What happened at Eden Park in 2015?
New Zealand played South Africa in the first semi-final of the 2015 World Cup at Eden Park, Auckland, on 24 March. South Africa won the toss and batted, and were 216 for 3 after 38 overs, with Faf du Plessis on 82 and AB de Villiers on 60, when rain stopped play for more than an hour.
Seven overs were lost and South Africa's innings was cut to 43 overs, so they had only five more overs to bat. David Miller hit 49 off 18 balls and they finished on 281 for 5 in 43 overs.
New Zealand's target was set at 298 in 43 overs, 17 more than South Africa scored. They got there with one ball to spare: Grant Elliott, on 84 not out, hit Dale Steyn for six from the second-last ball. It was the highest successful chase in a World Cup knockout match, and it sent New Zealand to their first World Cup final.
Why was the target higher than South Africa's score?
When the rain came, South Africa had 12 overs and 7 wickets left: the part of an innings where a set side scores fastest. Losing 7 of those overs took away far more than 7 overs' worth of an average innings. In the resource table, 12 overs left with 3 wickets down is worth 34.3%, and 5 overs left is worth 16.5%, so South Africa lost 17.8% of their resources and finished with 82.2%.
New Zealand knew from the first ball that they had 43 overs and 10 wickets, which is 92.8% of a full innings. They had more resources than South Africa, and when Team 2 has more, DLS adds runs to Team 1's score instead of scaling it down. This is the case covered in the DLS method guide under "R2 more than R1".
The extra runs are fair: if South Africa had known from the start that they had 43 overs, they would have paced their innings for 43 overs and scored faster earlier.
Why does the published table give 307?
With the Standard Edition, the extra runs are worked out with G50, the average 50-over score (245): 281 + 245 × (92.8 − 82.2) ÷ 100 = 306.97, so the target is 307. The ICC used the Professional Edition, which runs on unpublished ICC software and handles high-scoring innings differently, and it gave 298.
This is the biggest gap among the matches we recalculated, and it comes from the situation where the two editions differ most: a high first-innings score that was cut short. For club and league matches without the ICC software, the Standard Edition is the official method, and our calculator follows it exactly.
What does our DLS calculator give for this match?
| Overs per side | 50 |
|---|---|
| Rain in South Africa's innings | At 38 overs, 216 for 3; 7 overs lost (innings cut to 43) |
| South Africa | 281 for 5 in 43 overs |
| New Zealand's overs | 43 |
| G50 | 245 |
| Our result (Standard Edition) | 307 in 43 overs |
| Official target (Professional Edition) | 298 in 43 overs |
| Difference | +9 runs |
The working, step by step:
- Team 1 starts with 50 overs and 10 wickets: 100.0% of resources.
- Team 1 stoppage at 38 overs, 3 down: 12 overs left = 34.3%. After losing 7 overs, 5 left = 16.5%. Resources lost: 17.8%.
- Team 1 resources, R1 = 82.2%.
- Team 2 starts with 43 overs and 10 wickets: 92.8% of resources.
- Team 2 resources, R2 = 92.8%.
- R2 is more than R1, so par = 281 + 245 × (92.8 − 82.2) ÷ 100 = 306.97, rounded down to 306. Target = 306 + 1 = 307.
Open these numbers in the calculator
Our calculator uses the published ICC Standard Edition table. International matches and big franchise leagues use the Professional Edition, which runs on ICC software and is not published, so a gap of a few runs is normal. The famous matches page compares every match side by side.
FAQ
Why did New Zealand need 298 when South Africa only made 281?
South Africa lost 7 overs while they still had 7 wickets in hand, so they were robbed of the overs in which they would have scored fastest. New Zealand knew from the start they had 43 overs, so DLS gave them extra runs to chase to make up for South Africa's lost resources.
Who hit the winning runs in the 2015 semi-final?
Grant Elliott, with a six off Dale Steyn from the second-last ball. He finished on 84 not out and New Zealand reached their first World Cup final.
Why does the DLS calculator give 307 for this match?
Our calculator uses the published Standard Edition, which adds runs above Team 1's score at a fixed rate based on G50. The ICC used the Professional Edition, which scales high scores differently, and it gave 298.
Sources
- New Zealand Cricket scorecard archive: New Zealand v South Africa, 2015 World Cup semi-final
- Wikipedia: 2015 Cricket World Cup, semi-finals
- ICC playing conditions: Duckworth-Lewis-Stern method, with the Standard Edition resource table and worked examples (PDF)
- ECB: Duckworth/Lewis/Stern methodology, March 2026 (PDF)