Michael Jeh March 21, 2009

Coach or boffin?

Judging by Dyson’s miscalculations today, he is certainly no statistician or mathematician
107


What exactly is the role of a head coach © AFP
 
Every time I stay up all night to watch a game from the West Indies, it ends in farce. It happened in the 2007 World Cup final and it happened again last night. What a waste of a good night’s sleep!

On the subject of waste, I have often wondered what role the coach actually plays at this level of the game. What is his role? Is it to literally “coach” the players in the skills of the game, is it to help with slips catching and fielding drills or is it as tactician/strategist/statistician? John Dyson’s confused actions in last night’s farce begs the question: Was it Dyson’s fault and what exactly is his role?

I have long wondered what value a coach brings to a team at this level of the game. I can see why an individual coach who knows the player well can make little changes to that player’s technique and performance (eg: Gilchrist and the famous squash ball example in the WC Final of 2007). Whether a team coach can honestly help players of this calibre to improve technical aspects of their game is a moot point. In 25 years of senior cricket, I have yet to come across a coach who has made any significant difference to a player’s skills or technique in a team environment. Personalised, one-on-one coaching is a different matter altogether – I’ve seen that relationship work quite well.

To confuse the argument even further, teams at this level have specialist batting, bowling, fielding and fitness coaches. So what does the Head Coach really do then?

Perhaps he is not a ‘coach’ at all in that sense of the word. Perhaps his role is to analyse opposition strengths and weaknesses and to offer strategic or tactical direction. In which case, he is not a coach at all – he is more like the Manager of a football team. Except for the fact that in cricket, the coach doesn’t usually have a direct role in selections and usually leaves tactical decisions to the captain once the game begins. So, by that definition, he is not really a Manager either.

Perhaps he is a psychologist, counsellor and personal confidante to the players. In which case, what are his qualifications for that role? Do you need high-level coaching qualifications to perform this role or are you better off with expertise in other areas?

Judging by Dyson’s miscalculations today, he is certainly no statistician or mathematician. I’m sure he would claim no expertise in this area so why was he then left with the responsibility of making those decisions? Is that the coach’s job, to read complicated Duckworth-Lewis tables and then pull the strings accordingly? If so, why bother with cricket coaching qualifications? Hire a boffin instead!

I’m with Shane Warne on this issue – I’m not convinced that the coach has any significant role to play in teams at this level of the game. If they need other specialists around them, how do they justify their job? Are they merely managers of that human resource environment (in which case, hire HR experts)?

Warne apparently had an instinctive genius for reading the play on the field and cricket has always held a special place for the role of the captain (or other senior players) acting on those instincts on the field. Unlike many football codes which virtually rely on the coach or manager to run game strategy and selection, cricket’s charm lies in the tradition of the captain making those decisions with minimum interference from outsiders. It’s part of the game’s unique character.

This essay is about exploring the role of the Head Coach of a national team and trying to pinpoint exactly what role he is meant to play. There’s no definitive answer I suppose, just a matter of opinion, based on personal experiences. I’m in the Shane Warne camp - those who believe that a coach (at this level) is something that transports you from the hotel to the ground. Right now, Dyson must be wishing that he was the driver of that coach instead of being the person who had to interpret the D/L charts and then decide if the light was really that bad or not.

If Dyson realised that his team was behind the run rate, you can bet he would have thought the light was still good. Perhaps it should be left purely to the umpires to make that decision. Left to coaches or players, it appears that the definition of bad light depends on where your team is in relation to D/L. That sort of cynicism has no place in this great game - either the light was good enough or bad enough but the definition should not rely on whether you're ahead of the rate or not.

Michael Jeh is an Oxford Blue who played first-class cricket, and a Playing Member of the MCC. He lives in Brisbane

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Random T. on April 24, 2009, 11:16 GMT

    I noticed that this is not the first time you write about the topic. Why have you decided to write about it again?

  • David on March 25, 2009, 23:49 GMT

    I was at the game and in defense of the coach, manager and captain, the scoreboard displayed the required amount as 244; hence the batsmen being called off. I don't think it was changed after Ramdin was dismissed. West Indies is clearly the better team and Chanderpaul's innings was worth the price of admission.

  • Salicram on March 23, 2009, 13:40 GMT

    Clytus makes an excellent point.

  • Sid on March 22, 2009, 18:36 GMT

    People slamming the coach are right but I don't understand one thing. Why do the coaches have to do this calculations in the first place? And that too by looking at rows and columns on a piece of paper? They have started using advanced technologies like Hawkeye in cricket, how hard it is to write a computer program that does the calculation as per D/L method? In any case, this should be a job of the scorers and D/L score should be displayed on the scoreboard. Why it is not done defies all logic.

  • Dr. Reddy on March 22, 2009, 14:12 GMT

    On the issue of the significance of a coach, Shane Warne was the coach and captain of Rajasthan Royals in 2008 IPL. He has shown that a coach is not needed to run things. As for the farce in the 1st ODI its easy to point fingers at the coach. West Indies are die hard and emotional cricket fans and I believe that its ironic how one day Dyson is hailed as a savior for contributing to the Test series win vs England and then next you see headlines like "Die Soon". The parties to blame are: 1. Yes the coach but the blame doesn't lie in just him 2. Captain Gayle. He is supposed to be PROACTIVE! not just sitting and socialising with his team mates 3. The ground staff/scoreboard attendants. Why are spectators left in this cloud of uncertainity as to what the Duckworth Lewis target is? Why cant the revised target be announced on loudspeakers or displayed on scorecard at the end of every over/fall of wicket? Cricket is the loser and we were robbed of an awesome spectacle

  • Mike Welch on March 22, 2009, 7:22 GMT

    Everyone is entitled to an opinion.let us stick to the facts.Coach Dyson made a simple error just like the one South Africa made in the world cup.All this talk about playing the game through is talk for those who are happy about the end result.If the D/L system is part of the game it is obvious that teams will use it to their advantage,just like the referral system.All the English fans that are writing & talking about the test series, feel bad since they came to the W.I. with a dismissive attitude, talking about warming up for the ashes and got bowled out for 51.They will leave the C'bean with nothing but wounds to lick.All those people who saw the ODI on tv must remember the camera lens will make it brighter than it actually was.Light should have been offered or turned on long before it was and overs should have been adjusted due to rain.How come no spoke about Strauss setting his field after each ball ? We beat England for the ICC Champ Trophy in darkness in 2004!

  • R.Narayan on March 22, 2009, 6:32 GMT

    I have a question. Scoreboards these days give you every conceivable piec of information, down to action replays.Why can't they show the runs requiredunder D/L?? I,for one would be eternally grateful.This is one form of "Glorious Uncertainty" the game can do without!

  • Shamit on March 22, 2009, 4:16 GMT

    Good points Michael, I am completely with you and Mr. Shane Warne in this regard!! :)

  • Teri on March 22, 2009, 3:27 GMT

    The game is over, we have lost the first on. Yes it was a terrible mistake, but we must now learn from this mistake, all the players need to be more au-fait with the technical aspects of the game, we must now move on and let cricket take over. Go West Indies turn around to your winning ways again. See you at the stadium tomorrow

  • RICHARD on March 22, 2009, 2:28 GMT

    The role of the coach is just like everything else in West Indies cricket total shambles. No one know who or what they are thinking. Its clear to me that they all need to psychological help to get their confidence up so as to not focus on bad light but to focus on the game at hand.

