General Blackcaps Chat

Forums › Sports › General Blackcaps Chat

1 | ... | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | ... | 265

2130 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 327

#2276825 15-Jul-2019 11:49

CYaBro:

Also seems kinds of silly deciding the game on who got the most boundaries in the end.
Why not the team that took the most wickets?

I agree, a puzzling metric to use. I would have thought, with scores tied at full time, that the team with the most wickets in hand would have been crowned the winner by virtue of the fact they did better (scored the same number of runs but lost fewer wickets achieving them).

Geek girl. Freelance copywriter and editor at Unmistakable.co.nz.

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2276851 15-Jul-2019 12:36

Congratulations to England.

I couldn't be more proud of the New Zealand team. Compared to the 2015 they lacked star power (McCullum, Vettori, Southee at his peak) and with a newish coach.

The selectors and Williamson take a lot of criticism but our top 4 outscored England and de Grandholme had a massive spell with the ball. They haven't made too many wrong moves, considering our very limited playing and financial resources compared to England, India, South Africa and Australia.

A win would have mean much more to me than a rugby world cup this year. I've been actively following since the bad old days of Blair Hartland and Richard de Groen. What we have developed since then is a program to be very proud of.

I'm totally gutted but very very proud.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2276985 15-Jul-2019 14:04

An article on the overthrow error

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricket/cricket-world-cup/114247685/cricket-world-cup-final-england-should-have-got-five-runs--not-six--for-pivotal-overthrows-incident

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2277061 15-Jul-2019 15:29

The overthrow call is pretty bad; the rule allows for 'willful acts' or the throw to trigger overthrows and some are arguing the throw doesn't trigger it, Stokes' bat does...

which would imply the contact with the bat was willful and therefore Stokes should have been instantly dismissed. There's literally no way this can be interpreted as a legitimate scoring of that ball.

The ICC has a real problem here. This cannot be dismissed as a "Oh, sorry guys, guess we got that wrong" and just laugh it off. This is the World Cup Final.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277070 15-Jul-2019 15:43

GV27:

The overthrow call is pretty bad; the rule allows for 'willful acts' or the throw to trigger overthrows and some are arguing the throw doesn't trigger it, Stokes' bat does...

which would imply the contact with the bat was willful and therefore Stokes should have been instantly dismissed. There's literally no way this can be interpreted as a legitimate scoring of that ball.

The ICC has a real problem here. This cannot be dismissed as a "Oh, sorry guys, guess we got that wrong" and just laugh it off. This is the World Cup Final.

Yeah. The rule states wilful act or overthrow, so ok, this is an overthrow. No issue there. 4 overthrows. 1 run, and the run in progress, the rule says thee run that is in progress must be completed, and it wasnt.

To me, this isn't a sore loser, or a marginal call, or subjective, its just a clerical error. Plus, both umpires did not know as the one went to the other and asked, he then said 6. As we saw, it hit the bat as he slid, about 2.5 metres out. If they deny it then I could hit a ball, need more runs so hit it again?

If this happened to us, and the rule was stated later, we would hand it back. Its an error, they won type of thing. Its going to ICC they wont want to change a result, change the much publicised ENG result, admit to having two umpires who dont know the rules, Its politics now.

What should be done with a clerical error where the incorrect score was counted? Probably nothing. Its the home of cricket at strake

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277072 15-Jul-2019 15:46

GV27:

The overthrow call is pretty bad; the rule allows for 'willful acts' or the throw to trigger overthrows and some are arguing the throw doesn't trigger it, Stokes' bat does...

which would imply the contact with the bat was willful and therefore Stokes should have been instantly dismissed. There's literally no way this can be interpreted as a legitimate scoring of that ball.

The ICC has a real problem here. This cannot be dismissed as a "Oh, sorry guys, guess we got that wrong" and just laugh it off. This is the World Cup Final.

I've yet to see a sporting result overturned after the final whistle. (Olympics for cheating excepted).

Unfortunately, you'll need to live with the result. It wouldn't feel very good having it overturned now anyway.

Geekzone

Want to support Geekzone and browse the site without the ads? Subscribe to Geekzone now (monthly, annual and lifetime options).

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2277084 15-Jul-2019 15:53

networkn:

I've yet to see a sporting result overturned after the final whistle. (Olympics for cheating excepted).

Unfortunately, you'll need to live with the result. It wouldn't feel very good having it overturned now anyway.

