Worried Man Blues
Well-known member
Bit of a shame for Rashid being out without facing a ball!
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Cricket] Cricket World Cup Final: ENGLAND v New Zealand *** Official Match Thread ***
- Thread starter Sussex Nomad
- Start date
No. Just no.What the actual ****? No, they are claiming victory because they won.
Yeah I often feel gutted and hard-done-by in after football games (as is often the case when England lose). But I don't leave thinking the football should have been called a draw, that's just weird.
I like to think I'd have been over to them fairly quickly, but then you and I haven't spent our careers training in the hope we achieve what they achieved that second. New Zealand needed 2 runs off the last ball to win the world cup. They were favourites at that point. Archer bowled well, Roy fielded well (unlike a couple of balls earlier) and threw perfectly. Buttler, full of nerves, collected the ball and hit the stumps perfectly. Their years of practice became worth it at that second, so it's understandable they celebrated for a minute before going to the Kiwis.
Oh please.
Which is all that we've said. Overall, we weren't outrageously lucky. It was hard fought, and we won by the narrowest of margins.
Last edited:
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
Maybe sport isn't for you?
drew
Drew
What the actual ****? No, they are claiming victory because they won.
Yeah I often feel gutted and hard-done-by in after football games (as is often the case when England lose). But I don't leave thinking the football should have been called a draw, that's just weird.
I like to think I'd have been over to them fairly quickly, but then you and I haven't spent our careers training in the hope we achieve what they achieved that second. New Zealand needed 2 runs off the last ball to win the world cup. They were favourites at that point. Archer bowled well, Roy fielded well (unlike a couple of balls earlier) and threw perfectly. Buttler, full of nerves, collected the ball and hit the stumps perfectly. Their years of practice became worth it at that second, so it's understandable they celebrated for a minute before going to the Kiwis.
Oh please.
First time on this thread when I've agreed with everything Triggaaar has said!
maltaseagull
Well-known member
If you are talking sportsmanship, apparently Stokes asked the umpires to remove the 4 runs from hitting his bat, but they told him that was the rules and there was nothing they could do.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...n-after-england-s-world-cup-victory-qzdd8j5bv
And Chopper has the audacity to compare them with the Aussies
Even that doesn’t follow for me as if we knew that was the case we wouldn’t have had those last two run outs.
Had that been the rule, we would have played it differently. 2 of our last 3 never faced a ball, and Archer only faced one.
How about they play the match and then, once both teams have played their 50 overs, the ICC look at fans' forums to decide how to pick a winner? They can then play that shitty reality TV suspense music and announce the winner in front of the live audience!
Some of the commentators I listened too, thought it was a good toss to lose, some thought NZ should have batted first I also thought the same.
But NZ have become a team who like to defend scores.
I wonder how Stokes would have felt if the umpire called it a 5, and he had to go to the none strikers end.
That wouldn't have happened. He would have been at the same end but needing 4 from 2 balls to win (3 to tie).
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
I have visions of colinz driving his car off a bridge after ripping all his pictures of Brendon McCullum off the wall.
Mackenzie
Old Brightonian
Probably a bit like you do now
It was a fantastic game, it’s put cricket on the front pages and it will have inspired a load of children to have a go at the sport. England got the title, but cricket was the real winner.
Some fair comment there, pulled apart by the usual suspects.
Technically it was a draw, and an England win declared on count back. It seems clear to me a second super would have been the fairest way to produce an outright winner, it's a shame they didn't add that condition to the rules to begin with. Boundary count back is just daft.
Are you sure you are not Australian?
I'm a Pom with an Aussie passport living in NZ.