By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Jofra Archer has been named in the squad, and rightly so. He offers genuine pace and he’s still relatively unknown to the other teams. I don’t agree with the omission of David Willey though. I wouldn’t have had Liam Dawson. But hey ho.
This is the first round robin CWC since Australia/New Zealand in 1992. For me, that was the best CWC. Australia were big favourites, but lost their first four games. England are big favourites for this one. Let’s hope we get off to a better start.
Come on England ðŸ´ó §ó ¢ó ¥ó ®ó §ó ¿.
0
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:14 - Jul 15 with 2017 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:02 - Jul 15 by isawqpratwcity
That's absolutely right. England won the 2019 World Cup.
They didn't win the final. They didn't win the super over tie-breaker. They did score more boundaries in the final (somehow this equates with some runs being worth more than others) so this technically means they won.
They also benefited from the umpire's mistake in the last over that credited them with an extra run and incorrectly left the form batsman rather than the newly introduced tail-ender on strike with just two balls left.
What could possibly be wrong with winning like that? Celebrate it! All that stuff about England being the best in the world must be true, mustn't it? They clearly 'beat' New Zealand, didn't they?
Ben Stokes signals that he 'accidentally' just scored a six (in case the umpire might draw a different conclusion).
[Post edited 15 Jul 2019 16:05]
You just can't stop yourself can you?
I think Stokes is apologising there not signalling six by the way but who am I to spoil your moment of sourness.
5
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:14 - Jul 15 with 2016 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:02 - Jul 15 by isawqpratwcity
That's absolutely right. England won the 2019 World Cup.
They didn't win the final. They didn't win the super over tie-breaker. They did score more boundaries in the final (somehow this equates with some runs being worth more than others) so this technically means they won.
They also benefited from the umpire's mistake in the last over that credited them with an extra run and incorrectly left the form batsman rather than the newly introduced tail-ender on strike with just two balls left.
What could possibly be wrong with winning like that? Celebrate it! All that stuff about England being the best in the world must be true, mustn't it? They clearly 'beat' New Zealand, didn't they?
Ben Stokes signals that he 'accidentally' just scored a six (in case the umpire might draw a different conclusion).
[Post edited 15 Jul 2019 16:05]
Now type all that again but without crying
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
0
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:20 - Jul 15 with 1986 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 06:24 - Jul 15 by isawqpratwcity
Nah, f*ck that, the final is separate, otherwise why bother having finals at all?. How about the number of wickets taken?
Don't get me started on Law 34: "If a batsman hits the ball twice, other than for the sole purpose of protecting his wicket or with the consent of the opposition, he is out. How can Stokes get two runs and then a boundary off the same ball?
[Post edited 15 Jul 2019 6:40]
Want some lemon for that? Fück me, you sound like an Aussie... or a spoiled kid.
The grass is always greener.
0
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:22 - Jul 15 with 1980 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:14 - Jul 15 by CroydonCaptJack
You just can't stop yourself can you?
I think Stokes is apologising there not signalling six by the way but who am I to spoil your moment of sourness.
As I understood it from the radio commentary , if an incoming throw hits a running batsman it is a gentlemens agreement not to run the overthrows which would count for the batting team . Stokes was embarrassed because the throw hit him accidentally and went to the boundary and counted which he could not control .
0
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:31 - Jul 15 with 1961 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:02 - Jul 15 by isawqpratwcity
That's absolutely right. England won the 2019 World Cup.
They didn't win the final. They didn't win the super over tie-breaker. They did score more boundaries in the final (somehow this equates with some runs being worth more than others) so this technically means they won.
They also benefited from the umpire's mistake in the last over that credited them with an extra run and incorrectly left the form batsman rather than the newly introduced tail-ender on strike with just two balls left.
What could possibly be wrong with winning like that? Celebrate it! All that stuff about England being the best in the world must be true, mustn't it? They clearly 'beat' New Zealand, didn't they?
Ben Stokes signals that he 'accidentally' just scored a six (in case the umpire might draw a different conclusion).
[Post edited 15 Jul 2019 16:05]
bloody hell, i've seen some bitter nonsense in my time but this is award winning
England won the match fair and square, the rules of how to win were laid out at the start so was the same for both teams. New Zealand were lucky to get into the final 4 due to net run rate but that was the rules so they deserved to qualify.
