Australia vs India: Why was the DLS target lower than India's actual total? EXPLAINED

The first match of India's white-ball tour of Australia didn't go to plan as the hosts registered a thumping seven-wicket win in the opening ODI at Perth on Sunday (October 19). In a rain-affected match, India's total of 136/9 from their 26 overs proved to be well below-par as Australia chased it down with 29 balls to spare and seven wickets left.

 

DLS makes headlines AGAIN!

While it was a complete no-show from India, one of the major talking points of the day, albeit not that significant, was about the DLS target that Australia were given. Technically, you'd think that 137 would be the score that they needed to get but this was a rain-affected game and hence, Duckworth-Lewis Stern (DLS) came into play.

Usually, in rain-marred contests, the score made by the team batting first is revised using the DLS method and mostly, there is an increase in the score. This is because the team batting first is usually at a disadvantage, as they didn't start their innings knowing that it would be a shortened game.

In such a scenario, it is only fair that the score gets revised with some more runs added to the eventual score. How much is added often depends on the team's position before the rain delay and how many wickets they had left, the innings run rate etc.

 

What happened to Australia's DLS target?

In Perth, however, India's total was 136/9 from 26 overs but Australia's target was 131, which meant a reduction of six runs from India's total. This might seem unfair from the outset and while this is a rare occurrence in DLS targets, it is neither unfair nor illogical.

There are some scenarios where the team batting first could have been in some advantage in a shortened innings. You might wonder how could India, who were 50/4 in the 17th over, be in any advantage with the innings then shortened to 26-overs-a-side.

 

Explanation

The first rain delay happened with India at 37/3 in 11.5 overs with Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli and Shubman Gill all back in the hut. When play resumed after the long break, the innings shortened to 35-overs-a-side with each bowler having a maximum quote of seven overs. Josh Hazlewood, Australia's best bowler, had already bowled six overs while Mitchell Starc had sent down five overs already.

When the second rain break came, India were 46/4 in 14.2 overs and upon resumption, the match became 32-overs-a-side. With the innings shortened, it meant that two bowlers could bowl seven overs each and three could bowl six overs apiece. It meant that Josh Hazlewood, who bowled seven sensational overs for 2-20, couldn't bowl anymore.

Soon after, another rain delay got the overs down from 32 to 26-overs-a-side after India had crawled to 52/4 in 16.4 overs. It now meant that a bowler could only bowl a maximum of five overs. It now implied that Starc's spell was also done. So, India had 9.2 overs left to face but they also didn't have to face anymore of Hazlewood and Starc in conditions that were helpful for the seamers.

Nathan Ellis, who generally bowls at the death, only had two overs left in the tank from the last nine overs that India had to face. Seven off the last nine overs faced by India had to be bowled by Australia's support bowlers, which wouldn't be the case if Australia had known it would be a 26-overs-a-side game from the start of the innings.

Therefore, while Australia had an advantage of knowing the target in a rain-shortened game, there is enough data to suggest that they could have wrapped up India's innings earlier if Hazlewood and Starc had gotten more overs to bowl. Resources left and resources used are two key metrics of DLS calculations, and hence, Australia's target shortened by six runs.