  • Random T. on April 24, 2009, 11:16 GMT

    I noticed that this is not the first time you write about the topic. Why have you decided to write about it again?

  • David on March 25, 2009, 23:49 GMT

    I was at the game and in defense of the coach, manager and captain, the scoreboard displayed the required amount as 244; hence the batsmen being called off. I don't think it was changed after Ramdin was dismissed. West Indies is clearly the better team and Chanderpaul's innings was worth the price of admission.

  • Salicram on March 23, 2009, 13:40 GMT

    Clytus makes an excellent point.

  • Sid on March 22, 2009, 18:36 GMT

    People slamming the coach are right but I don't understand one thing. Why do the coaches have to do this calculations in the first place? And that too by looking at rows and columns on a piece of paper? They have started using advanced technologies like Hawkeye in cricket, how hard it is to write a computer program that does the calculation as per D/L method? In any case, this should be a job of the scorers and D/L score should be displayed on the scoreboard. Why it is not done defies all logic.

  • Dr. Reddy on March 22, 2009, 14:12 GMT

    On the issue of the significance of a coach, Shane Warne was the coach and captain of Rajasthan Royals in 2008 IPL. He has shown that a coach is not needed to run things. As for the farce in the 1st ODI its easy to point fingers at the coach. West Indies are die hard and emotional cricket fans and I believe that its ironic how one day Dyson is hailed as a savior for contributing to the Test series win vs England and then next you see headlines like "Die Soon". The parties to blame are: 1. Yes the coach but the blame doesn't lie in just him 2. Captain Gayle. He is supposed to be PROACTIVE! not just sitting and socialising with his team mates 3. The ground staff/scoreboard attendants. Why are spectators left in this cloud of uncertainity as to what the Duckworth Lewis target is? Why cant the revised target be announced on loudspeakers or displayed on scorecard at the end of every over/fall of wicket? Cricket is the loser and we were robbed of an awesome spectacle

  • Mike Welch on March 22, 2009, 7:22 GMT

    Everyone is entitled to an opinion.let us stick to the facts.Coach Dyson made a simple error just like the one South Africa made in the world cup.All this talk about playing the game through is talk for those who are happy about the end result.If the D/L system is part of the game it is obvious that teams will use it to their advantage,just like the referral system.All the English fans that are writing & talking about the test series, feel bad since they came to the W.I. with a dismissive attitude, talking about warming up for the ashes and got bowled out for 51.They will leave the C'bean with nothing but wounds to lick.All those people who saw the ODI on tv must remember the camera lens will make it brighter than it actually was.Light should have been offered or turned on long before it was and overs should have been adjusted due to rain.How come no spoke about Strauss setting his field after each ball ? We beat England for the ICC Champ Trophy in darkness in 2004!

  • R.Narayan on March 22, 2009, 6:32 GMT

    I have a question. Scoreboards these days give you every conceivable piec of information, down to action replays.Why can't they show the runs requiredunder D/L?? I,for one would be eternally grateful.This is one form of "Glorious Uncertainty" the game can do without!

  • Shamit on March 22, 2009, 4:16 GMT

    Good points Michael, I am completely with you and Mr. Shane Warne in this regard!! :)

  • Teri on March 22, 2009, 3:27 GMT

    The game is over, we have lost the first on. Yes it was a terrible mistake, but we must now learn from this mistake, all the players need to be more au-fait with the technical aspects of the game, we must now move on and let cricket take over. Go West Indies turn around to your winning ways again. See you at the stadium tomorrow

  • RICHARD on March 22, 2009, 2:28 GMT

    The role of the coach is just like everything else in West Indies cricket total shambles. No one know who or what they are thinking. Its clear to me that they all need to psychological help to get their confidence up so as to not focus on bad light but to focus on the game at hand.

  • Avin Boochoon on March 21, 2009, 23:49 GMT

    Greetings,

    I am by no means any Statistician but was deeply moved and bewildered by the actions of John Dyson today during the England vs West Indians ODI a few hours ago. Wondering how could a stupid blunder be made I decided to check the par score myself out of sheer disbelief. Now, I an Engineer so would like to know why my calculations too are wrong? According to my calculations, I observed England made 270 run utilizing 100% of their available resourses. The West Indies batted 46.2 Overs with 7 wickets fallen. Then 3.4 overs left with 7 wickets lost, according to the Duckworth-Lewis system, this calculates to 10.1 % which gives 89.9% resources of the England total. This give a 'par score' at 46.2 Overs of 242.73 runs. That is 243 runs ... Dyson called off his team at 244 runs scored, exactly one run ahead. hmmm... I can't figure it out, Can anyone please explain to me where I am performing my miscalculation?

    Regards

  • Vurone on March 21, 2009, 23:32 GMT

    the reluctance of the west indies team to positively attack the total even though it was gettable it should have been completed even afterthe cacique's dismissal. Though Dyson's UN canny decision was thoughtless and way too abrupt this in turn reflects his laid back approach and disgusting approach to west indies cricket. It raises suspicion about his loyalty to WI cricket. David should take charge and Dyson should be cut enough damage is done eg England has found some long lost hope waht will WI do when KP and company's confidence and the WI's confidence if severly disturbed. Anyways i do hope and pray that the boys can bounce back and bring it home like they did against India

  • Cam on March 21, 2009, 22:31 GMT

    One very good point made.. why is it up to the batsmen (and batting side) to decide when the game ends? It seems terribly unfair - even in a Test situation where there is no D/L, a batting team will always choose to go in when trying to save the Test, and always choose to stay out when they're batting and far ahead to pile runs on.

    Yes, batsmen could be in danger if they cannot see the ball properly, but likewise fielders especially in close positions are also in danger. Bad light affects everyone, so the umpires should make the decision and the players should play the game.

  • vinit on March 21, 2009, 21:16 GMT

    Dyson made a mistake. He was seeing scores for 6 wickets down. But if someone is a coach, is he not even allowed one mistake at his job. We all talk here as if we never ever make any mistake at our jobs. He was off by a column in the matrix but its not as if it was a mistake which no can ever commit. He thought he was winning so he called his players in.

    Cut the guy some slack please!

  • tippa on March 21, 2009, 21:01 GMT

    I am not so worried about this fiasco its a mistake and we have to move on.Let's see if windies have de character to win de odi series.I am never a fan of Gayle's captaincy he is too laid back but i am haooy for the team's recent series win.I am windies to de bone and i am not one of those think we are back on track we have been there before only to fall flat on de face.If we salvage a draw or even win the upcoming test series in england then i will be more convinced at the moment i will wait and see.Best of luck to de boyz.On a sad note the wicbc needs to be changed with immediate effect.It was sir vivian stadium now players boycott.We deserve better than that.

  • jedger on March 21, 2009, 20:55 GMT

    England calls this a "win"? Whatever happened to the "spirit of Cricket"?

  • Kassim Khan on March 21, 2009, 20:30 GMT

    One way of showing off our own virtues, is to openly claim the right to cast stones at the sinners. And stones are being hurled at Dyson from every direction.