Complaining about 1 run is comical, some of the wides given for both sides were questionable as well but that kind of thing happens.
If the umpire gave 5 rather than 6 for the Stoke shot how the final 2 balls were played would have been very different as different things were required. Rashid could have been caught or bowled trying for a big shot or might have hit a boundary and won it anyway.
Quite why people can't just enjoy what was a brilliant occasion and a fantastic match is beyond me.
[Post edited 15 Jul 2019 16:32]
3
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:52 - Jul 15 with 1917 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:22 - Jul 15 by essextaxiboy
As I understood it from the radio commentary , if an incoming throw hits a running batsman it is a gentlemens agreement not to run the overthrows which would count for the batting team . Stokes was embarrassed because the throw hit him accidentally and went to the boundary and counted which he could not control .
yeah if he had run after the ball hit his bat for a 3rd then he'd be rightly slated but really he did nothing wrong
2
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:54 - Jul 15 with 1909 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:02 - Jul 15 by isawqpratwcity
That's absolutely right. England won the 2019 World Cup.
They didn't win the final. They didn't win the super over tie-breaker. They did score more boundaries in the final (somehow this equates with some runs being worth more than others) so this technically means they won.
They also benefited from the umpire's mistake in the last over that credited them with an extra run and incorrectly left the form batsman rather than the newly introduced tail-ender on strike with just two balls left.
What could possibly be wrong with winning like that? Celebrate it! All that stuff about England being the best in the world must be true, mustn't it? They clearly 'beat' New Zealand, didn't they?
Ben Stokes signals that he 'accidentally' just scored a six (in case the umpire might draw a different conclusion).
[Post edited 15 Jul 2019 16:05]
No he was holding his hands up as an apology, anyone could see that. I thought NZ were great sportsman and a credit to the game, had they won yesterday I would have had no complaints, and guess what, their bowlers bowled magnificently without a trace of sandpaper in their pockets.
favourite cheese mature Cheddar. FFS there is no such thing as the EPL
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:54 - Jul 15 by loftboy
No he was holding his hands up as an apology, anyone could see that. I thought NZ were great sportsman and a credit to the game, had they won yesterday I would have had no complaints, and guess what, their bowlers bowled magnificently without a trace of sandpaper in their pockets.
And on a pitch tailor made for their medium pacers!
NZ should of won at a canter with a team suited to that pitch
0
Cricket World Cup thread. on 17:06 - Jul 15 with 1867 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:22 - Jul 15 by essextaxiboy
As I understood it from the radio commentary , if an incoming throw hits a running batsman it is a gentlemens agreement not to run the overthrows which would count for the batting team . Stokes was embarrassed because the throw hit him accidentally and went to the boundary and counted which he could not control .
Yes, exactly right.
0
Cricket World Cup thread. on 19:00 - Jul 15 with 1733 views
I feel sorry for NZ they have a habit of losing to 'technicalities'. England or the brilliant Stokes could not have known about or indeed purposely went for the fluke ''technicality'. This 'technicality' however was discussed and executed by the Australians on the field. Isaw... I'll just leave this here.
Cricket World Cup thread. on 19:35 - Jul 15 by Pommyhoop
I feel sorry for NZ they have a habit of losing to 'technicalities'. England or the brilliant Stokes could not have known about or indeed purposely went for the fluke ''technicality'. This 'technicality' however was discussed and executed by the Australians on the field. Isaw... I'll just leave this here.
"Disgraceful performance" "One of the worst things I have ever seen done on a cricket field"
You had to love Richie. You probably couldn't get a more proud Australian but it never clouded his impartiality. I think all the time he was on the BBC commentating on England-Australia matches I can only ever remember his guard slipping once.
That was during the fifth Ashes test in 1985 at Edgbaston where Australia were batting the second time on the fourth evening 260 behind. 2nd or 3rd over, Botham dropped one short to the opener Hilditch who loved a hook and he put it straight down Richard Ellison's throat at deep backward square leg. You could palpably hear the disgust in his voice. "Oh DEAR me....you wouldn't believe it, simply wouldn't believe it" About 6.20 in...
