ICC World Cup 2019
Advertise on CBF
Pages: 1 ... 99 100 [101] 102 103 104

Author Topic: ICC World Cup 2019  (Read 122886 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

alexhilly1492

  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3117
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1500 on: July 15, 2019, 07:24:47 AM »
Rubbish, Kane Williamson summed it up perfectly,

It's a (No Swearing Please) way to lose but the rules were set before the tournament.

I wonder how many of you would be saying this if we'd beaten India or Australia by boundaries? I'd bet none of you

Rules were set England beat NZ on boundaries end of, they could have gone on nrr for the tournament England win they could have gone on group position England win

The only way the don't is wickets lost, this will produce negative cricket as people will start to value wickets over runs
Logged
HS: 77*, 73*, 61*, 61*, 54*, 50*
BB: 7-4-9-5, 7.3-0-29-5

enlightened

  • Club Cricketer
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1501 on: July 15, 2019, 07:32:43 AM »
Quote from: alexhilly1492 on July 15, 2019, 07:24:47 AM
Rubbish, Kane Williamson summed it up perfectly,

It's a (No Swearing Please) way to lose but the rules were set before the tournament.

I wonder how many of you would be saying this if we'd beaten India or Australia by boundaries? I'd bet none of you

Rules were set England beat NZ on boundaries end of, they could have gone on nrr for the tournament England win they could have gone on group position England win

The only way the don't is wickets lost, this will produce negative cricket as people will start to value wickets over runs

I'd be saying the same whoever we'd 'beaten' if the circumstances had been the same. These particular rules may well have been set before the tournament but the chances of them being required were minimal and its unfortunate that they were.
Logged

CTS_Alex

  • Village Cricketer
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1502 on: July 15, 2019, 09:21:00 AM »
Its coming home! What a game that was!
Logged

ppccopener

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7790
  • Trade Count: (+6)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1503 on: July 15, 2019, 09:37:20 AM »
the format of the tournament is set and you can have any number of ways to win in a game that close, you have to accept that is h it is

im a die hard supporter and hugely relived we got over the line

England won by the skin of our teeth and the New Zealanders should be proud of such a huge effort and led by a captain with class and talent, I think he was the best Captain in the tournament]]

but we won and nothing should take that away from the team. For Butler and Stokes's efforts that got us over the line and Stokes's especially its redemption for the T20 WC where that last over cost us the match. He has had to live with that and only this win will ease those memories.

I thought myself he was the reason we won and sheer determination to go out again to face in the super over.

you would be unjsust not to feel sorry for the Kiwi's thou......someone had to lose and they didn't deserve it.
Logged

Calzehbhoy

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1946
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1504 on: July 15, 2019, 10:42:04 AM »
I'm not sure what feels better - Being WORLD CHAMPIONS or reading through twitter laughing at all the salty comments!

CHAMPIONE, CHAMPIONE OLE OLE OLE!!!
Logged

enlightened

  • Club Cricketer
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1505 on: July 15, 2019, 11:39:56 AM »
Not sure we did win actually...…. regarding the 6 runs awarded for the overthrow...….

"The law states: 'If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be any runs for penalties awarded to either side, and the allowance for the boundary, and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had already crossed at the instant of the throw or act.'

"The crucial clause is the last part. A review of the footage of the incident shows clearly that, at the moment the ball was released by the New Zealand fielder, Martin Guptill, Stokes and his partner, Adil Rashid, had not yet crossed for their second run.

On that basis, at the very least there was a strong case for the umpires to rule that five runs, not six, be awarded.
Logged

rickjames

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5094
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1506 on: July 15, 2019, 11:47:16 AM »
Seeing salty people on Twitter moaning has cracked me up
Logged

LEACHY48

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2277
  • Trade Count: (+4)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1507 on: July 15, 2019, 11:50:33 AM »
Quote from: enlightened on July 15, 2019, 11:39:56 AM
Not sure we did win actually...…. regarding the 6 runs awarded for the overthrow...….

"The law states: 'If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be any runs for penalties awarded to either side, and the allowance for the boundary, and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had already crossed at the instant of the throw or act.'

"The crucial clause is the last part. A review of the footage of the incident shows clearly that, at the moment the ball was released by the New Zealand fielder, Martin Guptill, Stokes and his partner, Adil Rashid, had not yet crossed for their second run.

On that basis, at the very least there was a strong case for the umpires to rule that five runs, not six, be awarded.

