sledger
Spanish_Vicente
They were. I am the best poster on the forum.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Final - England v New Zealand
- Thread starter James
- Start date
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That caused more anxiety than it relieved.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Pretty sure sledger's 2c is only worth 0.74c on the open market ftr.
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah England being awarded the game on the basis of finishing above NZ in the group stage, or on the basis that they had better NRR or that they won the group match would all be sensible ways to split a tie. So I can live with the result. But ****ing boundaries? Remember back in the 2014 FIFA world cup when the match finished a draw and they decided who won based on who had the most shots on goal? Of course you ****ing don’t!I don't hate the idea of just playing more Super Overs until the stadium administration and/or local government tells you to gagf, but failing that when it's a tie after a Super Over I think it should be treated the same way a washout is. I think that would mean England would be declared winners -- finished higher in the round robin -- but they may actually share the trophy in that situation based on what mr_mister said (which is lame, but if so lets just change that too).
Wickets lost is at the very least also incredibly stupid, possibly even just as stupid as the boundaries rule. I don't want to see it changed (back) to that.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
It does not. England were the best team throughout the tournanent, it's not like anyone begrudges them the win.
But if you can't talk about tweaking an imperfect rule right after it affects the biggest game of cricket possible then you'd probably never do it.
sledger
Spanish_Vicente
Got to get that rush somehow.
andmark
International Captain
I'm looking forward to the next CW Power 5 after this.
sledger
Spanish_Vicente
That's because the market is controlled by the state and not free.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Japan qualified over Senegal in the recent world cup on fewer yellow cards iirc. It was completely ridiculous.
Spintolose
U19 Cricketer
?
It was worth staying awake for 2 days for.
I don't know if I was shaking from nerves or the caffeine overdose.
RossTaylorsBox
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
A final being decided by some random technicality which will be debated about for decades is the most cricket thing ever, which is why it owns.
sledger
Spanish_Vicente
It is simply the optimum time to bestow my prodigious wit on people who can give it the attention it doubtless deserves.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
The open market is free. It's just fictional. Your 2c is worth 2c in the controlled market.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I agree that we should run with the momentum of the emotional outage, as I said in the other post. If people weren't talking about it on CW I'd have happily waited a day or two though. Middle ground ftw.
nightprowler10
Global Moderator
While it rings as a better strategy to me, it is still arbitrary. After all, England threw Adil's wicket away intentionally to give Stokes the strike. Similarly, teams intentionally give away boundaries by having an aggressive field because they are more worried about stopping the single or taking a wicket. We need to be either happy with a shared trophy or accept any arbitrary rule used to decide a winner, because let's face it, all of those types of rules are arbitrary, including the super over.