General Blackcaps Chat

Forums › Sports › General Blackcaps Chat

1 | ... | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | ... | 204

19389 posts

Uber Geek

#2277209 15-Jul-2019 17:47

I am wondering why they didn't go to the third umpire to work out what to do. They did it with several obvious catches, which shouldn't have needed the third umpire, but they did because of the importance of the game. But i do wonder if the umpires were confused and not entirely sure, with such an important game, whether they should have re-bowled that ball again, and whether the rules allow for that. But the fact is that NZ didn't bat well enough and get enough runs, (we really needed 260-280) and we really needed to bowl england out to win, before they got to our score. England batted better, and IMO they performed better overall in the world cup than us. NZ did also put down a few easy catches, which could have changed the result too. So there is so much luck in this game, and NZ could have won if some decisions had gone their way.

Pluralsight

Learn cloud, mobile, security, data and web technologies with Pluralsight (affiliate link).

GV27

5429 posts

Uber Geek

#2277211 15-Jul-2019 18:04

networkn:

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.

Cricket games are also prone to being fixed. You are confusing player mistakes with official calls that can be checked by third umpire. In this case, for some reason, they did not consider it to be worth checking.

That is all well and good, but it was the difference between 3 off 1 or 2 off 1. Running three is a bigger ask than running 2. And, I want to stress this, it's the World cup Final.

When I say it's not good enough, I want to understand why the TMO cannot intervene when they see errors or wrong calls being made. Or why neither of the two umpires out there knew the rules, and what the rule changes are going to be to stop it happening again. That's why a simple 'Oh whoops, LOLLLLLL!' isn't good enough.

If it had been India on the end of a call like that, the ICC would have fractured in two already. Why should we put up with any worse treatment than they would get.

networkn

Networkn
30225 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277213 15-Jul-2019 18:16

It's still not clear what you would consider satisfactory, since you've stated admitting the mistake and apologising isn't going to cut it.

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277215 15-Jul-2019 18:24

networkn:

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.

Not so much in cricket. Your rugby is a different beast, harder to rule, but cricket its just numbers mainly, very little grey area, if any really. The foot on the boundary was no issue, it was on the boundary so its a 6. The review issues are very frequent, as there is one, one per 3+ hours play. Where the ref make a blunder and is all fine for the world to see and the innocent player walks.

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277218 15-Jul-2019 18:28

mattwnz:

I am wondering why they didn't go to the third umpire to work out what to do. They did it with several obvious catches, which shouldn't have needed the third umpire, but they did because of the importance of the game. But i do wonder if the umpires were confused and not entirely sure, with such an important game, whether they should have re-bowled that ball again, and whether the rules allow for that. But the fact is that NZ didn't bat well enough and get enough runs, (we really needed 260-280) and we really needed to bowl england out to win, before they got to our score. England batted better, and IMO they performed better overall in the world cup than us. NZ did also put down a few easy catches, which could have changed the result too. So there is so much luck in this game, and NZ could have won if some decisions had gone their way.

I agree but while we didn't bat as well, we did play other aspects better hence we won by one run. So, you cannot penalise any team for reasons like that. Many things in all sports change results, but when a score is added wrongly that's unfair. If the AB's didnt get as many tries but scored more points but the person tallying them up made a mistake would that matter? Yes. Let is play and score points, just count them correctly, please.

mattwnz

19389 posts

Uber Geek

#2277258 15-Jul-2019 20:01

There are a lot of 'what if's' in cricket, where say if one of the easy catches had been caught by NZ, that would have changed the course of the game. Even if they had awarded 5 instead of 6, that may have changed the mindset of the batsman to hit a 6 on the next ball. At least with England winning, we don't have the English papers claiming they were robbed of winning for years and years. The fact that the winning team came down to the number of boundaries they scored, shows that the rules were written like that so the team who had the most entertaining game and hit the most 4's and 6's ends up winning in that type of situation, which benefits those teams who are better at hitting boundaries, so not exactly their fairest way to decide a result IMO. I am guessing they will be changing the rules next time around, as I am guessing they never imagined this would happen. At least it was a good entertaining game.

GV27

5429 posts

Uber Geek

#2277346 15-Jul-2019 20:59

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricket/cricket-world-cup/114259984/cricket-world-cup-final-from-a-top-exumpire-england-should-only-have-got-five-runs-not-six-after-that-overthrow

Gonna be a few media outlets contacting the ICC for comment by the looks of it.

itxtme

2053 posts

Uber Geek

#2277348 15-Jul-2019 21:09

I dont think there is any doubt the umpires got it wrong by one. The fact remains that the game is over. Its a really dumb rule, and it should be changed, and probably will. As to taking a copy and paste job from twenty20 for a draw that was just ridiculous. Again I doubt we will see that again in a world cup. All that is for nought though to the Black Caps. Tough luck :(

cshwone

1003 posts

Uber Geek

#2277532 16-Jul-2019 06:42

FWIW I am not really into cricket but my take is that England didn’t win, NZ didn’t lose but England were awarded the cup.

Such is life but it was a remarkable sporting spectacle.

GV27

5429 posts

Uber Geek

#2277533 16-Jul-2019 06:46

The ICC has stated they 'do not comment' on decisions made by umpires.

Given the history of proven match-fixing in the UK, plus some of the other decisions in that game (Nicholls, Taylor, etc) I will therefore choose my own conclusions about this mysteriously poor call that kept the home side of one the ICC's big three in the hunt at their own World Cup.

