Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93
2059 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

  # 2276825 15-Jul-2019 11:49
3 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

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.

 

Currently using: Modified 2008 Mac Pro, HP M6-1017TX Laptop, iPad Pro, iPhone 7, iPhone 6S, AppleTV4.


2306 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 2276851 15-Jul-2019 12:36
5 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

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.

 
 
 
 


1173 posts

Uber Geek


  # 2277061 15-Jul-2019 15:29
Send private message quote this post

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.  


17352 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  # 2277070 15-Jul-2019 15:43
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

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


20790 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 2277072 15-Jul-2019 15:46
Send private message quote this post

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.


1173 posts

Uber Geek


  # 2277084 15-Jul-2019 15:53
Send private message quote this post

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. 


 
 
 
 


2306 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 2277085 15-Jul-2019 15:55
Send private message quote this post

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.

20790 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 2277092 15-Jul-2019 16:00
Send private message quote this post

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 


17352 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  # 2277119 15-Jul-2019 16:17
Send private message quote this post

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


1173 posts

Uber Geek


  # 2277127 15-Jul-2019 16:20
Send private message quote this post

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. 


17352 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  # 2277134 15-Jul-2019 16:27
Send private message quote this post

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.  


1173 posts

Uber Geek


  # 2277186 15-Jul-2019 16:49
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

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?".


780 posts

Ultimate Geek


  # 2277198 15-Jul-2019 17:20
Send private message quote this post

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. 


20790 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 2277204 15-Jul-2019 17:37
Send private message quote this post

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 | ... | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter and LinkedIn »



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Intel expands 10th Gen Intel Core Mobile processor family
Posted 23-Aug-2019 10:22


Digital innovation drives new investment provider
Posted 23-Aug-2019 08:29


Catalyst Cloud becomes a Kubernetes Certified Service Provider (KCSP)
Posted 23-Aug-2019 08:21


New AI legaltech product launched in New Zealand
Posted 21-Aug-2019 17:01


Yubico launches first Lightning-compatible security key, the YubiKey 5Ci
Posted 21-Aug-2019 16:46


Disney+ streaming service confirmed launch in New Zealand
Posted 20-Aug-2019 09:29


Industry plan could create a billion dollar interactive games sector
Posted 19-Aug-2019 20:41


Personal cyber insurance a New Zealand first
Posted 19-Aug-2019 20:26


University of Waikato launches space for esports
Posted 19-Aug-2019 20:20


D-Link ANZ expands mydlink ecosystem with new mydlink Mini Wi-Fi Smart Plug
Posted 19-Aug-2019 20:14


Kiwi workers still falling victim to old cyber tricks
Posted 12-Aug-2019 20:47


Lightning Lab GovTech launches 2019 programme
Posted 12-Aug-2019 20:41


Epson launches portable laser projector
Posted 12-Aug-2019 20:27


Huawei launches new distributed HarmonyOS
Posted 12-Aug-2019 20:20


Lenovo introduces single-socket servers for edge and data-intensive workloads
Posted 9-Aug-2019 21:26



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.