Happens with Formula 1 all the time, although that is due to F1 races being run by chimps more than anything else.

I'm not saying they should go back to the ground on the reserve day and replay the final two balls with four to score to see who wins.

But I am saying that, for a sport like cricket, where there are so many issues around match fixing and transparency and where they are prepared to dish out life bans to players if they are found to not be on the level, to leave a question mark like that over a World Cup Final is simply not good enough. They will have to clarify if there has been an error in umpiring or not. End of. Anything else leaves the rest of the match (and the decisions made during it) too open for question.

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277085 15-Jul-2019 15:55

GV27:
The overthrow call is pretty bad; the rule allows for 'willful acts' or the throw to trigger overthrows and some are arguing the throw doesn't trigger it, Stokes' bat does...

which would imply the contact with the bat was willful and therefore Stokes should have been instantly dismissed. There's literally no way this can be interpreted as a legitimate scoring of that ball.

The ICC has a real problem here. This cannot be dismissed as a "Oh, sorry guys, guess we got that wrong" and just laugh it off. This is the World Cup Final.

It's definitely overthrows by any fair definition or precedent. There was a throw at the stumps, an unintentional deflection and a boundary.

How many of course is debatable but that is clearly how overthrows have been interpreted for as long as I have watched cricket.

It wasn't our day - the cricket gods had decided it was England's turn and they got the luck. They had a number of borderline calls go there way and our poor review when we batted cost us Taylor. It was just one of those horrible, crushing games that make you hate (and love) sport.

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277092 15-Jul-2019 16:00

So if they admit it was an error publically, then what? Will you really feel any better? Will you walk around telling anyone English that you really won the cup? At the end of the day, they won, it will stay in the records as that forever, unless England hand the cup over and I can tell you there are two chances of that, none and less than none.

@tdgeek suggested we would hand it over if it were us, and he personally might if it was solely his decision (and I probably would too), but unless directly directed to by ICC, NZ Cricket wouldn't do it either. Same chances.

The bottom line is, it wasn't the last play of the game, so even if it had been 5 runs instead of 6, there is no guarantee that things change and England doesn't get another boundary or make that 1 run up.

It's a really unfortunate thing, but I can't see it being overturned.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277119 15-Jul-2019 16:17

Handle9:
GV27:

The overthrow call is pretty bad; the rule allows for 'willful acts' or the throw to trigger overthrows and some are arguing the throw doesn't trigger it, Stokes' bat does...

which would imply the contact with the bat was willful and therefore Stokes should have been instantly dismissed. There's literally no way this can be interpreted as a legitimate scoring of that ball.

The ICC has a real problem here. This cannot be dismissed as a "Oh, sorry guys, guess we got that wrong" and just laugh it off. This is the World Cup Final.

It's definitely overthrows by any fair definition or precedent. There was a throw at the stumps, an unintentional deflection and a boundary.

How many of course is debatable but that is clearly how overthrows have been interpreted for as long as I have watched cricket.

It wasn't our day - the cricket gods had decided it was England's turn and they got the luck. They had a number of borderline calls go there way and our poor review when we batted cost us Taylor. It was just one of those horrible, crushing games that make you hate (and love) sport.

Agree, they are overthrows. 4 of them. 1 run and 1 incomplete run.

My issue is sportsmanship. I agree with networkn that unless its the last play, it cant be changed. And its awkward if it cannot be adjudicated on quickly. The umpires failed as they did not know. I didn't see much sportsmanship apart from the requisite usual words. If it turns out to be a clerical error, there should be some recognition and there needs to be better umpiring. Its an easy sport to rule on, there are few if any marginal calls, its all number and hits or misses.

It leaves a sour taste. Ill be interested in any developments, but I expect that to be snuffed out, such is the establishment at Lords and UK cricket

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2277127 15-Jul-2019 16:20

networkn:

So if they admit it was an error publically, then what? Will you really feel any better? Will you walk around telling anyone English that you really won the cup? At the end of the day, they won, it will stay in the records as that forever, unless England hand the cup over and I can tell you there are two chances of that, none and less than none.

@tdgeek suggested we would hand it over if it were us, and he personally might if it was solely his decision (and I probably would too), but unless directly directed to by ICC, NZ Cricket wouldn't do it either. Same chances.

