|
Post by chuckrocky on Jul 14, 2019 21:38:03 GMT
Broad for me, his best days are behind him. I think in the long term he will be Broads replacement, they're quite similar in the lengths and style. However, are we really going to be dropping Broad for the first Ashes test at Edgbaston?! I really can't see it. Archer is the future though for sure. If you pick your best team then Broad misses out. He doesn’t have the pace to trouble batsmen anymore so relies way to heavily on overhead conditions. He’s only taken 17 wickets so far in the county championship. Porter and Gregory who are currently playing for Lions have taken 90 wickets between them so far in the same league.
|
|
|
Post by LL Cool Dave on Jul 14, 2019 22:26:08 GMT
The amount of posts on social media (including my own) that I've seen that start with 'I don't even like cricket but...' or words to that effect have been very large in number.
That was an absolutely brilliant ending to a match, I'd never even heard of one of these Super Overs before. Up there with this countrys best sporting moments of all time.
|
|
|
Post by LL Cool Dave on Jul 14, 2019 22:34:04 GMT
And it's all down to Brexit All down to immigrants, you mean.
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Jul 14, 2019 22:36:20 GMT
Just been on Twitter lots of bitterness towards us from the Indian and Pakistan fans calling us cheats and how the NZ were the true winners. I reminded one Pakistan poster that if he’s talking cheating look at Amir and his spot fixing. Feel for the Black Caps and thought Williamson was magnificent in the way he conducted himself after the game but boy am I pleased we won.
|
|
|
Post by supersimonstainrod on Jul 14, 2019 23:10:37 GMT
The amount of posts on social media (including my own) that I've seen that start with 'I don't even like cricket but...' or words to that effect have been very large in number. That was an absolutely brilliant ending to a match, I'd never even heard of one of these Super Overs before. Up there with this countrys best sporting moments of all time. Neither had I. I was expecting a bowl-out,showing how out of touch with the game I am. 😂
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Jul 14, 2019 23:41:38 GMT
Any convicts moaning about countback need to remember 1999. They tied their game with South Africa in the Semi Final and went through because the tiebreaker was NRR from the Super Sixes which was a whole 0.1 better than South Africa’s. They’re the rules and both teams agree to play under them, boiling the piss of everyone by winning on that is just making this even better for me when I can point the aboce fact out.
|
|
|
Post by callas12 on Jul 14, 2019 23:48:41 GMT
Team of the year for the sports award this year for me by a country mile.
Although watch the BBC award it to Liverpool or Man City!
|
|
|
Post by Cast no shadow on Jul 15, 2019 2:57:56 GMT
Team of the year for the sports award this year for me by a country mile. Although watch the BBC award it to Liverpool or Man City! England women football probably
|
|
|
Post by lancashirelad on Jul 15, 2019 5:41:27 GMT
Just been on Twitter lots of bitterness towards us from the Indian and Pakistan fans calling us cheats and how the NZ were the true winners. I reminded one Pakistan poster that if he’s talking cheating look at Amir and his spot fixing. Feel for the Black Caps and thought Williamson was magnificent in the way he conducted himself after the game but boy am I pleased we won. In life not every one will be happy for you there is always jealousy. I know i can not be happy for every team/person that wins a competition but reluctantly congratulate them. This world cup on sky the coverage from the commentators as rule has been great all enjoying cricket and only the slightest own country bias. To me the only one throughout the competition who only championed his own team and next to no complements for other teams was Ganguly who appears a bitter person. Congratulations to the others for the banter and love of cricket. The crowds have been great also with a mixture of colourfull outfits, dancing and people just having a good time some with and some without alcohol getting along together.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Jul 15, 2019 6:45:06 GMT
The amount of posts on social media (including my own) that I've seen that start with 'I don't even like cricket but...' or words to that effect have been very large in number. That was an absolutely brilliant ending to a match, I'd never even heard of one of these Super Overs before. Up there with this countrys best sporting moments of all time. I’ve always considered cricket to be a perfect analogy of the Civil Service on grass(the stuff we walk on)not the stuff to keep off...)) The amount of laws & rules that are involved & the quality of some of the umpiring to steer the play through all the bureaucracy it is sublime. Organised fun at its best or as my friend who is not a cricket fan calls it,”Organised Loafing” As for the World Cup, didn’t we win on a technicality🏆