    There is no evidence that the W.I. coach lacked the knowledge to interpret the complex W-L chart. He simply made an honest mistake. Upon realizing this, he immediately accepted the responsibility and apologized to his team and the fans. What else do we expect form someone who is only, but a mere mortal?

    The stones that are being hurled at him can be no more painful than the pain of giving the game away to England, due to the huge blunder, on his part. I am sure he is not going to allow this to happen again. So, let’s give the man a break and watch the W.I, go on to win the other four ODI’s.

  • srinin on March 21, 2009, 18:54 GMT

    England and artificial results seem to go hand in hand! In the 1996 World Cup in Australia Eng won when SA had to score 22 of 2 balls after rain stopped play. This gave the birth to the D/L method. Then Hussain and Cronje contrived a Test result. Then England was awarded a win against Pak by Darrel Hair and others...

    DL worked against SA when Shaun Pollock made a blunder and Sri Lanka won another World Cup game in SA in 2003. Obviously some dont learn from such errors and now Dyson has done it! But it is not arithmetic but the emotions of the moment that led to making what in hindsight liks a silly and awful mistake. Chris Gayle shd hv also been watching and needed to intervene.

    As some hv rightly suggested, the DL score shd be handled by the Match Referee and not by teams. The decision on lights shd be made by the umpires on the field. If floodlights are available they MUST used. The playing conditions shd be standardized and universally applicable for all international games.

  • Satya Ramnarain on March 21, 2009, 17:47 GMT

    Why was D/L even an issue, the stadium has lights the lights should while its still bright, to allow the game to play out... I think it was in NZ last year that the stopped the game and turned on the lights so a game could finish why not here?

  • SravanKumar Iyer on March 21, 2009, 17:40 GMT

    With So many analysts now a days following the Team's performance ball by Ball on their Laptops, I simply dont understand why is there a difficulty in reading Duckworth Lewis system. This is certainly not the first time this kind of Blunder is happening. SA have had their share of it as well,and Shaun Pollock knows that quite well. And I dont blame the coach at all. His job is to Physically and mentally enhance players and not calculate targets.The best way would be to tell the analyst to keep the team posted. This would be really simple for an Analyst who has apparently know the basics and can keep the so called DL score at fingertips (His Laptop is there to help him). To WI team all I can say is All the very best to you fellas... Cheers Sravankumar Iyer

  • Winston on March 21, 2009, 17:35 GMT

    I would like to know why the game was not played to the end when they are playing in a stadium with lights. What is the use of having lights if you are not going to use them? Once there was a stoppage in play everyone involved should have known that 100 overs were not possible with the daylight so the overs should have been reduced or turn on the lights when it got dark.

  • Mohamed Z. Rahaman on March 21, 2009, 17:28 GMT

    So some of you want to fire the coach, huh? It was an error - a simple blunder, not a fiasco as far as coaching is concerned. West Indies finally responding to a coach and looking good for a change and this is the respect the coach gets after one blunder. We should all question why the Floodlights were not turned on and the match allowed to finish. The coach is not responsible for that. Antigua.. now that was a fiasco. Like many, I am no fan of the D/L because one needs to have need to have a Ph.D in Maths to understand it. All options should have been exhaused before resorting to D/L and that was not done.

  • ST on March 21, 2009, 17:28 GMT

    Oh, please spare me the angst. This same Dyson is pulling the WI team up by the boot straps. He made a mistake -- how many mistakes have been made by the WI team before this? I say that Dyson is great for the team and in the bigger picture he has pulled a 4th rate team up to some level of respectability.

  • jon on March 21, 2009, 17:22 GMT

    There are good coaches and there are bad coaches just like there are bad players and good players. Just because there are a few bad coaches around doesn't mean we shouldn't have coaches just like we can't say we don't need players. Get it!

  • Lee on March 21, 2009, 17:09 GMT

    Too harsh to blame Dyson alone. D/L method is so confusing, even veteran followers can not figure it out. Why can't the D/L status and exact run requirement be officially displayed on the score card so that we can avoid such cock-up? In a pressure situation, it is not right to let teams takw wrong decisions, based on wrong calculations. ICC needs to more forthright.

  • Aamir Khan on March 21, 2009, 16:40 GMT

    No offence both teams sucks playing one day and 20/20 games. They both would have used the D/L process to win the game and no wonder they are #6 and #7 in the world. WI had so many great players in the past and they can't get one to coach there team? This is what happen to teams using no country coaches....

  • Naina on March 21, 2009, 16:28 GMT

    The unthinkable has happened, we can't do anything about it now, except learn the lessons from it. Let's move on and play our beloved game. Habouring thoughts about the fiasco, could only be detrimental to the players/people involved. GO CRICKET!!!

  • Bala on March 21, 2009, 16:19 GMT

    The laid-back and happy-go-lucky attitudes of the Caribbean people are its charm and most loved qualities.Unfortunately those qualities are simply not acceptable in competitive sports.You simply cannot have a Gayle like laid-back captain cool nowadays when you need him to be proactive in the decision making.

  • john s on March 21, 2009, 16:07 GMT

    as a windies supporter, i was gutted to see us lose like that, however, the scoreboard had us ahead on the d/l, yes granted the management team should know better and have it down pat, but mistakes are going to happen when u have to make a split second decision. more importantly why are the lights not being used, also an hour was lost for rain and 40 mins was still taken for lunch. why then wasnt the overs reduced

  • George on March 21, 2009, 16:03 GMT

    I think that Gail is doing a great job as the West Indies captain, he is a great guy with a great deal of class. As a Guyanese, I was very proud of the way he carried himself after the incident yesterday.

    The miss calculation was due to human error and it happens to the best of us. I think that the West Indies just needs to put it behind them and move on. Having said that, I also think that the D/L method needs to be revamped, most cricketing fans have no idea how the silly thing works and evidently neither does the coaches. Cricket is a beautiful game and it does not need the D/L system to mess it up further. The ICC needs to get rid of it or simplify it for everyone involved.

    Finally congratulations to the English team for their win, they are a good set of guys who have worked hard in the West Indies and deserves the win.

  • clytus on March 21, 2009, 15:45 GMT

    I agree with Jeff Thomas, I think England was slightly ahead. Cant believe how idiotic some of these postings are, imagine som1 suggesting Strauss recalling the players to complete the game for the sake of fairness. Shouldnt the W.I. have displayed fairness also & try to win the game on the field instead of accepting light in a supposedly (& falsely) winning position. Matter of fact, W.I. was the only team (unfairly) who could have manipulated the result by accepting light if they were ahead in D/L calculation, if they werent ahead all they had to do was refuse the light offer. England didnt have this option.

  • malcolm dawson on March 21, 2009, 15:39 GMT

    Did anyone hear Mark Nicholas talk about how a batsmen should not giveaway any sign of being out so that the opposition would not refer the umpires decision? He may have been born English but his thoughts on how to get round being out is typically australian.Surely the correct decision is what should be important. In the west indies series 9 out of 33 referrals were changed.So 30% were wrong is it not good to get the right decision?How many tests and even series have been"umpired"to a bad result(think Bucknor in Oz last year. Sure there is still work to be done on the referral system but with players jobs on the line an equal chance should be given to all.

