The Roar
The Roar

Jeff

Roar Rookie

Joined June 2019

0

Views

0

Published

1.9k

Comments

Published

Comments

Jeff hasn't published any posts yet

And what if NZ had finished higher on the Table and beaten ENG in the group stage Tomothy? Would the “best” team of the tournament still have deserved to lose on count-back of boundaries?

New Zealand were robbed in the World Cup final

I certainly think England deserved to win under the rules, but the rules need changing for the future. The ICC’s lack of forethought in setting these rules in regard to the implications for both the integrity of the outcome of the contest and the cricketing public’s likely reaction, is infuriating.

I’m not sure how long this rule has been in effect, but there is no mention of it in the ICC’s September 2018 Men’s ODI Playing Conditions. It appears there is/was a separate CWC19 set of rules, however these have never been made widely available to the public; certainly not via publication on the ICC website (interestingly, the ODI Playing Conditions also provide for teams in a four-or-more Full Member ICC competition to be separated on the Points Table by head-to-head results and then NRR, yet the reverse was true for CWC19?).

Consider that this is the second tied final after completion of the 50-overs-a-side starting from the CWC99. That’s 2 finals in the last 6 tournaments. It is wrong to think that this is unlikely to ever happen again.

Having each team to play a Super Over but requiring one of those teams to score more runs than the other is absurd. Why have the Super Over in the first place.

The use of boundaries to determine the winner impacts the integrity of the game, because by telling teams beforehand that that is what they have to do to ensure victory in a tied situation, the ICC is pre-determining the way a team should score its runs. That is plain wrong.

That rule must be changed. If the use of the T20 solution of a Super Over is to be applied to ODI cricket – fine, but make it proportional to the length of the format; at least play up to 4 sets of Super Overs to separate the teams and then award the match (tournament) to the team that scored the most runs. If the batting sides still can’t be separated on runs, then the bowling side that took the most wickets is the winner of the contest.

The ICC should have been able to come up that, or a similar approach, than the – seemingly -appallingly little-thought-through solution it did.

Those who wish to just forget about what happened because the match is over, are setting up the integrity of future contests for failure.

New Zealand were robbed in the World Cup final

It wouldn’t surprise me that had India been on the receiving end, the public pressure that BCCI would have been under would have resulted very soon after the event seeing BCCI flex its muscles and require an inquiry and changing of the rules at the very least.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

Hi Cari, welcome aboard.

I agree with you, England won under the rules. I think the vast majority of posters here are saying the same thing. However it is far from a fruitless exercise in discussing it if you care about the integrity of the contest moving forward.

Remember, this is the 2nd finals match to be tied after the 50 overs in 6 tournaments – ’99 Semi Final and this Final – so you have to consider it will happen again.

Using boundaries scored as the means to award the match means that the ICC is pre-determining the way a team should core its runs. That is just plain wrong. But accepting that that is the rule moving forward and that teams must play that way in case of a tied final is exactly what persisting with this rule will do.

It is anything but far from impossible to devise rules that cover all eventualities. A tied match is hardly an unforeseen eventuality. Then using 6 balls each to try and break the deadlock but having both teams score the same runs, is also hardly an unforeseen eventuality.

The simplest fair approach is for the team that scores the most runs wins. All that takes is additional sets of Super Overs, if Super Overs are to be used in the first place.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

So still no actual ICC document and whatever these extracts are from, still no reference to boundaries determining the outcome or that one team must score more than the over.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

when was that? I can’t see it in the ICC ODI Playing Conditions, but don’t have access to this or previous ICC tournament rules.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

ahh…yep.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

yeah, but, butter tea?…..gag…!!

(Literally, it’s liquid butter disguised as tea because, well, it’s hot and in liquid form. And comes from churned Yak’s milk. Retch again…)

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

The likelihood of a Lyon injury is so low. If that were to occur, someone gets flown into the UK for insertion in the team, assuming selectors don’t want to run with a mix of Labu/Wade/Smith (albeit different bowling types). Perhaps Smith SHOULD step up a bit with his bowling.

Wade and Head make tons to press Ashes cases

Head for me easily in the First – and likely all – Tests. He has the record and the current form.

Wade and Head make tons to press Ashes cases

By balloon.

Nay, the Dalai Lama in the foothills of the Indian Himalaya to declare the result.

Now if you thought the pointy end of last night’s game was challenging, wait until you try and land that thing in a clearing on a ridge in the mountains surrounded by Deodar Forest. Now THAT would be be a well-deserved victory.

