India won the second ODI by four runs under the DLS method because the relevant comparison was India’s 113/7 with 26 overs completed against a DLS par score of 109, not against the original 135-run chase target. The completed-state winning threshold was 110. A possible 133-run target applied only if a restart had happened; it did not.
Key Takeaways - New Zealand made 134 all out in 41 overs from a match reduced to 47 overs per side. - India reached 113/7 after 26 overs, four runs above the DLS par of 109. - The scorecard’s T:110 means 110 was enough to win in the completed 26-over state. - The listed 133 in 37 overs was a prospective restart target, not a target India actually chased.
What happened in Wellington?
New Zealand’s innings finished at 134 all out in 41 overs, within the 47-over-per-side format set after the earlier interruption. India began the chase with an original target of 135. Rain then stopped play with India on 113/7 after 26 overs. ESPNcricinfo’s completed scorecard and result commentary record India’s result as a four-run DLS win.
The match was declared over at 11pm NZDT on 7 November. Officials had planned a possible 10:55pm NZDT restart with a 37-over chase, but drizzle returned around 10:42pm NZDT and play never resumed. That matters because the 37-over target belongs to a possible restart scenario, while the official result used the position at the final stoppage.
The result is separate from the full match report, which covers the four-run victory, India’s 2–0 lead in the five-match series and the wider scorecard context: India–New Zealand second ODI result report.
The numbers that explain the four-run win
These figures belong to different stages of the rain-affected match. Reading them as one uninterrupted chase creates the apparent contradiction.
| Match figure | What it means |
|---|---|
| 134 | New Zealand’s completed total: 134 all out in 41 overs, from a 47-over maximum |
| 135 | India’s original target before the final rain interruption |
| 113/7 after 26 overs | India’s actual score when the match stopped for the last time |
| 109 | DLS par score for the completed 26-over state |
| 110 | Winning threshold for that completed 26-over state: par plus one |
| 133 in 37 overs | Prospective target if play had restarted; no restart actually occurred |
The key arithmetic is simple: 113 − 109 = 4. That is the four-run result margin. It is not calculated as 113 minus 110. The 110 figure is the whole-number score needed to win, while 109 is the tie or par point used to describe how far ahead India stood when the match was ended.
Why 109 was the par score, not 135
Without a further rain interruption, India’s original chase target was 135. Once rain removed playing resources from the second innings, the DLS method supplied a revised comparison for the match state that actually existed. At the final stoppage, India had completed 26 overs and scored 113.
The ICC Men’s ODI Playing Conditions distinguish between a revised target for a resumed innings and the par-score comparison used when the second innings cannot resume. In this case, the final result commentary identified 109 as the DLS par. India were therefore four runs above par at 113/7.
That also explains the scorecard’s T:110 display. A side must finish one run above a par score to win rather than tie. So:
- 109 = par or tie score for the completed state;
- 110 = minimum winning score for that state;
- 113 = India’s actual score;
- 113 − 109 = 4 = the official winning margin.
Calling the result a three-run win by subtracting 110 from 113 mixes two different labels. The match was not decided by a margin above the winning threshold. It was decided by the actual score’s difference from par.
What did the 133-in-37-overs figure mean?
The scorecard also lists a possible 133-run target in 37 overs. That was the revised target for a restart after ten overs were removed from the original 47-over allocation. It was not the final target at the moment the match was abandoned, because the restart did not take place.
This is why both numbers can appear in the same match record without contradicting each other. 110 describes the completed 26-over state at which the result was made official. 133 in 37 overs describes a different scenario with a total chase allocation of 37 overs, including the 26 already completed. Since no ball was bowled after the final rain return, India never had to reach 133.
That is why a raw scorecard should not be read as an unfinished 135-run chase: T:110 is the completed-state threshold, while 133 is the unused restart target.
How DLS handles an interrupted ODI chase
DLS is designed to compare the resources available to each side rather than treat every lost over as a fixed number of runs. The relevant resources include overs remaining and wickets in hand. That is why the method cannot be reconstructed safely by a linear calculation such as “26 of 47 overs means 26/47 of the target.” The official resource tables, match inputs and calculation procedure are not reproduced here, and no invented percentage is needed to explain this result.
For this match, the ICC playing conditions also matter because the second innings had reached 26 overs, beyond the usual 20-over minimum used for a standard rain-affected ODI result when the chase has not already ended. The exact competition playing conditions govern how that provision is applied; it is not a claim that every ODI follows one absolute rule regardless of format or tournament. Here, the completed second innings was long enough for the final DLS comparison.
Rain did not award India the win by default. DLS accounted for both the lost playing time and the wickets already lost. The method provided the official comparison for the score and state reached; it does not prove that India would have won if play had continued, nor does it support a counterfactual prediction about the unplayed overs.
For context on the pre-match risk signal, the Wellington weather watch was a dated regional report before the match. It was not a stadium forecast that automatically proved this stoppage. The Hnry Stadium Wellington guide supplies venue context, not a claim about the weather decision.
What the final scorecard should be read as saying
The cleanest reading is: New Zealand scored 134; India’s revised first target was 135; India reached 113/7 after 26 overs; the DLS par at the final stoppage was 109; and India were four runs above that par when officials called the game. The scorecard’s T:110 records the winning threshold for the completed state, while 133 in 37 overs records a restart plan that was never used.
That framing also keeps this explainer distinct from the Brar performance coverage. Gurnoor Brar’s 4/30 and Player-of-the-Match award are useful match context, but they do not change the DLS arithmetic; see the Gurnoor Brar four-wicket report for that separate angle.
Frequently Asked Questions
Did India need 135 runs to win?
No. India began with an original target of 135, but the final rain stoppage changed the result calculation. With 26 overs completed and no restart, the DLS par was 109 and the winning threshold was 110. India’s 113/7 was therefore enough.
Why is India’s win margin four runs instead of three?
Because the result margin is measured from the par score: 113 − 109 = 4. The 110 figure is the score required to win, not the number to subtract from India’s final total when stating the margin.
Was 133 the target India had to chase?
No. The 133 target applied to a possible 37-over restart. Drizzle returned before that restart, no further play took place, and the match was declared over at 11pm NZDT. The official result used the completed 26-over state.
Does 26 overs mean DLS simply used 26/47 of the innings?
No. DLS accounts for the relationship between overs remaining and wickets available. It is not a straight 26/47 calculation, and the official proprietary resource tables and algorithm are not inferred from the score alone.
Does the DLS result prove India would have won if play continued?
No. It confirms only that India were four runs above the applicable par when the match could not resume. The unplayed overs were never contested, so the result cannot be used as a guarantee about a completed 47-over chase or any counterfactual continuation.
The short version is straightforward: 113 was enough because India were four runs above the 109 par for the 26 overs actually completed. The original 135 target and possible 133-in-37 restart target describe earlier or unrealised match states, not a score India still needed after the game was called off.