  • sree on March 21, 2009, 15:36 GMT

    a match should be decided on the field. This whole D/L method is utter stupidity. They could have reduced the number of overs at the beginning of the game or call it a draw at the end of the game. WI knew they might lose the game and the coach wanted to win it at any cost. England might have done the same thing. The rules of the game should be set up at the starting of the game. There can't be a moving target while the game is being played. D/L is a stupid method.

  • Randy on March 21, 2009, 15:30 GMT

    Four more games. Give gayle a rest. he seems not too interested. Dyson and khan should be punished- basic arithmetic classes. Amazing that for referrals their in front of monitors but to decide a ODI their scratching a clipboard. Every person watching knew that windies were behind. with the exception of the "windies team". Gayle has to bear this responsibility above all else. it is his team. he is the captain not dyson not khan. think digicel should give them phones now to calculate DL -LOL. Okay... so it has happened. let's see him move his feet now and bat. the only way this farce can be salvaged is WI winning this ODI Series "CONVINCINGLY". Can someone define that word for the WI Team please. Now a word for ENGLAND..... your winning was a fluke. you should not be celebrating after all it is this same great mathematician that you want as your coach. the english still hasn't won a match convincingly. And for the record.. for those who say that windies play for draws. THEY WON!!

  • Dylan Copeland on March 21, 2009, 15:23 GMT

    New Zealand had one of the best captains in the world a few years ago who took an undermanned squad to an exciting drawn series in Australia. Then in 2003 the Kiwis hired a coach who was either "hands on" or "control freak" depending on various points of view, linguistic preferences, etc. The next series in Oz Fleming had been relegated to a passenger and the Kiwis lost 2-0. In fact in the 7 tests since that 01/02 series the Kiwis have lost 6. Sure, an injury-prone Shane Bond, and a Fleming health scare didn't help, but the New Zealanders have never again looked like the disciplined and well thought out side that they did when Fleming had the responsibility.

  • Mellie on March 21, 2009, 15:20 GMT

    Why is Dyson being crucified??? He made a mistake but at the end of the day everyone who watched that match knows that WI were on their way to winning and as a result they should still take the series. This man has helped make this WI team into a team to watch, no longer do we go in expecting to loss. England may be 1-0, but honestly which team can draw confidence from a victory handed to them.

  • jag on March 21, 2009, 15:15 GMT

    everyone is pushing blame around,in the context of it all, Gayle has to go Struss will always consult his chart where was Gayles'and if he had one could he read it.W.I. has a full time scorer/stats man where is his name in all of this.Smart a blogger mentioned flood lights well thats the farce if any it will take national grid to power that a good option but none of uss were looking up only at charts-yes what about the lights?

  • Henry on March 21, 2009, 15:00 GMT

    Despite being English, I was pleased to see WI win the test series (although it could have been done in a more decisive and interesting fashion). Cricket needs WI (and Pakistan for that matter). It isn't cricket without it. Dyson has done a lot to reverse some of the negative trends in WI cricket, and I think if WI win the ODI series (which again I hope they will), this blunder will be forgotten.

    There is so little common sense in cricket though at these kind of times. The pitch apparently has flood lights - why couldn't this issue have been anticipated and the flood lights be switched on? Regardless of the result, the farcical end of this match ruined what was a thrilling encounter.

  • Collin Linley on March 21, 2009, 14:57 GMT

    Never seen so much commentary over another Windies lost match. Yes, Coach Dyson was wrong,but to err is human,and let's play the match on the field, not on technicalities or D/L tables. Incidently why was Captain Gayle who is supposed to have created such new found formidable Team Spirit, not shoulder to shoulder with Dyson? Everyone needs a helping hand. It is done. Now on to the next 50/50 match.

  • Collin Linley on March 21, 2009, 14:56 GMT

    Never seen so much commentary over another Windies lost match. Yes, Coach Dyson was wrong,but to err is human,and let's play the match on the field, not on technicalities or D/L tables. Incidently why was Captain Gayle who is supposed to have created such new found formidable Team Spirit, not shoulder to shoulder with Dyson? Everyone needs a helping hand. It is done. Now on to the next 50/50 match.

  • Dom on March 21, 2009, 14:51 GMT

    I'm afraid Dyson has to go, that was an unforgiveable mistake. i'm not sure he was even convinced he was right, he was sort of half heartedly calling the players in rather than standing up and waving them off, as if he thought they were winning but wasnt really sure. If he wasnt sure he should have left them out there, where they could have won the game off their own bat, rather than consigning them to an unnecessary loss.

    Pathetic.

  • sylvan roopan on March 21, 2009, 14:44 GMT

    Number of issues to consider not to blame anyone; to err is human; it is human to err. The umpires were making judgements of the light after overs not after individual balls. If consistent and offer the light after the over in progress was comleted no problem; there were 2 balls remaining and maybe WI may get the required 2 runs to acheive victory or, maybe England take another wicket to put the match beyond speculation and all this waste of opinions would have to be avoided. To offer the light immediately after Ramdin dismissal means that they were not consistent. It also implies that the light was indeed bad; TV viewers will not really know the condition of the light as the cameras has light enhancing features which actuall enhances the light for viewing purposes.

    England started to play for light since the power play. Call up Harmison , then Broad switch fron over to around the wicket, change field every ball, Umpires should have made England quicken the game light was bad

  • Thomas Allie - FL USA on March 21, 2009, 14:38 GMT

    In reply to gerry: In your dreams. England came down to the caribbean thinking they could use the Windies as a stepping stone (match practice) for their "holy grail" of cricket - The Ashes series with Australia. Their plans backfired and they are scrambling for anything that would redeem their pitiful performance in the eyes of their fans. This is no way to build confidence. I expect Ponting to crush them. I will tell you one thing- The WIndies will be in Egland in May. Look out for more humiliation.

  • Jagdeep on March 21, 2009, 14:34 GMT

    The umpires and the match referee should be held accountable. And as far the D/L system is concerned, it should be buried immediately.

  • Chris H on March 21, 2009, 14:09 GMT

    C George - the D/L Par Score on the scoreboard is the the score required at the END of each over, not on a ball-by-ball basis. During the over, the batsmen themselves have no idea what the par score would be unless they carried the sheets of paper with them or unless the coach sent out the twelfth man before each ball is bowled...which would only waste time and ensure that the light was even poorer before each ball was bowled.

    A lot of people seem to be saying that the batsmen should have "got on with it", echoing the sentiments of the commentators, but strangely enough one of those commentators used to complain about the light when he was on field. People seem to be forgetting that television cameras enhance the light for the viewing audience at home. It was probably darker than it appeared out there in the final few overs and it certainly seemed darker than when the light was finally offered at ARG. I believe J. Dee, the umps should have been checking light from every ball earlier

  • Avinaish Salim on March 21, 2009, 13:53 GMT

    Mistakes are made but in all fairness no one is perfect. I am a die hard west indian fan and i was at the stadium. The light was surely fading and it was evident that the batsmen wanted to come off way before they lost wickets when they were ahead of the par score for the next over practically. I don't agree with some of the post here because firstly Chris Gayle is not to be blamed and he is a good captain. Dyson is to be blamed here as he had the sheet in his hand and there were many televisions in the pavilion where anyone could have looked up and see what the par score was which would have sparked some re checking but nevertheless it never happened. West indies cricket have progressed a far way and it is fair to say that for this series there were as much action off the field as they were on it but in the end if the batsmen focused more on winning the game instead of trying to get off and win by D/l Method the west indies might have just won. Lastly it is clear that dyson was wrong.