In the case of two balloons touching down simultaneously, then a race between the two balloon pilots up to His Holiness’ residence across a 5km route. Barefoot. If still tied by arrival time, a count back on the number of strides taken to reach him.

Failing that, then the last to throw up following consumption of a full bowl of butter tea to be declared the winner.

So simple, you have to wonder at what the ICC spends its time on when the solution is so obvious.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

And Ronan, typical ICC administrative approach re supporter engagement of our game given they are yet to come out and provide us all with a statement as to how the 4x umpires and match referee interpreted the rules to arrive at the decision that was made (even though this could have ocurred with 1 hour of the game ending). Clearly this is an issue that is engaging supporters of the game of which we all entrust the ICC to be the voice, guide and custodian of.

And exactly what are the rules? That article points to the ODI Playing Regulations effective from Sept 2018. But these are NOT the regulations/rules being used for CWC19. Firstly, there is no reference to Super Overs in those playing conditions. Secondly, those playing conditions preference Head-to-Head results over NRR when determining the placement of teams in a tournament of four Full Members or more where table points are equal; that is the opposite of the CWC19 regulations (apparently).

Where exactly is a supporter of the game supposed to find these regs? I certainly haven’t been able to track them down on Google notwithstanding various permutations of word searches.

Ongoing supporter dis-engagement approach (deliberate or not) from the ICC unfortunately.

Darren Lehmann laments 'crap' rule that decided 'the greatest game of cricket' he's seen

I think that makes a lot of sense Chris. It then becomes proportionate to the format being played. Be it a series of 4-5 “Super Overs” until one team scores more, or a 4-5 over “extra time” scenario where it is aggregate that determines the result.

One 6 ball over where one team has to score more runs than the other and a playing condition which says that you must play a certain way to win (i.e. you must be a boundary-hitting team, not a team of scoring in lesser increments per ball), doesn’t sit well with me from the perspective of integrity of either the contest at hand or the ODI game more broadly.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

It was random in the choice of the ICC to select this metric as the determinant of the result, given it has never before been used and there are plenty of other metrics that could have been used. It’s random unless the ICC can come out with an explanation as to the logic of choosing this particular stat over all of the others available.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

Ohhh.. Taylorman. Yes I agree 100%. But let’s that one go, it was nearly 40 years ago. Let’s all move on 🙂

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

Being able to follow who is replying to who on this thread is becoming increasingly difficult given the tabs have stopped indenting. But my notification says you were replying to one of my comments so I think that was about what is/isn’t a dead ball. I’m just saying the current laws allow for a boundary deflected off a batsman to be counted as a boundary and for a run out throw deflected off a batsman to be counted as out. I wouldn’t mind either rule being amended to “dead ball” as that would better capture the spirit of the game.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

Half of Australia and none of the rest of the world has an understanding of it (other than the Irish at about 5%) and that works for me as a tie breaker!

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

Ouch, I may not agree with your sentiment overall re psychiatrists/insecurity etc – although I get the need to push back – but at least it’s good to see a poster coming round to looking at things from an objective perspective, albeit with significant qualifications.

The two best teams before the finals were obviously India and Australia – hence the table standings. Both were eliminated by good performances from their opponents. I do wish however that cricket could be discussed without the need for vitriol and a “haha gotcha” approach when some teams are successful – and genuinely so. Your observations to chips on the shoulder will continue to ring true until the “nah nah nah we smashed you this time” line of response disappears.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

Agree Ryan. The number of boundaries hit is the ICC pre-determining the way a team must score its runs. That is just plain wrong.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

It’s disappointing that the ICC rules for CWC19 (hopefully not future CWCs) essentially dictate the way a team must score their runs (i.e. hitting boundaries). Because that is precisely what the current ICC approach implies.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

This poster has a history of…well, just check out the comment history. It was great game, a little soured by the random use of a metric never before used, but those were the rules. Let’s just hope what comes from this is a review of – and change to – the rules by the ICC which better reflects the integrity of the contest that has come before.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

That’s just ridiculous Piru.

A game of Australian Rules.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

The above poster is just baiting.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

Ha ha!

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand

Agreed The Coaster. It was a great match played by two teams who absolutely deserved to be there. Well played by both, notwithstanding the views of some. If they can, NZ needs to carry that type of attack through to the next WC.

England win World Cup final in thrilling super over finish against New Zealand