|
|
|
Post by Goonie on Jul 15, 2019 8:05:21 GMT
Just in case any Aussies suggest we cheated a reminder of 'the most disgraceful incident in cricket' 😁:
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jul 15, 2019 8:14:51 GMT
Team of the year for the sports award this year for me by a country mile. Although watch the BBC award it to Liverpool or Man City! Already seen a few aussies chirping up on twitter saying there is no overseas team of the year so they can't win..... Joking apart as the world becomes more global I think some of the qualification rules have to be looked at, no doubt Archer is going to be world class on and off the pitch, but I think its wrong like Trott, KP, Jennings and many others they essentially pick a country to represent for financial reasons having already played representative cricket at u-19 level for the country they were born in, no problem with people like Devon Malcolm, Prior, Stokes, Strauss etc who moved to uk when young or who never played at representative level but it just seems to be almost getting like a transfer system in football. That said lets keep the rules as they are till we find a couple of openers, a no 3 and another quick
|
|
|
Post by Goonie on Jul 15, 2019 8:16:45 GMT
Any convicts moaning about countback need to remember 1999. They tied their game with South Africa in the Semi Final and went through because the tiebreaker was NRR from the Super Sixes which was a whole 0.1 better than South Africa’s. They’re the rules and both teams agree to play under them, boiling the piss of everyone by winning on that is just making this even better for me when I can point the aboce fact out. See below 1981 semi-final😁
|
|
|
Post by mattyd on Jul 15, 2019 8:20:45 GMT
Why did we win it when we scored 15 in the SO and so did NZ. Why did they have to beat us to win, or why was another SO not played.
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Jul 15, 2019 8:21:38 GMT
Why did we win it when we scored 15 in the SO and so did NZ. Why did they have to beat us to win, or why was another SO not played. Boundary countback was the tiebreaker. We scored more than New Zealand so we win on tiebreak.
|
|
|
Post by Goonie on Jul 15, 2019 8:22:08 GMT
Team of the year for the sports award this year for me by a country mile. Although watch the BBC award it to Liverpool or Man City! England women football probably I expect a huge 'positive discrimination' media campaign via the BBC from November onwards Yes they did ok but from what I saw of the women's world cup the quality was under 18 boys at best Anyone asking for wage parity on that basis fails to understand the relationship between meritocracy and capitalism in the real world as opposed to an 'ideal' world
|
|
|
Post by Goonie on Jul 15, 2019 8:24:18 GMT
Why did we win it when we scored 15 in the SO and so did NZ. Why did they have to beat us to win, or why was another SO not played. SO's are the equivalent of penalties in nogger They ended equal so it was decided on the most boundaries in their innings and we had 26 compared to their's in the teens
|
|
|
Post by Goonie on Jul 15, 2019 8:31:03 GMT
Any convicts moaning about countback need to remember 1999. They tied their game with South Africa in the Semi Final and went through because the tiebreaker was NRR from the Super Sixes which was a whole 0.1 better than South Africa’s. They’re the rules and both teams agree to play under them, boiling the piss of everyone by winning on that is just making this even better for me when I can point the aboce fact out. See below 1981 semi-final😁 Although New Zealand were also guilty years later:
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2019 9:14:26 GMT
I don't understand why the ICC rules don't state that the game should be decided on the number of wickets each side lost, although we would obviously have lost using that method and thankfully the Super Over worked in our favour.
I suppose the number of boundaries is probably used as in theory it should encourage more attacking, aggressive cricket.
|
|
|
Post by charlesjefferson on Jul 15, 2019 9:23:17 GMT
I'm not comfortable with the ruling as it stands regarding breaking the tie by using boundaries hit as the determining factor. It's the only slight nag i have about what is a phenomenal and glorious achievement which has been built for 4 years.
What i would personally state is that it could have been determined on 3 group stage factors...
Who finished with the most points in the round robin group stage?
Who won in the group stage head to head?
Which team ended the group stage with a superior net run-rate?
The answer to all three of those is England.