  • Robert Wright on March 21, 2009, 13:35 GMT

    It must be the responsibility of the ICC match referee and umpires to ensure that both captains are aware of the OFFICIAL match situation under Duckworth / Lewis in a situation where bad light is being offerred in a ODI. I am not aware that coaches or managers have official recognition in critical aspects of the game e.g toss, declarations or warnings to players. As such only the captain should be able to call off his players and only after being officially advised by the match officials of the permutations that will apply. Cricket needs to hold itself to a higher standard if the game is going to be viewed seriously at the international level.

  • Swati Kadam on March 21, 2009, 13:04 GMT

    dear, baseless comments! and duckworth -lewis chart is not as difficult as you are pretending. you do not have to understand logic behind it, but just look in proper row and column to find out target.

  • Derrick Fuller on March 21, 2009, 13:01 GMT

    I am strong supporter of West Indies cricket in their highs and lows. The saga of the 1st ODI is regrettable. If umpires can be overuled in a referral issue why not so in the offering of light when a stadium is equipped for evening/night games. Secondly, I believe the WI Captain should have asserted more involvement in the issue as a leader and not sat passively in the back row. Had he at least looked at the table (while we at home watched helplessly by video) he might have noticed the error and avoided a gift to the opposing team. No harsh criticisms at Chris Gayle nor the John Dyson they have both done good jobs for WI team. The vibrancy of winning is still not solidly grasped by our WI Cricketers.

  • Irving Cobden on March 21, 2009, 12:43 GMT

    I think the comments about how England are cheats are appalling. It was the West Indies who didn't want to win the game fairly - they were the ones who kept whinging about the light instead of doing what we all wanted(including the commentators) - which was to play out a great game of cricket to its exciting conclusion, and may the best team win. They (the West Indies) robbed us of that, not England or the umpires - they would have been perfectly happy to close the game short at any time they thought they were ahead - the words "Poetic Justice" spring to mind.

  • charlie on March 21, 2009, 12:22 GMT

    I have to agree with Jeff Thomas, I think England had their noses ahead in this game. I too, did not enjoy the defensive time wasting tactics of the West Indies during the test series. It seems that winning to them has become more of a political act than a sporting triumph. They dont need to do it, they are better than that. Sport is a game, it should entertain and be FUN.

  • Edmund on March 21, 2009, 12:04 GMT

    On some modern electronic scoreboards, the par D/L score is displayed for all to see. Apart from the paper-based tables, I'm sure someone has written a somputer program to calculate it based on the available scoring data. In the end, it is the match referee who decides the match result so his sources of data are most important. Why can't the D/L par score be calculated centrally based on oficial data available to the match referee and displayed from ball one of the second innings of an ODI / Twenty20 match? There was no need for the Farce of Providence to occur. The ICC has a role to play here.

    Ultimately, though, I take offence at my WI Team's extremely defensive approach in seeking to win a game by relying on D/L rather than seeking to play it out. Maybe Dyson had a major part to play in our defensive approach to the final Test as well? I'm a die-hard WI fan but I'm glad they lost, if only to show this is NOT the way to go. In my opinion, it borders on cowardice.

  • R.Srinivasan on March 21, 2009, 12:03 GMT

    There is no use by blaming the coach. West Indies lost the match as Dwayne Bravo was a non-performer with both bat & ball. Also Chris Gayle was sitting behind John Dyson as if he was not interested in the whole issue. His attitude has to be questioned.

  • ian wason on March 21, 2009, 12:02 GMT

    i remember that there was a time that the West Indies had no coach. And besides, when a player reaches Test level, what coaching does he really need? Players who are playing Test cricket are supposed to know how to play cricket, and should not be told how to bat, catch and bowl properly, they are supposed to know that before they play international cricket. So what really is the coach's job?

  • C George on March 21, 2009, 11:39 GMT

    As far as I'm concerned, no sheets of paper with coach calculations were required. The current D/L 'PAR' score is always on the score-board for everyone to see, so there should have been noooo confusion!!!!

  • J. Dee on March 21, 2009, 11:30 GMT

    Earl Erskine u are clueless....the batsmen were in danger long before the official end of the match.....the place was too dark for cricket since Ramdin and Pollard were batting....I was there.....Ramdin even asked the umpire to look at the light but he refused to offer it....and England had 2 fast bowlers operating at the time, which was really unfair......that's why both batsmen were dismissed so quickly.....buy hey, they all want England to win.............the great pommies.....pack of cheats....it whould never have come to this D/L system

  • Steve West Oz on March 21, 2009, 11:24 GMT

    Not a good England team, however I think they have a lot more smarts than the team put out by the Windies. Captain, Coach and probably most of the players. A very fortunate series win in the tests, but maybe a more realistic result in the ODI's.

  • gerry on March 21, 2009, 11:16 GMT

    Posted by: Thomas Allie - FL USA at March 21, 2009 4:26 AM

    If Strauss was that confident that he would win he should have asked the Windies to finish the game - bowl out the Windies with the next 24 balls or watch the Windies get the required 27 runs. That simple!!

    You idiot !! It wasn't up to Strauss..he couldn't do it... but the Windies could have... but they chose to go off... imo they got exactly what they deserved, if they had just got on with it rather than keeping on complaining about the light , they might have won ! England to win all the ODI's left.

  • djsweets on March 21, 2009, 11:09 GMT

    when god needs our attention he allows things to happen.west indies needs to start having the lord in their presence.lets not not blame anybody and just hope that this is the only win for the english men come on west indians lift up your spirit for the next game.west indies will win the series but the time a match has to go to D\L method they would be no mistake everyone learns from their mistakes lets just come together and unite the team we will win the series 4 to 1

  • RICHARD on March 21, 2009, 10:59 GMT

    The role of the coach is just like everything else in West Indies cricket total shambles. No one know who or what they are thinking. Its clear to me that they all need to psychological help to get their confidence up so as to not focus on bad light but to focus on the game at hand.

  • Gaurav Khandelwal on March 21, 2009, 10:40 GMT

    A very good article Michael. You raised some very valid points but I am afraid anyone has answers for them. I am WI fan and I was very disappointed. I don't how the fans in WI were feeling. Had he been a coach of Indian cricket team, he would have been given Prime minister level security after this disastrous farce.

  • aisha on March 21, 2009, 10:37 GMT

    well i stayed up late as well watching this match and wanted the windies to win.but thanks to their coaches blunder they lost.poor chander paul.he played so well.got his team into the game and the coach did the opposite.their is no excuse for this kind of blunder,and on this level!i think if it had happened in india the coach would have been dead by now for a stupid mistake.

  • Vishy on March 21, 2009, 10:33 GMT

    I think this should be a lesson. Dl should not be brought into calculations when offering light. Only players out in middle should decide if light is good enough or not. For me biggest farce is not Dyson bungling up, but a coach out in pavillion deciding light is not good enough in the middle.