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277535 16-Jul-2019 07:12

mattwnz:

There are a lot of 'what if's' in cricket, where say if one of the easy catches had been caught by NZ, that would have changed the course of the game. Even if they had awarded 5 instead of 6, that may have changed the mindset of the batsman to hit a 6 on the next ball. At least with England winning, we don't have the English papers claiming they were robbed of winning for years and years. The fact that the winning team came down to the number of boundaries they scored, shows that the rules were written like that so the team who had the most entertaining game and hit the most 4's and 6's ends up winning in that type of situation, which benefits those teams who are better at hitting boundaries, so not exactly their fairest way to decide a result IMO. I am guessing they will be changing the rules next time around, as I am guessing they never imagined this would happen. At least it was a good entertaining game.

We arent commenting on the what ifs. We are commenting on an incorrect score. That has now been confirmed by a top umpire

Retired umpire Taufel, named ICC umpire of the year every year from 2004 to 2008, who stood in the 2011 World Cup final, and is a member of the MCC Laws subcommittee, defended officiating umpires Kumar Dharmasena and Marais Erasmus, who were in the middle for the chaotic finish, but confirmed they had erred.

"There was a judgment error on the overthrow," Taufel told The Age and Sydney Morning Herald. Five runs should have been the correct allocation of runs, and Ben Stokes should have been at the non-striker's end for the next delivery.

If we had issues with what ifs we might say the AB's didn't really win the last few World Cups because of these five what ifs. I could say to my boss I wasnt late because of these what ifs

Sport is sport. We won, 241 to 240 and if you want to talk what ifs, it might have been a loss by 6 runs or a win by 16, but are are not talking about that, we are talking about the incorrect score posted to NZ, nothing more

No need to change the rules, just referee those rules. A try is 5 points so dont score it as 4

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277537 16-Jul-2019 07:15

itxtme:

I dont think there is any doubt the umpires got it wrong by one. The fact remains that the game is over. Its a really dumb rule, and it should be changed, and probably will. As to taking a copy and paste job from twenty20 for a draw that was just ridiculous. Again I doubt we will see that again in a world cup. All that is for nought though to the Black Caps. Tough luck :(

The rule is fine, just use it correctly. Yes, given that there are processes in shortened games based on runs and wickets (to assess the value of a shortened innings, you would have thought that wickets in what was an equal innings on both sides is the next means to check. I'd like to know is this is an old rule or a 2019 rule

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277540 16-Jul-2019 07:24

GV27:

The ICC has stated they 'do not comment' on decisions made by umpires.

Given the history of proven match-fixing in the UK, plus some of the other decisions in that game (Nicholls, Taylor, etc) I will therefore choose my own conclusions about this mysteriously poor call that kept the home side of one the ICC's big three in the hunt at their own World Cup.

A bit cynical buts its hard not to look at that. UK is the home of cricket. Just as the quinitessential All Blacks are the home of rugby. UK cricket is old and steeped in tradition. The old fogie members in the Lords big room, and outside the door, clap as players move in and out. That is SOLELY tradition based. Its the Freemasons of cricket. UK has never won the World Cup. That cant keep happening

Cricket has been corrupt. Including NZ involvement. The much loved and respected Hanse Cronje who captained Soutb Africa took his own life when he was found out. UK cricket, the big one of the big three is NOT the Wimbledon of cricket in terms of class and vales

TeaLeaf

5114 posts

Uber Geek

#2277573 16-Jul-2019 09:03

I personally think NZ cricket should be challenging the way the WC final was handled. It wasn't just human error, it was system error. Plus there is a 4th umpire and a 3rd in video, how they all missed the extra run from the ball hitting the "bat of god" is a serious breach of their comeptency and can only be explained by being biased/ie match fixed. Stokes should not have been facing that second to last ball either.

The amount of umpiring mistakes is one thing.

But after India who have massive pressure on the ICC, have nearly had the same thing happen to them, why on earth has the ICC not changed the rule to either the cup is shared or they play golden over until a winner is decided. Using fours is like saying Eng lost due to having less wickets at end of any innings applying DLS. Its just BS.

England did not WIN the World Cup, they were given it by the ICC, there is no way NZ's name should not be on that trophy as a tied match.

The NZ government should have something to say on it, but Adern only doing things that gain her fake political brownie points, ie gun laws, ie not putting a cannabis referendum in that you agreed to, to be in parliament in the first place until your final day of office/voting I am not surprised. Reminds me of Kiefer Sutherland on Netflix but in his show he is actually trying to do the right thing by the country, not waiting for things that look good for him to occur.

At the very least NZ Cricket should be filing a complaint at the highest level.

Human error is one thing, not changing how the game is decided is another. But 3d and 4th umpire should have over turned that "bat of god" 2nd run as they had no crossed, how the F 4 umpires miss that can only be explained by match fixing.

Ben Stokes crying like a Fn baby when hes a Kiwi and he didnt even win the game, in fact he caused the problem with the bat of god. I hope serious Karma impacts him.

And England poaching Archer from the Carribean then fast tracking his status for the WC.

Just sooooooo much rubbish going on the ICC should intervene over or at least when asked about it have something better than "no comment" because I think they know they are open to a law suit.

Lets not forget how much money was involved in this, outside the gambling, but the players pay cheques upward of $500k each for one game.

Now I see why the Aussies despise the whinging Poms, time for NZ to turn its back on England.

[Mod edit (MF) language]

networkn

Networkn
30225 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2277574 16-Jul-2019 09:06

TeaLeaf:

I personally think NZ cricket should be challenging the way the WC final was handled. It wasn't just human error, it was system error. Plus there is a 4th umpire and a 3rd in video, how they all missed the extra run from the ball hitting the "bat of god" is a serious breach of their comeptency and can only be explained by being biased/ie match fixed. Stokes should not have been facing that second to last ball either.

--Snip--

Now I see why the Aussies despise the whinging Poms, time for NZ to turn its back on England.

You sound slightly unhinged at this point.

1 | ... | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | ... | 204