The only people munching sour grapes are non-England fans who wanted the underdog New Zealand to win. They wouldn't mind if New Zealand has won in the exact same circumstances though, double standards and all that.
We're men's and women's Cricket world champions at the moment and for a nation full of sporting hurt, that feels pretty spectacular.
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Jul 15, 2019 10:02:33 GMT
I'm not comfortable with the ruling as it stands regarding breaking the tie by using boundaries hit as the determining factor. It's the only slight nag i have about what is a phenomenal and glorious achievement which has been built for 4 years. What i would personally state is that it could have been determined on 3 group stage factors... Who finished with the most points in the round robin group stage? Who won in the group stage head to head? Which team ended the group stage with a superior net run-rate? The answer to all three of those is England. The only people munching sour grapes are non-England fans who wanted the underdog New Zealand to win. They wouldn't mind if New Zealand has won in the exact same circumstances though, double standards and all that. We're men's and women's Cricket world champions at the moment and for a nation full of sporting hurt, that feels pretty spectacular. Not to mention, the criticism regarding New Zealand's passage into the semis at the expense of Pakistan on NRR has suddenly gone very quiet indeed. The cricket world at large just doesn't like England winning, especially at the expense of a team as likeable as new Zealand.
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Jul 15, 2019 10:05:30 GMT
I don't understand why the ICC rules don't state that the game should be decided on the number of wickets each side lost, although we would obviously have lost using that method and thankfully the Super Over worked in our favour. I suppose the number of boundaries is probably used as in theory it should encourage more attacking, aggressive cricket. I think wickets lost is unfair too though, because England only lost those wickets chasing hopeless twos in a situation that New Zealand were never in. There's lots to nitpick, Lockie Ferguson bowled at least 3-4 wides that weren't called and Archer's in the super over was bang on the line. Swings and roundabouts. If you're New Zealand I don't think they can be too upset (with the tiebreaker used) being as though they go through to the semis on a tiebreaker that was considered unfair. (Which everyone has now shut up about.)
|
|
|
Post by GeneralFaye on Jul 15, 2019 10:56:07 GMT
I'm not comfortable with the ruling as it stands regarding breaking the tie by using boundaries hit as the determining factor. It's the only slight nag i have about what is a phenomenal and glorious achievement which has been built for 4 years. What i would personally state is that it could have been determined on 3 group stage factors... Who finished with the most points in the round robin group stage? Who won in the group stage head to head? Which team ended the group stage with a superior net run-rate? The answer to all three of those is England. The only people munching sour grapes are non-England fans who wanted the underdog New Zealand to win. They wouldn't mind if New Zealand has won in the exact same circumstances though, double standards and all that. We're men's and women's Cricket world champions at the moment and for a nation full of sporting hurt, that feels pretty spectacular. Not to mention, the criticism regarding New Zealand's passage into the semis at the expense of Pakistan on NRR has suddenly gone very quiet indeed. The cricket world at large just doesn't like England winning, especially at the expense of a team as likeable as new Zealand. It's not just Cricket though is it? Everyone loves beating England in Football, Rugby etc. We're just hated but am I arsed?
|
|
|
Post by thequietman on Jul 15, 2019 11:11:54 GMT
Well, that was all rather magnificent. Bizarre in parts, but magnificent nonetheless.
Rules are rules, and we won. Although I've been discussing a potential amendment should a super over end in a tie again.
My mates and I have mulled it over and come to agreement that each player on both sides should have 3 shies at a target from 22 yards. Most hits win. 3 stumps as a target, or even one stump were suggested, but the target we decided on by popular acclaim is an un-shielded Piers Morgan.