The bottom line is, it wasn't the last play of the game, so even if it had been 5 runs instead of 6, there is no guarantee that things change and England doesn't get another boundary or make that 1 run up.

It's a really unfortunate thing, but I can't see it being overturned.

The whole game revolves around some vague and aspirational notion of decency and sportsmanship.

I'm not saying they should hand the trophy over, for God's sake. I'm saying that as the governing body, the ICC has an obligation to clarify whether there has been an honest mistake made, or there is a real risk that, given some of the other calls in the game, people will ask if there is more to it than that.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277134 15-Jul-2019 16:27

GV27:

networkn:

So if they admit it was an error publically, then what? Will you really feel any better? Will you walk around telling anyone English that you really won the cup? At the end of the day, they won, it will stay in the records as that forever, unless England hand the cup over and I can tell you there are two chances of that, none and less than none.

@tdgeek suggested we would hand it over if it were us, and he personally might if it was solely his decision (and I probably would too), but unless directly directed to by ICC, NZ Cricket wouldn't do it either. Same chances.

The bottom line is, it wasn't the last play of the game, so even if it had been 5 runs instead of 6, there is no guarantee that things change and England doesn't get another boundary or make that 1 run up.

It's a really unfortunate thing, but I can't see it being overturned.

The whole game revolves around some vague and aspirational notion of decency and sportsmanship.

I'm not saying they should hand the trophy over, for God's sake. I'm saying that as the governing body, the ICC has an obligation to clarify whether there has been an honest mistake made, or there is a real risk that, given some of the other calls in the game, people will ask if there is more to it than that.

They need to fix this umpire BS. In rugby I relive third umpires are unlimited. In tennis a set has 3, this around 30 -60 minutes, extra for a tiebreaker. Cricket which is 3 hours has 1. Do we want an honest result or not. Thats all I ask. I see on the ICC website they result is a Tie (Eng won super over) There needs to be recognition of the result as in doubt even though ENG is listed. That's the reality. Roy the other day was out, but he was a mile in. Multiple umpires, technology, they still cant get it right.

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2277186 15-Jul-2019 16:49

I think the other issue becomes "If you're not going to enforce the rules of the game in the World Cup Final, why even have an ICC?".

mudguard

2328 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1250

#2277198 15-Jul-2019 17:20

GV27:

The overthrow call is pretty bad; the rule allows for 'willful acts' or the throw to trigger overthrows and some are arguing the throw doesn't trigger it, Stokes' bat does...

which would imply the contact with the bat was willful and therefore Stokes should have been instantly dismissed. There's literally no way this can be interpreted as a legitimate scoring of that ball.

The ICC has a real problem here. This cannot be dismissed as a "Oh, sorry guys, guess we got that wrong" and just laugh it off. This is the World Cup Final.

My brother and I discussed this when it happened. Willful acts refers to a fielder tossing it over the boundary on purpose. The discussion we had was around which is the act, the throw, striking the bat (unintentionally) or crossing the boundary?

If it's the bat, then Stokes had not completed the run, as he was short of his ground, if it's the throw, then the players had not crossed, if it's the boundary, then they get all six.

We thought it was a fairly robust debate but it seems to have blown up. I think they could amend the rule to something if it strikes the batswo/man then it's dead ball immediately, so runs, that are run are kept, but if it carries onto the boundary accidentally (like today) then the extra runs aren't given. However, if it the batswo/man has nothing to do with it, IE hits the stumps, keeper, fielder misses etc, then it counts.

It would remove the etiquette aspect of it too.

I don't think it will change the result, but it may cause a rewrite.

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277204 15-Jul-2019 17:37

GV27:

I'm not saying they should hand the trophy over, for God's sake. I'm saying that as the governing body, the ICC has an obligation to clarify whether there has been an honest mistake made, or there is a real risk that, given some of the other calls in the game, people will ask if there is more to it than that.

The ICC has a real problem here. This cannot be dismissed as a "Oh, sorry guys, guess we got that wrong" and just laugh it off. This is the World Cup Final.

I feel you are contradicting yourself here.

You are saying you aren't happy with them admitting they made a mistake, and aren't saying you want the trophy handed over.

What DO you want?

From my perspective, they need to admit they made an error, it should have been awarded as 5 points, and apologise. That's it.

Referees are human, and prone to mistakes, just like the foot on the boundary after the catch or the review that shouldn't have been by the Black Caps.

1 | ... | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | ... | 265