    Going by comments and articles on it, seems like all would have been okay if Dyson had not called them in, or called in earlier. Such myopia is already hurting cricket.

  • cricman007 on March 21, 2009, 10:17 GMT

    This is a clear case of the coach John Dyson and the manager khan usurping the authority of the captain. They made it clear that they were in charge by calling in the players without seeking the input of the captain who was prepared to see the game through to the end. Can you imagine Gayle's shock when they decided to call the players in? The West Indies Board should remind the manager that he has no role in cricketing decisions. That should be left to the coach, captain and vice-captain. There has to be a disciplinary hearing and sanctions against both the manager and coach. Dyson and Khan have made the West Indies the laughing stock of the world.

  • knight on March 21, 2009, 9:57 GMT

    Why does it took umpire wicket of Ramdin to come to conclusion that the light wasn't good enough?

  • Emerson B Howard on March 21, 2009, 9:39 GMT

    Can anyone name a "Sport" in which calculations decide the outcome? One in which spectators and players are un aware of the outcome? The D/L method may be a good mathematical exercise but does nothing to make cricket more "people friendly". This may give cause for the powers that be to revie their vision.

  • growltiger on March 21, 2009, 9:32 GMT

    Dyson and the Windies got what they deserved. It is quite inappropriate that an interaction between the Duckworth Lewis rules and an offer of the light should give the batting team an option whether to win or lose the game. By choosing what they thought was a free option to win, the Windies and Dyson showed total cycnism. Good thing it was also incompetent. Whether Chris Gayle would have made the same decision if it were left to him (captain, after all) is not clear. But the scorched earth approach in the Test Series, together with his magnanimous remark that he isn't going to kill Dyson for making this mistake, suggests he would. The obvious solution is that in games governed by the DL rules, the light should be a pure decision of the umpires, and the basis for their decision should be entirely the safety of the players, with a bias towards staying on unless it is definitely dangerous to play.

  • Graham Ashe on March 21, 2009, 9:17 GMT

    I don't see how this stupid miscalculation should become an excuse for questioning the overall value of a coach. Which, in the case of Dyson for the WI, as indeed with Duncan Fletcher for England and Bob Woolmer for SA, is beyond question if we judge a coach by his success in constructing winning ways for his team.

  • shamlal on March 21, 2009, 8:50 GMT

    In India cricket crazy nation, we think he would have been buried by now.Luckly for him he has gone scot free frm the Windies.How can a coach make such a stupid mistake,its unbeleiveable.I blame the umpires as wel for play to continue for longer period.

  • Jeff Thomas on March 21, 2009, 8:15 GMT

    Speaking as a fan of neither team, and Chanderpaul's incredible over notwithstanding, it was probably the right result. Those who say that WI would have gone on to win are ignoring the fact that there would have been two brand new batsmen at the wicket, no 8 and 9, with overs to bowl from all of England's most economical bowlers. And whatever you say about England, at least they were prepared to fight to the end; WI, as in the final test match, aren't interesting in winning - merely not losing. Disgraceful.

  • Tracy on March 21, 2009, 7:51 GMT

    Why did the umpire offer the light? This isn't a test. I've never seen the umpire offer the light in an ODI played in a stadium with lights! It should have never come down to this and the last 22 should have been played. I fault the umpire more than the coach.

  • Chris on March 21, 2009, 7:48 GMT

    Coaches fdault or not, coming off to win the game when it could have been played out until the umpires call the game is much the better way to go. Playing to win by any means is not the way cricket should be played or seen to be played. What about all the paying public at the game and those watching on TV? A sad end to a great game in the making and more bad press! Any flack the WI team and coach get is well deserved. Bringing the game into disrepute? I think so!

  • Chris Larlham on March 21, 2009, 7:42 GMT

    I'm amazed at most of these comments. What is all the fuss about? This was just another of these endless, meaningless ODIs. What does it matter who won and how? No one died. Three things are clear; first, Dyson is a good coach and this was a mistake in reading the D/L chart (nothing at all to do with maths), easily made. To be fired for that would be a gross over-reaction, particularly when you remember how incompetent his employer, the entire WICB, has been for years. Secondly, had the mistake not been made, it is anybody's guess who might have won. With two new batsmen at the crease and darkness falling, it was likely to have been England (that's why they were ahead on the D/L, which takes no account of the playing conditions. Thirdly, the West Indies should have been trying to win by playing cricket, not getting obsessed with the light - if Pollard had concentrated on that, he might still be batting. Dyson will be rewarded by the ECB with the England job, which is why he did it, lol

  • Deo Raj on March 21, 2009, 7:28 GMT

    This saga begs the question "why weren't the lights at the stadium brought into play?" I cant see the need to plead for poor light when you have just 22 balls to go at 17:30 and the ground has the facilities to continue play even after dark. What a WASTE!! I am disappointed, not with the WI nor their coach but the way some things are handled in cricket.

  • oiron007 on March 21, 2009, 7:11 GMT

    What confidence can England draw out of this so called win? On the contrary, it could be more demoralising to win in the fashion that they did.

  • jogesh99 on March 21, 2009, 6:43 GMT

    So if Windies were actually 1 run ahead and walked out, all would be well is it? I don't think it would be any less of a farce for those watching. in fact, Dyson's goof-up at least provides some comic relief.

  • jogesh99 on March 21, 2009, 6:37 GMT

    Why all this breast beating? If you can't figure out the rules, don't play. And the same bunch of guys will clamour for more convoluted rules to make the game more 'competitive' or 'sell-able' or 'fair' or whichever holy aspect has been most recently besmirched by an unforseen circumstance. Since you ODI-watchers can't stomach draws, learn to live with these asinine results.

  • djsweets on March 21, 2009, 6:19 GMT

    i honestly thinks the entire west indies teams is to be blame come on no one else than the dyson had the D\L caculation at that point of the match everyone should have been invovled with the calculation and for some of the players like pollard and ramdin i always take michael holding's comment they leave they criketing brain in the pavilion .

  • Jei on March 21, 2009, 6:16 GMT

    Agreed matches to be decided in the field and not on the papers. But why blame the DL? I dont think the captains or the coaches are given the algorithm and framework of what DL is and made to calcualte the target accordingly. It might just be a spreadsheet (if im not wrong) with runs on one axis and balls on the other with additional information on the wickets lost. Its purely a manual error for not considering the Ramdin's wicket before calling team off. DL system does work fine.

  • Jay on March 21, 2009, 6:11 GMT

    I think there is a lot to be said for leaving the light decision completely in the hands of the umpires, you can't "offer it" to the batsmen and not to the fielding side, particularly when the batsmen's decision is going to be based on D/L status and not the light conditions.

  • ravi on March 21, 2009, 6:06 GMT

    WHY DO U WANT TO CRUCIFY DYSON for this. Most of the teams I believe have the Captain also looking into the DL tables. No.. it doesnt need a statistician to read thru that. There has to be atleast more than one person reading thru that. So why do u blame the coach alone??? From what I understand I believe some of the team players carry the tables in their pockets when they are chasing.. so Y the coach??? Are the players so very inept at understanding those tables. On a lighter note.. I wld say ICC shld take responsibility of providing a days training to ALL players as soon as they start representing their country. :P

  • Mustafa Biviji on March 21, 2009, 5:38 GMT

    I believe a coach is required for strategies,etc and Warney doesnot believe in them, just because he already has a good cricket brain so in most cases he does not require a coach, but this wont be true for all.