In fact, next WC, sod the cricket. Every team gets 33 chucks at Piers Morgan to decide each match.
|
|
|
Post by Goonie on Jul 15, 2019 11:40:42 GMT
I'm not comfortable with the ruling as it stands regarding breaking the tie by using boundaries hit as the determining factor. It's the only slight nag i have about what is a phenomenal and glorious achievement which has been built for 4 years. What i would personally state is that it could have been determined on 3 group stage factors... Who finished with the most points in the round robin group stage? Who won in the group stage head to head? Which team ended the group stage with a superior net run-rate? The answer to all three of those is England. The only people munching sour grapes are non-England fans who wanted the underdog New Zealand to win. They wouldn't mind if New Zealand has won in the exact same circumstances though, double standards and all that. We're men's and women's Cricket world champions at the moment and for a nation full of sporting hurt, that feels pretty spectacular. Re: 'I'm not comfortable with the ruling as it stands regarding breaking the tie by using boundaries hit as the determining factor.' Why not do what we did as kids when there was (nearly always) disagreement as to who was out by having to face 'three bat handles' after the SO tie? 😁
|
|
|
Post by Goonie on Jul 15, 2019 11:43:15 GMT
I don't understand why the ICC rules don't state that the game should be decided on the number of wickets each side lost, although we would obviously have lost using that method and thankfully the Super Over worked in our favour. I suppose the number of boundaries is probably used as in theory it should encourage more attacking, aggressive cricket. I think wickets lost is unfair too though, because England only lost those wickets chasing hopeless twos in a situation that New Zealand were never in. There's lots to nitpick, Lockie Ferguson bowled at least 3-4 wides that weren't called and Archer's in the super over was bang on the line. Swings and roundabouts. If you're New Zealand I don't think they can be too upset (with the tiebreaker used) being as though they go through to the semis on a tiebreaker that was considered unfair. (Which everyone has now shut up about.) Both teams played by the same rules One lost by those rules and one won. The 4 overthrow runs will no doubt go down in history though Sport is ace and without contention would be far duller
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jul 15, 2019 13:05:28 GMT
Just been on Twitter lots of bitterness towards us from the Indian and Pakistan fans calling us cheats and how the NZ were the true winners. I reminded one Pakistan poster that if he’s talking cheating look at Amir and his spot fixing. Feel for the Black Caps and thought Williamson was magnificent in the way he conducted himself after the game but boy am I pleased we won. You're are always going to get those who are happy and those who are not so happy, that's how a game with winners and losers works. My Facebook is full of friends from Indian and Pakistan descent who were supporting England very vocally in this Final from start to finish and that was reflected in the crowd too. One of the most exciting things about the Final was the diversity of the crowd, truly international and how involved the crowd got whatever their background. Cricket was the winner. The England team also reflects that diversity which I think is wonderful. I think as fans we should try to adopt the spirit in which the game was played by the players themselves. Unbelievable. You will never get that replicated in football sadly. They are all heroes of sport, both the England boys and the Kiwis.
|
|
|
Post by GrahamHyde on Jul 15, 2019 13:38:35 GMT
I suspect the powers that be never thought that the boundary countback rule would ever come in to play, let alone decide a World Cup final.
It's one of them things. I don't think it's worth discussing at length given the rarity of a single draw in cricket, let alone a double one.
Almost once in a lifetime stuff.
|
|
|
Post by middleoftheboothen on Jul 15, 2019 14:11:36 GMT
I think wickets lost is unfair too though, because England only lost those wickets chasing hopeless twos in a situation that New Zealand were never in. There's lots to nitpick, Lockie Ferguson bowled at least 3-4 wides that weren't called and Archer's in the super over was bang on the line. Swings and roundabouts. If you're New Zealand I don't think they can be too upset (with the tiebreaker used) being as though they go through to the semis on a tiebreaker that was considered unfair. (Which everyone has now shut up about.) Both teams played by the same rules One lost by those rules and one won. The 4 overthrow runs will no doubt go down in history though Sport is ace and without contention would be far duller This! One hundred percent. It had everything didn't it and that's why I love sport because anything can happen and more often than not does. Fantastic and I'd normally feel sorry for New Zealand but I don't one bit! Haha
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Jul 15, 2019 14:44:04 GMT
Oh before I forget, we shouldn't forget some of the players who didn't make the squad but have been pivotal in changing the mentality of this England side over the past 4 years.
Take a bow, David Willey, Tom Curran, Moeen Ali, Alex Hales (misdemeanors aside, he's been crucial), Steven Finn (was a big part of the side immediately after the WC, did a good job), James Taylor and because I'm being nice, even Chris Jordan.
|
|