the first innings was interrupted by rain on two occasions, reducing the match to 22 overs each. India (batting first) made 166/4. The D/L method increased England's target to 198 from 22 overs. As England ''knew'' they had only 22 overs, the expectation is that they could score more runs from those overs than India had from their (interrupted) innings. England made 178/8 from 22 overs, and so the match was listed as "India won by 19 runs (D/L method)".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://content-eap.cricinfo.com/indveng/engine/current/match/361046.html |work=Cricinfo|publisher=ESPN Sports Media|title=Full Scoreboard of India vs England 4th ODI 2008|date=23 November 2008}}</ref>

During the [[Indian cricket team in South Africa in 2010–11#5th ODI|5th ODI between India and South Africa in January 2011]], rain halted play twice during the first innings. The match was reduced to 46 overs each. South Africa scored 250/9. The D/L method increased India's target to 268. As the number of overs was reduced during South Africa's innings, this method takes into account what South Africa were likely to have scored if they had known throughout their innings that it would only be 46 overs long. The match was listed as "South Africa won by 33 runs (D/L method)".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/463154.html|title= Full Scorecard South Africa v India 5th ODI 2011|date= 23 January 2011|work=Cricinfo|publisher=ESPN Sports Media}}</ref>

====Decreased target====
On [[English cricket team in Sri Lanka in 2014–15#3rd ODI|3 December 2014, Sri Lanka played England]] and batted first, but play was interrupted when Sri Lanka had scored 6/1 from 2 overs. At the restart, both innings were reduced to 35 overs, and Sri Lanka finished on 242/8. D/L reduced England's target to 236 from 35 overs.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/750667.html |title=Full Scorecard of Sri Lanka vs England 3rd ODI 2014|date=3 December 2014|work=Cricinfo|publisher=ESPN Sports Media}}</ref> Although Sri Lanka had less resource remaining after the interruption than England would have for their whole innings (about 7% less), they had used up 8% of their resource (2 overs and 1 wicket) before the interruption, so the total resource used by Sri Lanka was still slightly more than England had available, hence the slightly decreased target for England.

===Stoppage in second innings===
A simple example of the D/L method being applied was the [[Indian_cricket_team_in_Pakistan_in_2005–06#First_ODI|1st ODI between India and Pakistan in their 2006 ODI series]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Matches/MatchScorecard_ODI.asp?MatchCode=2423 |title=2005-2006 Pakistan v India - 1st ODI - Peshawar|date=6 February 2006|work=HowStat!}}</ref> India batted first, and were all out for 328. Pakistan, batting second, were 311/7 when bad light stopped play after the 47th over. Pakistan's target, had the match continued, was 18 runs in 18 balls, with three wickets in hand. Considering the overall scoring rate throughout the match, this is a target most teams would be favoured to achieve. And indeed, application of the D/L method resulted in a retrospective target score of 305 (or par score of 304) at the end of the 47th over, with the result therefore officially listed as "[[Pakistani cricket team|Pakistan]] won by 7 runs (D/L Method)".

The D/L method was used in the group stage match between [[Sri Lanka national cricket team|Sri Lanka]] and [[Zimbabwe national cricket team|Zimbabwe]] at the [[2010 ICC World Twenty20#Group B|T20 World Cup in 2010]]. Sri Lanka scored 173/7 in 20 overs batting first, and in reply Zimbabwe were 4/0 from 1 over when rain interrupted play. At the restart Zimbabwe's target was reduced to 108 from 12 overs, but rain stopped the match when they had scored 29/1 from 5 overs. The retrospective D/L target from 5 overs was a further reduction to 44, or a par score of 43, and hence Sri Lanka won the match by 14 runs.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cricinfo.com/world-twenty20-2010/engine/current/match/412686.html|title=Full Scorecard of Sri Lanka vs Zimbabwe ICC Men's T20 World Cup 7th Match Group B|date=3 May 2010|work=Cricinfo|publisher=ESPN Sports Media}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.espncricinfo.com/world-twenty20-2010/content/story/458306.html|title=Jayawardene ton floors Zimbabwe|date=3 May 2010|author=Sriram Veera|work=Cricinfo|publisher=ESPN Sports Media}}</ref>

The DLS method was also used after the rain disruption in the  [[2023 Indian Premier League final]], when [[Chennai Super Kings]] had scored 4/0 (0.3 overs) and the [[Gujarat Titans]] just scored 214/4 (20 overs). The target was reduced at 171 runs from 15 overs from earlier target of 215 runs from 20 overs for Chennai Super Kings. Chennai Super Kings won by 5 wickets by the DLS method. This was achieved by reaching 171/5 from 15 overs. 

