 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Don’t get me wrong I’m happy England “won” the cricket but does anybody else feel it was an anticlimax after 48 games. In the truest terms no one won.
Scores drawn after 50 overs, scores drawn after super over. However, because we got more boundaries we won, they lost less wickets in the 50 overs so shouldn’t they have won?
In football penalties keep going until someone misses, wouldn’t a bowl off be better. 5 bowlers each side same as a penalty shoot out, must hit the stumps.
If scores are level as in football after the 5 then it’s one at a time using the other players. You don’t base the winner on who had the most possession or shots on goal during the game. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Don’t get me wrong I’m happy England “won” the cricket but does anybody else feel it was an anticlimax after 48 games. In the truest terms no one won.
Scores drawn after 50 overs, scores drawn after super over. However, because we got more boundaries we won, they lost less wickets in the 50 overs so shouldn’t they have won?
In football penalties keep going until someone misses, wouldn’t a bowl off be better. 5 bowlers each side same as a penalty shoot out, must hit the stumps.
If scores are level as in football after the 5 then it’s one at a time using the other players. You don’t base the winner on who had the most possession or shots on goal during the game. "
No, but you base it on the rules that were established well before the tournament started, so everyone knew the score.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Id be more worried about the "6" in the 50th over than winning by essentially goal difference. Rules were well laid out before the start of the world cup and both teams knew what they had to do in the superover all in all Id say it was a pretty good climax |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Don’t get me wrong I’m happy England “won” the cricket but does anybody else feel it was an anticlimax after 48 games. In the truest terms no one won.
Scores drawn after 50 overs, scores drawn after super over. However, because we got more boundaries we won, they lost less wickets in the 50 overs so shouldn’t they have won?
In football penalties keep going until someone misses, wouldn’t a bowl off be better. 5 bowlers each side same as a penalty shoot out, must hit the stumps.
If scores are level as in football after the 5 then it’s one at a time using the other players. You don’t base the winner on who had the most possession or shots on goal during the game. "
An "anticlimax"? It was the most thrilling game of cricket I've ever seen. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"How very British 
What being allowed to have an opinion? "
All entitled.. like mine
As someone else said .. rules were clear at the start .. so why not just celebrate
I think it demonstrates just how closely matched the teams were ... what you'd hope for on a final ... something hard fought and close |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Nah not an anti climax at all. That would of been a one sided affair ending at 6pm. We had the complete opposite.
We won due to the boundaries hit in the game. Probably not the best way to do it.
We won because the ball deflected off a diving Ben Stokes bat and goes for over throws.
My heart goes out to NZ as it's a cruel way to lose and not the best way to win but the rules of sport were not at all compromised - and I would of snapped your hand off at 10.30am if offered it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Don’t get me wrong I’m happy England “won” the cricket but does anybody else feel it was an anticlimax after 48 games. In the truest terms no one won.
Scores drawn after 50 overs, scores drawn after super over. However, because we got more boundaries we won, they lost less wickets in the 50 overs so shouldn’t they have won? Tweet or email the icc they love feedback from fans especially if you attended matches
In football penalties keep going until someone misses, wouldn’t a bowl off be better. 5 bowlers each side same as a penalty shoot out, must hit the stumps.
If scores are level as in football after the 5 then it’s one at a time using the other players. You don’t base the winner on who had the most possession or shots on goal during the game. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