Cricket World Cup thread. on 15:27 - Jul 15 by thame_hoops
Well overall we finished above NZ in the table, beat them at Durham already, had a better NRR than them overall so Id say we were deserved winners over the whole tournament. Also NZ qualified on NRR over Pakistan so you could say they qualified for the semis on a technicality...by your logic
Exactly right. Just a week ago the debate was about how unfair NRR was.
We also absolutely stuffed the Aussies in the semi and beat India convincingly.
England are the best ODI side in the world and have been for at least a year, and are now much better than they were before Archer. It's not braggadocio its effing obvious and anyone who says otherwise can safely be ignored on the subject of cricket.
They did get nerves from being favourites and having to make up for 40 years of failure by other players, and who can blame them? Monkey off back time now.
0
Cricket World Cup thread. on 02:33 - Jul 16 with 1475 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 16:02 - Jul 15 by isawqpratwcity
That's absolutely right. England won the 2019 World Cup.
They didn't win the final. They didn't win the super over tie-breaker. They did score more boundaries in the final (somehow this equates with some runs being worth more than others) so this technically means they won.
They also benefited from the umpire's mistake in the last over that credited them with an extra run and incorrectly left the form batsman rather than the newly introduced tail-ender on strike with just two balls left.
What could possibly be wrong with winning like that? Celebrate it! All that stuff about England being the best in the world must be true, mustn't it? They clearly 'beat' New Zealand, didn't they?
Ben Stokes signals that he 'accidentally' just scored a six (in case the umpire might draw a different conclusion).
[Post edited 15 Jul 2019 16:05]
New Zealand are the team affected. They have shown nothing but class ever since. They are admirable and seem a very decent bunch of players and fans. Despite being much smaller and less successful (rugby aside) than Australia, they don't appear to have the same inferiority complex at all.
All the whining is coming from Aussies, in particular the media who would have had the articles ready for an England loss and had to delete them. The sound of a million tweets, memes and GIFs being deleted and keyboards smashed was lovely stuff. They weren't good enough to make the final, not even close. England murdered them. At least the Kiwis took us to the wire.
Did you watch the game? Stokes was clearly holding his hands up as an apology and to say it was accidental (which it clearly was), similar to when a tennis player gets a jammy net cord point. To suggest he's signalling a six is absolutely laughable.
On the actual rule it is highly debatable. It talks about the players having crossed when "the act" occurs. The whingers say "the act" was the throw from the fielder and this would make sense if the ball ran straight out for overthrows without being touched.
However it didn't, it deflected off Stokes' bat. If that didn't happen one of two outcomes would have occurred. Either a run out or Stokes makes it and scores two. The deflection changes everything and to my mind could easily therefore be interpreted as "the act". They had crossed by then so it becomes irrelevant.
Lets say it was awarded as 5. Stokes would not have been sent back to the other end any more than batsmen who cross before a ball is caught are. Stokes bunted the ball off the last trying to steal two and knowing one would at least get the tie. If he needed more he would have gone for a bigger shot and maybe the super over would not have been needed at all. It wasn't a great delivery and was there to be hit if required.
There's no denying England were lucky in the final but to an extent they made their own luck with a brilliant fightback when the game looked lost. They put the pressure back on NZ just when it looked like they had it in the bag.
When you have been the stand out team for 4 years, I think you deserve a bit of luck rather than miss out on a deserved title due to a knockout format that allows for the possibility of New Zealand, who are clearly not as good an ODI team as England at present based on rankings, despite their great performance in the final, being crowned world champions.
England deserve the title. Let us enjoy it and move on.
11
Cricket World Cup thread. on 05:00 - Jul 16 with 1431 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 22:26 - Jul 14 by Antti_Heinola
Another classic Jonno prediction! To be fair, I felt the same at that stage ;) But, yeah, Jonno, if you could keep up these gems for the season that would be great. And I really hope you're not a betting man, or your palatial Cyprus pad will soon be a hut or something.
Betting, at least online betting, is illegal in Cyprus so not possible even if I wanted to mate. But what a fantastic game of cricket, only just recovered from watching it! England looked dead and buried - brilliant work by Stokes and Buttler. Need to acknowledge that we were incredibly lucky and NZ did not deserve to lose that game either (even more so that it now appears we should only have been given five with the overthrows off Stokes bat instead of six).Very happy to be wrong with the WC predictions!
