England captain Paul Collingwood has lashed out after watching his side’s chances of victory against the West Indies washed away by rain and the rules.

England had made 191 for five, a challenging total in this format, in their Twenty20 World Cup opener on Monday against the hosts after being sent in to bat.

But, after a couple of downpours, the West Indies were left with a revised target of 60 in six overs under the Duckworth-Lewis method, which they achieved with a ball to spare. And the eight-wicket loss left skipper Collingwood in a thunderous mood.

“I think 95 per cent of the time when you put 191 runs on the board you are going to win the game,” Collingwood said.

“I don’t know what equation you should have but you shouldn’t have that one.

“We’ve played a near perfect game but we’ve lost,” the all-rounder added.

The system, devised by English statisticians Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis, has been widely regarded as the fairest yet in deciding rain-affected matches.

But there are signs it is struggling to come to terms with scoring rates in Twenty20, which wasn’t even on the horizon when the method was first used back in 1997.

Monday’s defeat was the second time in a year England had lost under the Duckworth-Lewis method to the West Indies. And it left them fighting against Ireland for a place in the second round Super Eights, in a clash that took place late last night
“There’s a major problem with this Duckworth-Lewis in this form of the game,” Collingwood insisted.

“I’ve got no problems with it in the 50-over form.

“But I know it’s made us very frustrated here. “It certainly has to be revised for this form of the game.”

West Indies captain Chris Gayle, who opted to field first, had some sympathy for England having seen his side knock the then hosts out of last year’s Twenty20 World Cup at the Oval in similar circumstances.

“I would support what Collingwood said. I could have been in the same position as well,” Gayle said after watching Andre Fletcher score the winning run for his side. “It’s something that can be addressed, so it can be ‘even Stevens’ for both teams in the future.

“I’m happy, but it’s just unfortunate for England.”

Previous systems led to farcical conclusions such as at the 1992 ODI World Cup in Australia where South Africa went from needing 22 runs off 13 balls to beat England in the semi-final to an impossible 21 runs off one ball following a rain break.

One of Duckworth-Lewis’s supposed advantages is that when a game is being threatened by rain the system is flexible enough for the target to change depending upon the number of wickets lost, rewarding the fielding side for dismissing opposition batsmen. But the search could no be on for a new system for the Twenty20 era.