The ICC has announced that the Cricket World Cup final could be decided by a Super Over, if the match ends in a tie.
The Super Over would not be used in any game except the final, with the quarter finals and semis to be decided by the higher placed side coming into the knockout stage of the tournament.
This decision marks a change from the originally announced policy, where in the event of a tie there would be joint winners of the Cup.
“The ICC Board reinstated the use of a Super Over in the event of a tie in the ICC Cricket World Cup 2015 final,” read a statement.
“This now replicates the arrangements for the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 final and other recent ICC events where a winner will be determined on the day of the final (weather permitting), and a Super Over was the most credible way to separate the two sides.”
If nothing else, the decision will make sure there is plenty of tension and excitement if the match ends in at ie.
With the success of the Super Over in the Big Bash League over the past two seasons, do you think this is the right move?
Graeme
Guest
If there is a one in 100 chance of a draw, then the chance of two draws in a row would be one in 10,000. You'll have to wait quite a few lifetimes for that to happen. I quite like the idea of a repeat playoff after a draw. The excitement would be huge. And ICC would be rolling in it. But who is to be churlish to them if they give us something to enjoy.
Mark
Guest
And if it's a tie again?
Vas Venkatramani
Roar Guru
I think the Super Over was a good idea. But I prefer another: Each of the knockouts have a reserve day, including the final. It's out of the box, but if the original final ended as a tie, then what is stopped a replay the following day? More $$$ for ICC (which they never say no to), an exciting sequel to a an exciting original final that ended in a tie, and two teams equally tired, but both ready to go again.
Cam Reddin
Roar Rookie
I'm a huge fan of having a super-over decide the Final should it end in a tie. Personally, I'd rather leave ties that occur throughout the group stages stand as a share of the points, but I realise you can't have it both ways. As rare as ties are in the longer form of the game it definitely seems the right thing to do. End of the day, you can't have joint winners.
Beny Iniesta
Guest
Tournament hasn't started yet. This is the right decision, why should you have a problem with it?
Mitcher
Guest
Which is more concerning? The original decision to leave open a 'joint winners' scenario; or, that this type of decision is being made on the eve of the tournament beginning. The ICC is a farce.