An example of a D/L tied match was the ODI between England and India on 11 September 2011. This match was frequently interrupted by rain in the final overs, and a ball-by-ball calculation of the Duckworth–Lewis 'par' score played a key role in tactical decisions during those overs. At one point, India were leading under D/L during one rain delay, and would have won if play had not resumed. At a second rain interval, England, who had scored some quick runs (knowing they needed to get ahead in D/L terms) would correspondingly have won if play had not resumed. Play was finally called off with just 7 balls of the match remaining and England's score equal to the Duckworth–Lewis 'par' score, therefore resulting in a tie.

This example does show how crucial (and difficult) the decisions of the umpires can be, in assessing when rain is heavy enough to justify ceasing play. If the umpires of that match had halted play one ball earlier, England would have been ahead on D/L, and so would have won the match. Equally, if play had stopped one ball later, India could have won the match with a [[dot ball]] – indicating how finely-tuned D/L calculations can be in such situations.

===Stoppages in both innings===
During the [[2012–13 Big Bash League season#Knockout stage 2|2012/13 KFC Big Bash League]], D/L was used in the 2nd semi-final played between the [[Melbourne Stars]] and the [[Perth Scorchers]]. After rain delayed the start of the match, it interrupted Melbourne's innings when they had scored 159/1 off 15.2 overs, and both innings were reduced by 2 overs to 18, and Melbourne finished on 183/2. After a further rain delay reduced Perth's innings to 17 overs, Perth returned to the field to face 13 overs, with a revised target of 139. Perth won the game by 8 wickets with a boundary off the final ball.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/571265.html|title=Full Scorecard of Perth Scorchers vs Melbourne Stars, Big Bash League 2nd semi-final|work=Cricinfo|publisher=ESPN Sports Media|date=16 January 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.espncricinfo.com/big-bash-league-2012/content/story/601098.html|title=Scorchers prevail in dramatic, rain-hit match|author=Alex Malcolm|date=16 January 2013|work=Cricinfo|publisher=ESPN Sports Media}}</ref>

===Stoppage in second innings with revised target already achieved===
When a team who get their full resources scores very low, and their opponents score very quickly early in their innings a stoppage can result in a revised target that has already been achieved. In 2012 a [[Big Bash League]] [[Twenty20]] over match between Perth & Melbourne Stars saw Perth score a record low of 69 runs all out. Melbourne Stars scored 29 from their first 2 overs when rain fell and delayed the match. Once the rain cleared the umpires decided that the match conditions and timing was acceptable for a reduced 5 over innings from Melbourne. Under the older Duckworth-Lewis method the revised target score for their 5 over innings was only 20 runs, a score which Melbourne had already exceeded. The unusual situation saw the match referee order the two teams to play out a single delivery (a non-scoring leave through to the keeper) then "award" the match to Melbourne in an effort to avoid confusing spectators and television viewers. This "extra ball" was later declared void as it was not required and was expunged from the match score along with the impact the ball had on the league table net run rate. Melbourne won by 24 runs under the D/L method calculated using the par score of 6 runs after 2 overs. The 6 run par score incorrectly reported by some media outlets to have been the target.<ref>https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/big-bash-league-2012-13-571220/perth-scorchers-vs-melbourne-stars-571236/full-scorecard</ref><ref>https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/bbl-blushes-after-controversial-stars-win-597003</ref>

As any competitive match will have a minimum over requirement, commonly 5 overs each in Twenty20 cricket and 20 or 25 each in one day internationals, a team being ahead of a revised target for the amount of play remaining can leave the teams waiting for the weather to clear, the ground staff to work and the match referee to decide the game could continue even though no more play would occur in order to determine if the match is abandoned or a declared victory for the batting team. Duckworth & Lewis wrote in 2017 that they had suggested that the calculations involved be done dynamically and that in these unusual situations it would mean a team would win the game were they ahead of the par score at any point after overs had begun being lost. They argued that it would also prevent tactics that would otherwise be against the normal spirit of cricket, ie scoring runs instead of blocking to get through overs to avoid an abandonment, or that would have a bowling team having their bowlers doing no-balls or wides in order to prevent a match going past the minimum limits.<ref>https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/frank-duckworth-and-tony-lewis-on-interpreting-the-dls-rules-differently-1130137</ref>