3
Cricket World Cup thread. on 06:25 - Jul 16 with 1401 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 02:33 - Jul 16 by SydneyRs
New Zealand are the team affected. They have shown nothing but class ever since. They are admirable and seem a very decent bunch of players and fans. Despite being much smaller and less successful (rugby aside) than Australia, they don't appear to have the same inferiority complex at all.
All the whining is coming from Aussies, in particular the media who would have had the articles ready for an England loss and had to delete them. The sound of a million tweets, memes and GIFs being deleted and keyboards smashed was lovely stuff. They weren't good enough to make the final, not even close. England murdered them. At least the Kiwis took us to the wire.
Did you watch the game? Stokes was clearly holding his hands up as an apology and to say it was accidental (which it clearly was), similar to when a tennis player gets a jammy net cord point. To suggest he's signalling a six is absolutely laughable.
On the actual rule it is highly debatable. It talks about the players having crossed when "the act" occurs. The whingers say "the act" was the throw from the fielder and this would make sense if the ball ran straight out for overthrows without being touched.
However it didn't, it deflected off Stokes' bat. If that didn't happen one of two outcomes would have occurred. Either a run out or Stokes makes it and scores two. The deflection changes everything and to my mind could easily therefore be interpreted as "the act". They had crossed by then so it becomes irrelevant.
Lets say it was awarded as 5. Stokes would not have been sent back to the other end any more than batsmen who cross before a ball is caught are. Stokes bunted the ball off the last trying to steal two and knowing one would at least get the tie. If he needed more he would have gone for a bigger shot and maybe the super over would not have been needed at all. It wasn't a great delivery and was there to be hit if required.
There's no denying England were lucky in the final but to an extent they made their own luck with a brilliant fightback when the game looked lost. They put the pressure back on NZ just when it looked like they had it in the bag.
When you have been the stand out team for 4 years, I think you deserve a bit of luck rather than miss out on a deserved title due to a knockout format that allows for the possibility of New Zealand, who are clearly not as good an ODI team as England at present based on rankings, despite their great performance in the final, being crowned world champions.
England deserve the title. Let us enjoy it and move on.
Spot on. Haven't heard one complaint from a kiwi over here. The Aussies are losing their sanity about it, it's fantastic. Plus they're trying to take everyone's mind off of the sandpaper incident.
1
Cricket World Cup thread. on 08:55 - Jul 16 with 1338 views
'If you'd said four years ago I'd be a World Cup winner now, I might not have believed you' By Interviews by George Dobell
England are finally World Cup winners after a dramatic tie with New Zealand at Lord's. The players and coach recount the hard work that went into winning the trophy, and the roller-coaster ride of the last few moments of the final.
Eoin Morgan: The defeat to New Zealand in the 2015 World Cup was as close to rock bottom as I've been. Certainly as a captain and as a player. Being beaten off the park like that is humiliating. One of those moments that will stand out forever in my life as a day where I was devastated not only with the way we performed but also the way we carried ourselves.
But the influence of New Zealand throughout that whole World Cup on all the other teams around the world was extreme. New Zealand proved that you can actually be really good humans and grow the game and play cricket in your own way and win at the same time. It was incredibly eye-opening for a lot of countries around the world. I thought that rubbed off on everybody at the World Cup.
Joe Root: If you'd said four years ago I'd be a World Cup winner now, I might not have believed you. But what a journey. What a tournament. What a day! That was probably the best game of all time.
Trevor Bayliss: I wasn't sure it was possible for England to win the World Cup when I started, but I thought I'd give it a go. I knew they desperately wanted to do better and that no stone would be left unturned in an effort to get that World Cup. Fairly early on I could see it would be possible. The main plan was to let them go out and test the ceiling of how good they could be. We knew they would lose games and probably lose some games badly. But you only get better from making mistakes and seeing how well you can play. Learn from those mistakes over a period of four years to get it right. The talent of the team was obvious very early on.
Liam Plunkett: I played against Ross Taylor in the first World Cup I played, in 2007, and now, in the blink of an eye, I am playing him at Lord's. As soon as I came up the hill from the Nursery End, I felt comfortable attacking the crease. It felt a lot better.
