WC FINAL: England v New Zealand Lords London July 14 2019 (Result - Tie)

[AlwaysGreen]

If the ball had deflected off Stokes' bat in the 23rd over would people be calling for a rule change?

Most wickets? England lost their ninth wicket in desperation trying to keep Stokes on strike so that they could win the game. They lost their 10th in desperation trying to win the game. The circumstances of chasing a total when it gets tight are a lot different than setting one.

Winning off most boundaries? Doesn't seem right, there should be another super over until there is a clear winner.

I'd suggest if the kiwis won in the same circumstances most post would be telling the poms to suck shit or similar.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

The result is like your mum arbitrarily deciding the result in the backyard.

Nice guys of world cricket "lose" again. Such a shame really. CDG fked it for you though. Need some sub continental burning effigies of him at the airport when he arrives home.

 

[Iafeta]

Is this boundary countback farce from hit and giggle Indian t20? God that tripe of a tournament has a lot to answer for. I sincerely hope one thing countries learn from this tournament as a positive is that bowlers are important and giving them appropriate and fair conditions makes 50 over cricket compelling.

Whatever happened to a tie being decided by who lost more wickets? Since when is a boundary a bigger event than a wicket?

 

[JJ]

If the ball had deflected off Stokes' bat in the 23rd over would people be calling for a rule change?

Most wickets? England lost their ninth wicket in desperation trying to keep Stokes on strike so that they could win the game. They lost their 10th in desperation trying to win the game. The circumstances of chasing a total when it gets tight are a lot different than setting one.

Winning off most boundaries? Doesn't seem right, there should be another super over until there is a clear winner.

I'd suggest if the kiwis won in the same circumstances most post would be telling the poms to suck shit or similar.

The only solution was more super overs (I'd have preferred 5 overs anyway), or playing again...

I agree, it's not the Poms fault - they didn't deserve to lose either - although had the most luck (in my biased view)

Unsatisfactory way to "lose", I suspect in some ways an unsatisfactory way to "win", but then again winners are grinners...

Be nice if people now understand that tests>50 overs>>>>>>>T20

And that 350 plus isn't really good cricket IMO - lets have conditions that provide something for bowlers...

 

[mave]

There is seriously bad luck, then there is the NZ cricket team.

Anyway, I guess another batch of knighthoods coming up for the Poms.

 

[JJ]

The result is like your mum arbitrarily deciding the result in the backyard.

Nice guys of world cricket "lose" again. Such a shame really. CDG fked it for you though. Need some sub continental burning effigies of him at the airport when he arrives home.

he bowled well - lots of things cost us, Guptill (supported by Nicholls) taking a geniused review was another within our control

 

[Iafeta]

Correct. That review was like he was channeling his inner Shane Watson. That decision though by Erasmus, I turned off at that point as it was clear there would be a stitch up. I didn’t realise how farcical it would be to be decided by boundaries. I have no idea how Erasmus gave Taylor out, he even looked sheepish doing it. He had no confidence in that decision

 

[simmo1]

Shattered for NZ, and yeah, boundaries is a dumb way to decide a final, however I think Pakistan should have qualified in 4th because they won the group game, so swings/roundabouts I suppose.

 

[JJ]

and the men's tennis was a disappointment too - so close to nirvana all round, but empty shitty feeling is all I am left with

 

[JJ]

Shattered for NZ, and yeah, boundaries is a dumb way to decide a final, however I think Pakistan should have qualified in 4th because they won the group game, so swings/roundabouts I suppose.

yeah, the rules were there ahead of time

I don't think anyone thought the final would get to the geniused last line of the rules... I just don't understand when a 4 became more important than 2 2's, 4 1's, or a 3 and a 1... just weird for me

 

[The Bye]

I think it’s fairly safe to say that had the Indians lost this World Cup final in the same manner, the BCCI would have had the rules changed before the majority of Australians had even woken up this morning.

Rules are rules, but they quite clearly need to be changed so we don’t ever witness something as farcical as this again. The one positive out of this shit storm is that there will always be an asterisk next to the Poms first ever World Cup final win.

Got to feel for Un Zed but couldn’t think of a better nation to be perennial groomsmen. Eat a big bag of dicks merkins. You’ll never win a World Cup.

 

[Valheru]

If the ball had deflected off Stokes' bat in the 23rd over would people be calling for a rule change?

Most wickets? England lost their ninth wicket in desperation trying to keep Stokes on strike so that they could win the game. They lost their 10th in desperation trying to win the game. The circumstances of chasing a total when it gets tight are a lot different than setting one.

Winning off most boundaries? Doesn't seem right, there should be another super over until there is a clear winner.

I'd suggest if the kiwis won in the same circumstances most post would be telling the poms to suck shit or similar.

Yeah I don't like wickets as a count back method either.

Wickets have never mattered in ODI cricket as far as the result goes that is why you can lose matches conceding 0 wickets.

The only reasonable solution was more super overs.

 

[edabomb]

yeah, the rules were there ahead of time

I don't think anyone thought the final would get to the geniused last line of the rules... I just don't understand when a 4 became more important than 2 2's, 4 1's, or a 3 and a 1... just weird for me

Or how a french cut four is more valuable than a pristine cover drive for 3. The bowling equivalent of this rule would be the most dot balls, which I figure we would have won comfortably.

It's the modern day toss of the coin.

 

[Eelectrica]

Change the super over to have whoever hasn't been given out to be eligible then.
What England, you were bowled out? What a shame.

 

[Pommy]

Congratulations to the United Nations on (err sort of) winning their first World Cup final.

What a brilliant match led by their Irish skipper, with a fantastic super over bowled by their West Indian superstar, finished off with the winning runs hit by a kiwi.

It’s just a shame that New Zealand’s Indian and Zimbabwean players were just not as good as those two British citizens and the kiwi from Whitehaven.

 

[The Bye]

It’s just a shame that New Zealand’s Indian and Zimbabwean players were just not as good as those two British citizens and the kiwi from Whitehaven.

The cherry on top for me was your Australian coach. Hats off to the England Wales Ireland South Africa Barbados and New Zealand cricket board (EWISABNZCB for short) for identifying that the English would never win a World Cup on their own and doing something to rectify their downfalls.

 

[JJ]

It’s just a shame that New Zealand’s Indian and Zimbabwean players were just not as good as those two British citizens and the kiwi from Whitehaven.

Leave us out of this BS...

We'd love to have Stokes - his family shifted to England when he was 12, unfortunately...

 

[Bazal]

Gut wrenching way to decide a world cup. Really entertaining, but also kind of empty.

On the plus side, Australia is still the last team to actually WIN the world cup

 

[Pommy]

Leave us out of this BS...

We'd love to have Stokes - his family shifted to England when he was 12, unfortunately...

Of course you would people talk like they wouldn’t select players eligible to them and who want to play for you. The same people probably say it’s amazing that Tonga select their heritage players.

 

[Bazal]

Deep breaths lol.

Nah, LeedsRhino is a genuine fair weather tosser.