    And forget this match, in most matches including test matches I never understand the fact why are the players offered light. The umpires have a meter in the handing, and they should have a cut -off value after which they should stop, this policy of asking players is basically incorrect (as good as asking u want to win or lose !).

    Common light levels affect humans equally, if a player has special light requirements than sorry you cannot play world cricket !

    By the way i hope I could watch Chanderpaul, and I hope he could have been there till the end.

  • sam on March 21, 2009, 5:33 GMT

    all i can say is that all teams need one more coach, they need a D/L system analyst to interpret and analyse correct score and read it properly so they won't lose a match like that!!!!!!LOL

  • lucky from india on March 21, 2009, 5:32 GMT

    hi folks..i think all technical staff should be blam for all this.. coach have less to blame then captain..gayle is no as good agresser as he in batting.he mostly behves lyk a puppet in dressing room

  • Apple on March 21, 2009, 5:25 GMT

    I am sure the WI dressing room had a gadget known as Laptop. What was the need to read the DL-thing on the sheet of paper?

  • Errol Erskine on March 21, 2009, 5:15 GMT

    I do not know what Nathan is talking about. Firstly Dayson is being paid alot to get the team in order. If the WI is good or not has nothing to do with it, what ever team you support was bad at some stage or another. The other thing is England's former captain said the coach was not good and both of them was fired. Dyson did not say anything, but he 'GIVE' England the game and some confidence.

  • Harish on March 21, 2009, 4:54 GMT

    Hi Michael You do raise some good points. However I must disagree on one thing - it does not take a mathematician/statistician/boffin to read a table with two sets of numbers (score needed and overs) and tell you the number required. And "complicated D-L tables" - wrong! the D/L system is complicated , not the table. Perhaps in the future Mr Dyson could use a ruler to make sure the score he is reading corresponds to the correct over count!!

  • abhishek on March 21, 2009, 4:51 GMT

    Cricket must be played,won,lost on the wicket and not on the sheet of paper. The coach must be blamed for calling it off with just 1 run lead, but i believe we must blame DL method. Sad day for cricket, i always feel disappointed when the decision about the match result is taken in out of the boundary rope...

  • Ronald on March 21, 2009, 4:47 GMT

    Its jus a dissappointment to the 16,000 fans that turned up to see a simple error could end a match in much confusion. To be honest i don't really blame the coach but the captain should be more proactive..and its a "SHOCK" to see that all the analyst that u see sit with the team with their laptops could not have advised the team, they are they one that should be fired..anyway windies are goin to win...but the game should have been played out...

  • lukose a on March 21, 2009, 4:41 GMT

    Were the umpires sure of getting a full game (100 overs) in the allotted time BEFORE the start of play ? I do not think so. If they had doubts ( and they would have since daylight hours can be shorter on some March days in the WI )they should have reduced the match to a 45 over side right from the beginning. Cricket umpires made the same mistake during World Cup 2007 Final when it was declared that the match would be 38 over per side. As it turned out, 38 overs were too many. Umpires need to get better at predicting how many overs can be realistically completed before the start of play.

  • Boo Radley on March 21, 2009, 4:31 GMT

    I am confident west indies can win this series...england sorry to say are not impressive and i can safely was west indies would have won that match if they just played on and stop picking at the light. Its a shame how it ended but its nothing new with west indies cricket.

    I can't really blame dyson, everyone is not perfect and can make errors...WI should have kept on playing and not try to cheat a win via the D/L...Lets hope they bounce back and let England keep their "lucky win".

  • Ron Don on March 21, 2009, 4:31 GMT

    Why couldn't the captains, coaches and umpires get together and explain the situations of both teams. Then ask the question, What would they like to do? Hence, everyone is involved and knew their situation and could act accordingly.

  • Thomas Allie - FL USA on March 21, 2009, 4:26 GMT

    I am still devastated by that loss.I will never understand why gayle was not left to make that call. This is probably the only way England will win a game in this series. As an English player I would not feel totally confident by the manner in which the game was won. If Strauss was that confident that he would win he should have asked the Windies to finish the game - bowl out the Windies with the next 24 balls or watch the Windies get the required 27 runs. That simple!!

  • Kamal Abdool on March 21, 2009, 4:25 GMT

    I've supported my beloved West Indies for close to 48 years ... as a six year old listening with my Dad to the 1960-61 Australian Tour .... through good times and bad. I am blue mad ... if we lose OK, once we gave it the best shot. Why is Gayle sitting like an idiot behind Dyson, he is the captain ... follow what's going on. Ask for help if needed to interpret. Tony Cozier was there, talk to him. TV was showing exactly what was needed. Were they not following? This thing about Gayle as Mr Cool is BS. Coach, Manager, Captain, WICB President and CEO must go .... bunch of morons.

  • Vonnoj on March 21, 2009, 4:22 GMT

    Just sad. So very sad. It's another blow to West Indies cricket. Loyal fans of WI are devastated.

  • nathan sawbridge on March 21, 2009, 4:05 GMT

    im shocked anyone would call for dysons head to roll. he has worked wonders with a team which were previously dead beats. his job description is not crucial, but the fact that he is starting to get results is. I say live and let live. Lets see if this team really has character by clawing back this series.

  • gopal on March 21, 2009, 4:02 GMT

    the odi was actually robbed by the fortune hope this gives the coach dyson to see the odi series win for the hosts i saw the entire match. a gift to englishmen my night sleep saw a good scintillating match with unlawfull ending let us hope the windies get back to the richards era looking for the best series in future a composed playing was seen from the new players like simmons pollard chanderpauls 26 from single over

  • S.Sambamoorthy on March 21, 2009, 3:58 GMT

    It is ridiculous.The umpires should be made responsible because they take the onfield decisions. Before offering the lights they should have told the match position to the West Indies team.What for they are there.Are they mere spectators.In all fairness,the match result be reversed and declared as a no reult match

  • abby brathwaite on March 21, 2009, 3:47 GMT

    Forgive me if i take the route of foucusing on the miscalculation by Dyson instead of the role that coaches should play in the game. I would like to use this space to wonder aloud if the real questions should not be asked of the ICC? What benefit does the game derive if teams are left to determine the score. What other international sport do you know where the OFFICIALS do not make it abundantly clear what the score is at any given time during the game. Ultimately the decision to leave the game was made because Dyson made an error. Should such a thing be even possible in professional sport. If the DL system was not being used on Friday because the match was interupted we would have no questions regarding the score of the game it would be public knoweldge. Why then isnt the third umpire responsible for ensuring that all people involved know their exact standings in the game DL system needed or no? It seemes foolish to me that the quality of the game should be subject to such human error

  • Andrew Bhagan on March 21, 2009, 3:42 GMT

    This is truly an amazing achivement by the West-Indies management they have single handingly given England a 1 nil lead.Why didn't they allow the game to be completed.I am sure the real West Indies fans like myself would have prefered to lose by the same one run,without a ball remaining.But it was a genuine mistake,one that will never be repeated.lol.