Kane [Williamson] is a massive player, so to get his wicket was nice. It's what I pride myself on: to get that wicket and not go for many runs. I was satisfied but I knew the job was half-done. The Buttler-Stokes partnership
Jos Buttler: We knew we just had to bat some time. In one-day cricket recently, that hasn't been the mode of operation. But we knew if we batted for 50 overs we should be there or thereabouts. I was disappointed we weren't both there at the end to finish it off. But we knew we just had to build a partnership. As we saw in New Zealand's innings, the wicket eased after the first ten overs.
Ben Stokes: I think the only time I really thought about it was the second to last ball. All I could think about was Bangladesh in the World T20 when they needed the same and they just hit it in the air. All I was thinking was: "Don't get caught. Try and get one and get it to a Super Over at least." Then if I hit it into a gap, maybe we could get two. That was my process: just don't hit it in the air and get caught. I was thinking, "Don't try and be a hero and do it with a six." I wish it had gone for two and hadn't come to that because my emotions were high. I wasn't best pleased with myself walking back to the changing rooms for that ten-minute turnaround.
Bayliss: In one way, we have been practising for the last four years to play on flat decks. There were games where we lost badly on wickets that were doing a little bit. But the players have grown, they have learnt from those bad games and been able to play some smart cricket and adjust to wickets with a little bit in them. The overthrows
Stokes: That's not the way I wanted to do it - the ball going off my bat like that. I apologised to Kane Williamson.
Plunkett: When those overthrows went four, it changed the tide.
Jonny Bairstow: I did think the game had gone. But it ebbs and flows, doesn't it? I said to Nathan [Leamon], our analyst, with seven overs to go, "We need three sixes here." When Stokesy dived and it deflected for four, that was the third six. Then we looked at each other and went: "Okay, we've got our three sixes!"
Joe Root: You always think if you just get one over the ropes, the pressure is all back on the bowler. As soon as that happened and you get the fortune of the overthrows, it's all in your hands again. It was hard to watch in the dressing room again.
Morgan: I wasn't quite sure what had happened, to start with. He dived and there was dust everywhere and the ball deflected. I was trying to stay in the moment. I wasn't celebrating. It is not something you celebrate or cheer. It could be us on the other side of it. It was about the finest of margins. The Super Over
Stokes: I actually had to go and have five minutes to myself in the shower area of the changing room. I was pretty annoyed. I was angry. I had to get my head switched back on because I knew there was a job out there to do. I was full of adrenaline, so I needed to make sure my head was in the right place.
Morgan: We have worked extremely hard to get to the final and to play in a Super Over at the end of an extremely draining day takes a huge amount out of you. I encouraged them to smile, laugh, enjoy, because it was such a ridiculous situation. There was quite a lot of pressure in that particular moment. It was a matter of trying to put smiles on the guys' faces to release a bit of tension, and the guys responded brilliantly to that. It was about remaining calm and making sure we enjoyed it. Whether we won or lost, we had done incredible things.
Buttler: With the game being free-to-air, I hope many people around the country watched it. And I'm sure people who had never even watched cricket before, when they heard something called a Super Over was going, may have even switched on.
Jofra Archer: It was going fine until the six. Ben Stokes told me: "Win or lose, today does not define you. Everyone believes in you." I knew that if we did lose, it wasn't the end of the world. I am glad that the guys look up to me and trust me to do it. The skipper really believed in me, even after the six. A lot of captains could have had their head in their hands, but he was really calm and really understanding.
Morgan: Jofra's an unbelievably talented player and he has an unbelievable repertoire of balls to bowl. We were trying to keep it simple and bowl yorkers the whole time until he bowled that short ball. So it was reaffirming what he was trying to do the whole time and that he was doing a great job. The last ball
Bairstow: I wanted the ball to come to me in the field. I want every ball. I want to be a part of it. That's in my DNA. I'm just so happy that the throw [by Jason Roy] was half on target.
Buttler: I felt quite calm [as the keeper]. Obviously the consequences are much greater than anything you have been in before, but it's still a game of cricket. You are still doing the same things you have been doing for years and years. I just had to catch it and I had plenty of time to take the bails off.
