Cricket......

[Mntboy]

I'm not convinced about that super over. England have a distinct advantage in that Stokes has his eye in when he lines up to bat.

 

But before all that.. England were all out.. surely the team that achieved the target with the least wickets down is the winner.

Them are the rules Stretch. Just like the lucky four overthrows that Stokesy got in the final over of the main match. That said I don't think that the Super Over detracted from the quality of the match or prevented the better team from winning the trophy. All told it is going to be a match long remembered and long celebrated. As Nasser said during the commentary the game of cricket as whole won. It was just simply fantastic and engrossing to watch!

[Stretch]

Them are the rules Stretch. Just like the lucky four overthrows that Stokesy got in the final over of the main match. That said I don't think that the Super Over detracted from the quality of the match or prevented the better team from winning the trophy. All told it is going to be a match long remembered and long celebrated. As Nasser said during the commentary the game of cricket as whole won. It was just simply fantastic and engrossing to watch!

Yeah..I know it's the rules....I just can't stand them poms!

[Eddy Gordo]

But wasnt the super also a draw?

[gemmerbal]

The poms hit more boundaries in the super over. That rule was explained to the players before the tournie started and also when the Kiwis started batting in the super over. Lots of ex players also complaining about this, but it is what it is unfortunately.

 

This match ebbed and flowed. In my opinion probably one of the best WC finals ever. But not better than the 438 game as far as the best match ever is concerned.

 

But wasnt the super also a draw?

[gemmerbal]

[gemmerbal]

Correction: the most boundaries combined in the 50 overs as well as the super over.

[gemmerbal]

I really thought the Kiwis had it, until that deflection ran away for 4. Talk about luck running for you!

Edited July 15, 2019 by gemmerbal

[Mntboy]

Yeah..I know it's the rules....I just can't stand them poms!

I'd rather the Poms than either of Australia or India.

[babse]

I really thought the Kiwis had it, until that deflection ran away for 4. Talk about luck running for you!

yeah at that moment i too thought that it has to be the Poms day...

 

winning on boundaries is a **** way to win it however they probably deserve it overall!

[Piston ZA]

I agree with Stretch, it should go down to who lost the least amount of wickets, but those were the rules, and they would've/should've known it before hand.

 

I think the Kiwis actually lost it when Boult caught Stokes, but then stepped onto the boundary rope for a six.

[scotty]

Could have, would have, should have, It is what it is. Rules and scenarios were known to the players and based on that England, who were my choice over NZ won. Imagine if NZ took the CWC and the rugby cup (who I believe they will) this year, we would never have heard the end of it. 

[stefmeister]

Could have, would have, should have, It is what it is. Rules and scenarios were known to the players and based on that England, who were my choice over NZ won. Imagine if NZ took the CWC and the rugby cup (who I believe they will) this year, we would never have heard the end of it.

Well, now we’re not going to hear the end of it with the poms.

[scotty]

Well, now we’re not going to hear the end of it with the poms.

They not going to win the rugby so that's OK. 

[Stretch]

Could have, would have, should have, It is what it is. Rules and scenarios were known to the players and based on that England, who were my choice over NZ won. Imagine if NZ took the CWC and the rugby cup (who I believe they will) this year, we would never have heard the end of it.

Even worse.. Can you imagine if the poms win the rwc..... Which they could... I'll hibernate for 4 years then

[babse]

im yet to meet an all out NZ cricket fan (anything close to their Rugby fans)... surely there arent many around.

 

dont think it would a real issue if NZ had won last night and then take the RWC

[Shebeen]

I agree with Stretch, it should go down to who lost the least amount of wickets, but those were the rules, and they would've/should've known it before hand.

 

I think the Kiwis actually lost it when Boult caught Stokes, but then stepped onto the boundary rope for a six.

Could have should have would have.

 

That catch/six would normally have seen Boult take it and the deflection (which might have been only 5) were big moments at the death, but there's a 102 overs of incidents to pick apart, and there's loads when the margins are this thin. NZ got smashed in the league game, england definitely the better side on paper.

 

I for one don't think Archer was the right call for superover bowler. I would have gone with Woakes, especially when they had 15 to defend. He was excellent at the death in the 50 overs, but missed a lot of lines, they got away with it. Also interesting that they were allowed to field with James Vince, mark wood was able to come out and bat and run for two, but then they bring on a specialist sub for the superover....

 

but hey India were not subtle in how they played 12 men the entire tournament. While Jadeja only played 2 games, came on as a sub in 4 of them - took 9 catches and a run out as fielder of the tournament.