  • RES on March 21, 2009, 3:33 GMT

    A farce indeed! I wonder whether Dyson confered with the team captain before calling the team off the field. If not, what part did the captain play in the decision making process?

  • Nazir Khan on March 21, 2009, 3:26 GMT

    I liked Michael Jeh's comments because it is true that no one seems certain as to who should have made the call but I feel Michael was too hard on Dyson & Khan. Like Strauss today (and other captains) referring to the D/L chart, Chris Gayle has to share and probably shoulder most of the blame for what happened. He showed no inclination to go get a chart to see what his guys were up against. I am from the West Indies and I am a diehard fan of the team but much too often, we see a nonchalant attitude by senior W.I. players. Gayle in paricular as captain should have been more involved in checking his D/L chart too instead of sitting back passive, non-vocal and being the Mr. Cool he likes to portray.

  • Horace R. Gopeesingh on March 21, 2009, 3:22 GMT

    I have said for many years (since its inception) that the D/L match status should be made CONTINUOUSLY PUBLIC by the match referee as soon that there is a threat that the game may be resolved by D/L method.

    Some time ago I started reading the D/L calculation and abandoned my effort to do more useful things.

    The assanity of the situation was became evident when the WI were offered light with the full knowlwdge by some players and officials that if light was accepted thn the WI would loose the game. Was this a trick?

    Bizarre I say!

  • Arvind on March 21, 2009, 3:18 GMT

    It also brings another (un)related question: What does the captain do in football?

    Also, I did not see the match (and I dont care to see a match between two third rate teams), but what is the problem in playing out the full 100 overs when there are floodlights?

  • Bilvanandh Raman on March 21, 2009, 3:01 GMT

    The finish was a mockery of all sorts .There's no question that the coach has to be fired .He should go back to school and hone his math skills.The way chanderpaul brought back the windies back to the game was spectacular and windies deserved to win.The game's result was decided off the field though by a poor mathematician .Dyson should take total responsibility of the farce and should hang up his boots .The Westindies crowd was simply devastated to see their team loose that way .It was ludicrous seeing english players celebrating their victory to say the least they certainly gained the much needed confidence and it wouldnt be suprising if they go on to win the series .The coach and the manager needs to be fired for the farce

  • Terry on March 21, 2009, 2:55 GMT

    Like you, I am totally confused about the role of the cricket coach particularly in the case of the Dyson saga. It was indeed strange and infact, this is the first time I have ever seen a coach and manager ...and not the captain, call in the players in a test match or limited overs int'l.In this case, Capt. Gayle sat passively behind the coach while the latter and Khan beckoned the batsmen towards the pavillion. Very strange indeed!!!

  • Errol Erskine on March 21, 2009, 2:37 GMT

    Good comments,I think there was no danger to the batsmen and the game should have been played out.On the other hand I think that the coach should be fired because he give the game away to a team who have not been winning anything.He has now given the English team a bit of cofidence.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Errol Erskine on March 21, 2009, 2:37 GMT

    Good comments,I think there was no danger to the batsmen and the game should have been played out.On the other hand I think that the coach should be fired because he give the game away to a team who have not been winning anything.He has now given the English team a bit of cofidence.

  • Terry on March 21, 2009, 2:55 GMT

    Like you, I am totally confused about the role of the cricket coach particularly in the case of the Dyson saga. It was indeed strange and infact, this is the first time I have ever seen a coach and manager ...and not the captain, call in the players in a test match or limited overs int'l.In this case, Capt. Gayle sat passively behind the coach while the latter and Khan beckoned the batsmen towards the pavillion. Very strange indeed!!!

  • Bilvanandh Raman on March 21, 2009, 3:01 GMT

    The finish was a mockery of all sorts .There's no question that the coach has to be fired .He should go back to school and hone his math skills.The way chanderpaul brought back the windies back to the game was spectacular and windies deserved to win.The game's result was decided off the field though by a poor mathematician .Dyson should take total responsibility of the farce and should hang up his boots .The Westindies crowd was simply devastated to see their team loose that way .It was ludicrous seeing english players celebrating their victory to say the least they certainly gained the much needed confidence and it wouldnt be suprising if they go on to win the series .The coach and the manager needs to be fired for the farce

  • Arvind on March 21, 2009, 3:18 GMT

    It also brings another (un)related question: What does the captain do in football?

    Also, I did not see the match (and I dont care to see a match between two third rate teams), but what is the problem in playing out the full 100 overs when there are floodlights?

  • Horace R. Gopeesingh on March 21, 2009, 3:22 GMT

    I have said for many years (since its inception) that the D/L match status should be made CONTINUOUSLY PUBLIC by the match referee as soon that there is a threat that the game may be resolved by D/L method.

    Some time ago I started reading the D/L calculation and abandoned my effort to do more useful things.

    The assanity of the situation was became evident when the WI were offered light with the full knowlwdge by some players and officials that if light was accepted thn the WI would loose the game. Was this a trick?

    Bizarre I say!

  • Nazir Khan on March 21, 2009, 3:26 GMT

    I liked Michael Jeh's comments because it is true that no one seems certain as to who should have made the call but I feel Michael was too hard on Dyson & Khan. Like Strauss today (and other captains) referring to the D/L chart, Chris Gayle has to share and probably shoulder most of the blame for what happened. He showed no inclination to go get a chart to see what his guys were up against. I am from the West Indies and I am a diehard fan of the team but much too often, we see a nonchalant attitude by senior W.I. players. Gayle in paricular as captain should have been more involved in checking his D/L chart too instead of sitting back passive, non-vocal and being the Mr. Cool he likes to portray.

  • RES on March 21, 2009, 3:33 GMT

    A farce indeed! I wonder whether Dyson confered with the team captain before calling the team off the field. If not, what part did the captain play in the decision making process?

  • Andrew Bhagan on March 21, 2009, 3:42 GMT

    This is truly an amazing achivement by the West-Indies management they have single handingly given England a 1 nil lead.Why didn't they allow the game to be completed.I am sure the real West Indies fans like myself would have prefered to lose by the same one run,without a ball remaining.But it was a genuine mistake,one that will never be repeated.lol.

  • abby brathwaite on March 21, 2009, 3:47 GMT

    Forgive me if i take the route of foucusing on the miscalculation by Dyson instead of the role that coaches should play in the game. I would like to use this space to wonder aloud if the real questions should not be asked of the ICC? What benefit does the game derive if teams are left to determine the score. What other international sport do you know where the OFFICIALS do not make it abundantly clear what the score is at any given time during the game. Ultimately the decision to leave the game was made because Dyson made an error. Should such a thing be even possible in professional sport. If the DL system was not being used on Friday because the match was interupted we would have no questions regarding the score of the game it would be public knoweldge. Why then isnt the third umpire responsible for ensuring that all people involved know their exact standings in the game DL system needed or no? It seemes foolish to me that the quality of the game should be subject to such human error

  • S.Sambamoorthy on March 21, 2009, 3:58 GMT

    It is ridiculous.The umpires should be made responsible because they take the onfield decisions. Before offering the lights they should have told the match position to the West Indies team.What for they are there.Are they mere spectators.In all fairness,the match result be reversed and declared as a no reult match