Morgan: I knew the number of boundaries could be crucial before we took the field for the Super Over. When it got close to the chase we started refreshing our minds and communicated with Aleem Dar before we batted. The last ten minutes were worse than the 20 minutes leading it: getting that tight and losing a game like that is the worst. But the clarity in decisions came down to: Could Ben continue to bat? Did he still have the energy? And then taking into account which end they might choose to bowl from and coming up with the best left-right hand combination. The end
Bairstow: It was ridiculous, genuinely ridiculous. You saw the last World Cup; you saw the transition we've had as a group of people. The ins and outs, the ups and downs that you get along the way. Wow. There's never going to be a game like that ever in history ever again.
Plunkett: What a day. It has changed the history of English cricket and everyone got to watch it. I hope everyone loves it like when we won the Ashes [in 2005]. But even if we didn't win the World Cup, it would have still be a journey. We have been amazing. We have changed the culture of cricket in England. People expect us to win, which is a lot different from a few years back.
Bairstow: I've been through quite a bit. Of course, there are things that are tougher to go through than that but the intensity of it was huge. People said it was written in the stars. Dad was there; Grandpa was there. Yeah, it was awesome.
Morgan as England captain
Buttler: He is the best captain we've ever had and all of us love playing under him. We are all very hopeful [he will continue]. There is no reason to stop, is there? There is plenty of life in him yet, I hope.
Bayliss: He has been at the forefront. There have been a lot of people involved - especially Andrew Strauss in the early days - but Morgs is the leader of not just the guys on the pitch, he is the leader off the field as well. He is the one who has really driven this going forward. I think the rest of the boys try and run through a brick wall for him. The effort that Stokes put in was just an example of that.
Morgan: I haven't looked beyond this. Four years is a long time away. I think the big question I will have to answer is: Will I be in the team in four years? Will I be good enough? These guys are improving very quickly. Will I be able to keep up with them? The celebrations
Bayliss: There was a lot of singing, as the English like to do. They can string a few words together, unlike the Aussies, who just go "Oi, Oi, Oi"! Experiencing that in the changing rooms with not just the boys but their wives, their children, their parents and brothers and sisters, it was a great family feel. To see the joy on the boys' faces and the way they celebrated was all worth it.
Woakes: I think some of the guys got no sleep. We take for granted turning up to Lord's. But for the families to see that was really special. It was nice to share that moment with them.
Bairstow: I was thinking how long I'd known Rooty. I was remembering sharing fish and chips with Rash [Adil Rashid] when I was 15. He was playing England Under-19s then, and all of a sudden, I started playing for Yorkshire U-17s as a 15-year-old. And now we've just won a World Cup.
Morgan: To me, the team and everybody who has been involved over the last four years, it means absolutely everything. But I definitely feel empathy for New Zealand. They have actually been through a better tournament than we have. We got the rub of the green. New Zealand, throughout the group stages, were absolutely outstanding and in the semi-final were very ruthless in playing against India. I think the most admirable thing is the way they played their cricket. They are the best and they do it in a fashion that you'd have no qualms in turning around to your kid and saying, "Please idolise these guys, they are very admirable." They are. On Stokes' contribution
Bayliss: What he did was extraordinary. He has a zest for life. He is a leader of people on the field and off it. People gravitate to him. Everyone in the team is so happy for him. If there was one guy who could come back from the sort of adversity… he is that one guy. He has a belief in his own ability and the rest of the players have a belief in his ability as well. It was great that he was able to take advantage of that and take hold of it. I don't want this taken out of context, but he is a real fighter.
Morgan: He's almost superhuman. A lot of careers would have been ended after what happened in Kolkata [in the 2016 World T20 final against West Indies]. Ben, on numerous occasions, has stood up individually and in a unit for us. He leads the way in training, in any team meetings, and he's an incredible cricketer. He really carried the team and our batting. I know Jos and his partnership was extraordinary, but to bat with the lower order the way he did was incredible. The atmosphere, the emotion - he managed to deal with that in an extremely experienced manner. And obviously everybody watching at home will hopefully try and be the next Ben Stokes. The future for England
Root: Winning the World Cup and Ashes would be the pinnacle. It's what we set out to do two or three years ago. And we're halfway there.
