Final - New Zealand v Australia (29th March)

[kiwiviktor81]

Well done Aussie, just too good on the day. Aussie bowling was magnificent. I wouldn't be surprised if Starc ends up as the Bradman of ODI bowling with an average of 12 or something equally ridiculous.

 

[Frost]

Thought so!..as calling a team who's actually won things a "minnow" didn't seem logical.

Your right, my post was a bit harsh on Bangladesh

 

[TNT]

Your right, my post was a bit harsh on Bangladesh

Cant you take this **** to private messages or something.

 

[NZTailender]

Australia just too good on the day; well done to them. I don't even hate to say I love watching Starc bowl, so so good.
Probably the difference for me is that they really stepped up for the final, whereas NZ played to the same high intensity throughout - which was great and why we got to the final undefeated - but we needed to step up into the highest gear and we didn't.

Roll on the Tests later this year, and the CH!

 

[NZTailender]

Well, what can i say? I really feel for my kiwi friends

Love your work WW especially

They'd been riding on a crest of a wave before the world cup

It's a shame they couldn't join the exclusive club of teams who have lifted the world cup but hey ho!!!..as the great Tupac Shakur once said "that's just the way it is"..

It's quite a testament to WI cricket that you can ride a wave 36 years since you last won the WC and 15 since you last had a Test standard side!

 

[Frost]

Cant you take this **** to private messages or something.

Could, but why?

 

[artvandalay]

- Anyone saying that SA/some other team would have been better finalists kindly **** off

SA would have made better finalists.

 

[viriya]

Honestly I knew in the back of my mind that SA would do better if they had made the final over NZ simply because of AB and the fact that they had played in Aus conditions and it wouldn't have been their first game there in forever. NZ obviously deserved to go through, but feel like SA would've pushed Aus more... Imagine AB coming in at the 150/3 after ~35 over scoreline. Do you think SA would've ended up with 180-odd? Possible, but I would bank on AB coming off and SA getting 300+ instead.

All hindsight though.

 

[Zinzan]

Love your work WW especially





It's quite a testament to WI cricket that you can ride a wave 36 years since you last won the WC and 15 since you last had a Test standard side!

Love how he pops up at the most inopportune times. Didn't hear boo from him after that semi-final thriller against SA, yet coincidentally he's the first to offer his condolences after the final loss. How very predictable.

 

[JediNudist]

wow the comments here on the Blackcaps so called technical deficiencies is pretty pathetic. Remember NZ has 4million population. Rugby takes all our talent, many all blacks were also accomplished junior cricketers as well. We have who we have .
Yeah ok Guppy isn't the perfect batsman but all I can say is WHERES YOUR ODI DOUBLE CENTURY. So people talking about his 'technical deficiency' can just go and jump off a cliff.
Also Australia isn't all that perfect as shown at Eden Park. yeah tough team at the G in their own back yard.

 

[Zinzan]

In fairness, I suppose the final result is the closest he's felt to a victory for some time.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Imagine AB coming in at the 150/3 after ~35 over scoreline. Do you think SA would'v ended up with 180-odd?

Imagine Taylor, Elliott, Anderson and Ronchi still available at 150/3... you'd back them to get 270-280 9 times out of 10.

I swear if the semis had been NZ vs Aus and SA vs India, and if SA had reached the final and got smashed by Aus/NZ, people would've been saying India would've put up a better fight. It's just what people do. This discussion really is very weird and has no logic behind it whatsoever. SA just weren't that good guys.

 

[OverratedSanity]

It's quite a testament to WI cricket that you can ride a wave 36 years since you last won the WC and 15 since you last had a Test standard side!

West Indies were pretty awful even in 2000 tbh.

 

[JediNudist]

Imagine Taylor, Elliott, Anderson and Ronchi still available at 150/3... you'd back them to get 270-280 9 times out of 10.

I swear if the semis had been NZ vs Aus and SA vs India, and if SA had reached the final and got smashed by Aus/NZ, people would've been saying India would've put up a better fight. It's just what people do. This discussion really is very weird and has no logic behind it whatsoever. SA just weren't that good guys.

Any other game it would have happened. it didn't . Have to plan for England in 2019 were the conditions are even better for our bowlers than NZ

 

[Xuhaib]

the intensity that the Aus teams show in the finals I believe you need to be a super human talent like AB to match them. Apart from a charged up AB led South Africa I don't see anyother side challenging Australia in a final at the G

 

[Zinzan]

Honestly I knew in the back of my mind that SA would do better if they had made the final over NZ simply because of AB and the fact that they had played in Aus conditions and it wouldn't have been their first game there in forever. NZ obviously deserved to go through, but feel like SA would've pushed Aus more... Imagine AB coming in at the 150/3 after ~35 over scoreline. Do you think SA would've ended up with 180-odd? Possible, but I would bank on AB coming off and SA getting 300+ instead.

All hindsight though.

The other thing that is hindsight that you conveniently failed to point out, so i'll do it for you, is that SA did actually play at the MCG (you might have forgotten) and were rolled by that ferocious Indian attack for just 177. But don't let that stop you thinking they would have prospered better against Starc, Johnson & Co. in the pressure of a grand final.

 

[viriya]

The other thing that is hindsight that you conveniently failed to point out, so i'll do it for you, is that SA did actually play at the MCG (you might have forgotten) and were rolled by that ferocious Indian attack for just 177. But don't let that stop you thinking they would have prospered better against Starc, Johnson & Co. in the pressure of a grand final.

They looked much better in the knockouts. Aside from the late fielding lapses in the NZ game they didn't choke under pressure like usual.

Aus were rolled for 150-odd vs the same NZ attack.. didn't mean they would repeat that the next time they met.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I think any reference to on field behaviour would be sour grapes and take away the graciousness of being a good loser. Australia played the match in the right spirit and their behaviour was exemplary, I know that there will be a few disgruntled posters who find it difficult to deal with Australia winning their 5th WC and as usual will look to discredit them by using unsubstantiated or unmeasurable accusations.

Almost as bad as being such a good winner that you complain that New Zealand were too nice.

 

[Spikey]

It's like Brad Haddin said what he did today just to totally counter that post by TNT

 

[Zinzan]

They looked much better in the knockouts. Aside from the late fielding lapses in the NZ game they didn't choke under pressure like usual.

Aus were rolled for 150-odd vs the same NZ attack.. didn't mean they would repeat that the next time they met.

We're talking about the same ground in SA's case FFS, that's the difference, and I know deep down you already know that.

They scored less against India than we did against Aust, Australia didn't play again at Eden Park. Surely even cricrate factors the venues teams play at.

SA lost 3 times in the WC - 3 without even playing Australia.