There's too much ambiguity in that clause, the word 'act' could quite easily refer to the ball hitting the bat and the ensuing ricochet for 4 runs.
And had 5 been awarded stokes would have gone to hit the last ball rather than gap it for 1 or maybe 2.
Logged

enlightened

  • Club Cricketer
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1508 on: July 15, 2019, 12:01:48 PM »
Quote from: LEACHY48 on July 15, 2019, 11:50:33 AM
There's too much ambiguity in that clause, the word 'act' could quite easily refer to the ball hitting the bat and the ensuing ricochet for 4 runs.
And had 5 been awarded stokes would have gone to hit the last ball rather than gap it for 1 or maybe 2.

Don't think so - the law refers to the 'act' of the fielder … not anything that happens after that.
Logged

brokenbat

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2320
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1509 on: July 15, 2019, 12:12:24 PM »
Quote from: enlightened on July 15, 2019, 11:39:56 AM
Not sure we did win actually...…. regarding the 6 runs awarded for the overthrow...….

"The law states: 'If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be any runs for penalties awarded to either side, and the allowance for the boundary, and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had already crossed at the instant of the throw or act.'

"The crucial clause is the last part. A review of the footage of the incident shows clearly that, at the moment the ball was released by the New Zealand fielder, Martin Guptill, Stokes and his partner, Adil Rashid, had not yet crossed for their second run.

On that basis, at the very least there was a strong case for the umpires to rule that five runs, not six, be awarded.

Yes - and Adil Rashid would have been on strike instead of stokes. Simon Taufal explains it nicely: https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/27194046/umpires-made-error-judgement-awarding-six-runs-says-simon-taufel
Logged

LEACHY48

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2277
  • Trade Count: (+4)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1510 on: July 15, 2019, 12:19:10 PM »
There's no clear answer though, the act is very unclear
Logged

six and out

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2136
  • Trade Count: (0)
    • MKCC website
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1511 on: July 15, 2019, 12:19:48 PM »
Quote from: enlightened on July 15, 2019, 11:39:56 AM
Not sure we did win actually...…. regarding the 6 runs awarded for the overthrow...….

"The law states: 'If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be any runs for penalties awarded to either side, and the allowance for the boundary, and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had already crossed at the instant of the throw or act.'

"The crucial clause is the last part. A review of the footage of the incident shows clearly that, at the moment the ball was released by the New Zealand fielder, Martin Guptill, Stokes and his partner, Adil Rashid, had not yet crossed for their second run.

On that basis, at the very least there was a strong case for the umpires to rule that five runs, not six, be awarded.

just seen this!

surely this is the definition of..... kicking a bloke in the nuts whilst he's lying on the ground!
Logged

enlightened

  • Club Cricketer
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1512 on: July 15, 2019, 12:27:53 PM »
Quote from: LEACHY48 on July 15, 2019, 12:19:10 PM
There's no clear answer though, the act is very unclear

I don't think it is … the second mention of the 'act' is merely referencing the first …. "from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder". It's clear that it is the throw or the act of the fielder that matters.
Logged

smilley792

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8755
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Willoooowwwww
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1513 on: July 15, 2019, 12:32:05 PM »
Umpires got it wrong. It happens. Ross Taylor lbw amongst other things.


Had it not gone for overthrows stokes needed 7 of 2 balls, his shot selection would have been different.

Had they called it right Adil been on strike he may have got the 1,2,3,4 who’s knows?

And stokes may have put that leg side full toss into the stand?
It’s all hear say, as it happened. The balls affter where played differently because.

Crying on Twitter, Facebook or a forum isn’t gonna change it.
Logged
@chrisjones792
Fastest ton- 54balls

mo_town

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1103
  • Trade Count: (+1)
Re: ICC World Cup 2019
« Reply #1514 on: July 15, 2019, 12:34:43 PM »
Quote from: brokenbat on July 15, 2019, 12:12:24 PM
Yes - and Adil Rashid would have been on strike instead of stokes. Simon Taufal explains it nicely: https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/27194046/umpires-made-error-judgement-awarding-six-runs-says-simon-taufel

Cant believe Dharmasena was allowed to officiate in the final! He is not qualified to officiate in village cricket. Too many mistakes. IMO, ICC should count the wrong decisions taken by each umpire and the ones with the least mistakes should get to officiate. Its poor to put someone so incompetent incharge of such a big match!
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 99 100 [101] 102 103 104
« previous next »
 

Advertise on CBF