Bayliss: There's still six very important matches to go in this summer. We won't be taking the foot off the pedal. For me, the Ashes win four years ago was just as big as this and hopefully there's another one in a few weeks' time.
Morgan: I hope my life hasn't changed that much. I lead quite a quiet one, so I hope it hasn't changed too much.
Stokes: We may be world champions but we want to be Ashes winners as well.
3
Cricket World Cup thread. on 11:49 - Jul 16 with 1255 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 06:25 - Jul 16 by ozexile
Spot on. Haven't heard one complaint from a kiwi over here. The Aussies are losing their sanity about it, it's fantastic. Plus they're trying to take everyone's mind off of the sandpaper incident.
The Aussies being so bitter and upset about it is almost as good as winning the thing itself. Drowning in their own salty tears.
2
Cricket World Cup thread. on 12:07 - Jul 16 with 1221 views
Cricket World Cup thread. on 02:33 - Jul 16 by SydneyRs
New Zealand are the team affected. They have shown nothing but class ever since. They are admirable and seem a very decent bunch of players and fans. Despite being much smaller and less successful (rugby aside) than Australia, they don't appear to have the same inferiority complex at all.
All the whining is coming from Aussies, in particular the media who would have had the articles ready for an England loss and had to delete them. The sound of a million tweets, memes and GIFs being deleted and keyboards smashed was lovely stuff. They weren't good enough to make the final, not even close. England murdered them. At least the Kiwis took us to the wire.
Did you watch the game? Stokes was clearly holding his hands up as an apology and to say it was accidental (which it clearly was), similar to when a tennis player gets a jammy net cord point. To suggest he's signalling a six is absolutely laughable.
On the actual rule it is highly debatable. It talks about the players having crossed when "the act" occurs. The whingers say "the act" was the throw from the fielder and this would make sense if the ball ran straight out for overthrows without being touched.
However it didn't, it deflected off Stokes' bat. If that didn't happen one of two outcomes would have occurred. Either a run out or Stokes makes it and scores two. The deflection changes everything and to my mind could easily therefore be interpreted as "the act". They had crossed by then so it becomes irrelevant.
Lets say it was awarded as 5. Stokes would not have been sent back to the other end any more than batsmen who cross before a ball is caught are. Stokes bunted the ball off the last trying to steal two and knowing one would at least get the tie. If he needed more he would have gone for a bigger shot and maybe the super over would not have been needed at all. It wasn't a great delivery and was there to be hit if required.
There's no denying England were lucky in the final but to an extent they made their own luck with a brilliant fightback when the game looked lost. They put the pressure back on NZ just when it looked like they had it in the bag.
When you have been the stand out team for 4 years, I think you deserve a bit of luck rather than miss out on a deserved title due to a knockout format that allows for the possibility of New Zealand, who are clearly not as good an ODI team as England at present based on rankings, despite their great performance in the final, being crowned world champions.
England deserve the title. Let us enjoy it and move on.
Brilliant post.
Notable that the English aren't gloating either. Everyone I've spoken to, read, or heard has immense sympathy (and empathy) for the Kiwis. We know we had great luck at the right times, but we also know, as do the Kiwis, that this was a fiercely and fairly contested match between two sides with the utmost respect for each other. No one should have lost, but one team had to.
The Aussies, with their increasingly risible 'whingeing poms' schtick (there only seems to be one group that whinges these days), their recent history of, you know, *actual* cheating (and let's not forget - at the time the general view was Warner would certainly never play for them again and Smith would be lucky to play for them again - something thrown out the window the moment they realised they needed him back - pathetic) and now these pathetic attempts to take the gloss of a fabulous game of cricket, are nowhere close to being the credit to the sport that the Kiwis are. Everywhere else in the cricket world simply exults in a phenomenal contest. The Aussies whinge like mad. As if it's even anything to do with them!
As Morgan said in an interview above - he loves how the Kiwis showed under McCullum that you can play in the right way, the right spirit, with attacking intent and be good humans too. That's how McCullum led, it's how Williamson leads and it's how Morgan leads too.
Bare bones.
4
Cricket World Cup thread. on 12:10 - Jul 16 with 1215 views
The rules were set by the ICC months before the tournament and agreed to by everyone. The Aussies are under the impression as it was at Lords we made them up that afternoon.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
