Once again, the West Indies have been booted out of a tournament because its players and management have failed to come to terms with the mathematics of modern-day cricket. Like it or not, net run rate (NRR) can play a significant role when tournaments involve more than two teams.
Teams must be aware of this and do whatever is necessary to achieve the best NRR possible from the beginning. Sadly, time and time again, the West Indies have been found wanting in this department of the modern game, throwing away simple opportunities to improve their NRR.
Before the final match (Sri Lanka v India) of the tri-nation series involving the West Indies, our NRR was -0.383 and India's was -0.524. However, almost any victory by India in the last match would have brought them level on points and made their NRR better than ours. For instance, a win off the last ball for any score up to 321 in a 50-over match would have sufficed. Of course, any win before the last ball would have made their NRR even better.
In other words, there was no added pressure on India to win that last match by a significant margin. But it did not have to be so. The West Indies blew two simple opportunities to improve their NRR. In the match against India, Kemar Roach and Sunil Narine had done remarkably well bringing the score from 113 for 8 to 171 for 8, with 32 balls remaining.
The victory target of 274 was beyond reach but adding 20 runs, say, for the last 32 balls would have greatly improved our NRR. (Sometimes, even 1 run is enough to take your NRR above another team.) The fact seemed totally lost on Narine who, as usual, threw away his wicket. Roach followed immediately, playing a careless shot, perhaps thinking it did not matter, not appreciating the importance of making a few more runs.
In the match against Sri Lanka, we missed another opportunity to improve our NRR even when it was clear we could not win the match. Adding just another 10 runs to go with the 20 above would have given us a NRR of -0.202 (instead of -0.383). To appreciate its significance, suppose Sri Lanka had batted first and made 275 off 50 overs. To beat a NRR of -0.383, India could afford to win off the very last ball. However, to beat a NRR of -0.202, they would have had to make 276 off 43 overs–a much more demanding task.
As it turned out, Sri Lanka needed to score 178 off 26 overs to win the rain-shortened match and allow West Indies into the final. If they reached 168 and lost, our NRR would have been better than India's and we would have progressed. Had our NRR been -0.202, they would have needed to score just 138 for our NRR to be better than India's. However, they would have had to score at least 142 to deny India the bonus point and a place in the final. Still, it's much easier to score 142 than 168.
Far too often the West Indies operate as if they are clueless about NRR and take notice only when it hits them squarely in the face. By then, the missed opportunities are gone and it's too late to do anything about it. Perhaps it's time the WICB hire someone familiar with mathematics and cricket to give our team every possible advantage. Heaven knows, we need it.
Noel Kalicharan
noelkali@gmail.com
