• Information about the new forum home page: here.

CWC 19 : England V New Zealand CWC Final

not watched cricket for many years, caught it on and off through the afternoon and the last hour or so..After the initial ending had no clue what was going to happen or why as nobody on tv mentioned it so as someone who had lost track of the rules etc it could have done with an explanation.

for the experts on here prior to the super over why if the 2nd team batting were to get the same score (which they did) why do the first win?
 
Slightly hollow victory. It’s akin to winning the WC final when a through ball going nowhere and running out of play diverts off the referee, wrong foots the keeper and leaves Harry Kane with an injury time tap in to win it.

Great to win it but it will forever be tainted by how it was won.
Never tainted in a million years. Felt it was difficult to watch but it was won in the right spirit and New Zealand did themselves proud in both their play and how they conducted themselves in defeat. Incredibly exciting and hats off to stokes, brilliant innings under huge pressure.
 
I’ve watched every second, live, of every England game this World Cup... apart from this one ?? still, didn’t know the score and watched the highlights... unbelievable game, so close and to be honest we were massively lucky to win it... what a great tournament!
 
not watched cricket for many years, caught it on and off through the afternoon and the last hour or so..After the initial ending had no clue what was going to happen or why as nobody on tv mentioned it so as someone who had lost track of the rules etc it could have done with an explanation.

for the experts on here prior to the super over why if the 2nd team batting were to get the same score (which they did) why do the first win?
They gave a big explanation just before the super over of how it works.
They also made clear that NZ needed 16 to win in that last over due to Englands boundaries during the main game.
 
They gave a big explanation just before the super over of how it works.
They also made clear that NZ needed 16 to win in that last over due to Englands boundaries during the main game.

thanks hadn't heard that
 
Read the articles in the Sydney Morning Herald out of interest and their Cricket Writer didn't fail to deliver. The bitterness at England winning came through like a beacon.

Brilliantly, he whined about Roy's dissent in the semi and claimed England did nothing about it while trying to compare it to Warner, Smith, Bancroft cheating with the sandpaper and getting a ban. He also didn't get the irony that all those players' bans ended in ample time before the World Cup so they had time to get some form beforehand and play in it, as well as being available for the Ashes.

He also had a dig about Jofra Archer but again I refer to the players involved in Sandpaper-gate. Also, when the ECB suspended Ben Stokes, he missed an Ashes series, yet remarkably Smith, Warner and Bancroft are all likely to play in the Ashes.

Oh and beautifully, apparently the World Cup wasn't important to the Aussies at all, only the Ashes matter. :LOL:
 
not watched cricket for many years, caught it on and off through the afternoon and the last hour or so..After the initial ending had no clue what was going to happen or why as nobody on tv mentioned it so as someone who had lost track of the rules etc it could have done with an explanation.

for the experts on here prior to the super over why if the 2nd team batting were to get the same score (which they did) why do the first win?
England won because both teams scored 15 in their super overs which meant the winner was the team which scored the most boundaries during the match.
 
Well, what a way to bring the curtain down on the cricket World Cup.
Sport rarely puts everything into one perfect place and delivers.
There may never be a greater final in any sport than this as these two tremendous teams delivered a thrilling spectacle of high/low moments viewed at times from behind the sofa. A supernova over at the end was just too much.
Sport like this is a killer and it was sadness and elation at the end in equal measure.
I thought that England’s semi final victory was great, but this?
The best one day cricket match ever.
Credit must go to NZ, who pushed us to very extraordinary lengths to grasp that last ball victory.
I need a lie down!?
 
Football World Cup, Rugby World Cup, Cricket World Cup
England are the only nation to have won all 3
I think we should be reminding our Aussie friends and relations of this at every opportunity!

Plus, we had previously won the T20 World Cup under Collingwood.
 
Read the articles in the Sydney Morning Herald out of interest and their Cricket Writer didn't fail to deliver. The bitterness at England winning came through like a beacon.

Brilliantly, he whined about Roy's dissent in the semi and claimed England did nothing about it while trying to compare it to Warner, Smith, Bancroft cheating with the sandpaper and getting a ban. He also didn't get the irony that all those players' bans ended in ample time before the World Cup so they had time to get some form beforehand and play in it, as well as being available for the Ashes.

He also had a dig about Jofra Archer but again I refer to the players involved in Sandpaper-gate. Also, when the ECB suspended Ben Stokes, he missed an Ashes series, yet remarkably Smith, Warner and Bancroft are all likely to play in the Ashes.

Oh and beautifully, apparently the World Cup wasn't important to the Aussies at all, only the Ashes matter. :LOL:
They are gonna a lose those too. Bitter aussies bitter indians Jog on lol
 
Read the articles in the Sydney Morning Herald out of interest and their Cricket Writer didn't fail to deliver. The bitterness at England winning came through like a beacon.

Brilliantly, he whined about Roy's dissent in the semi and claimed England did nothing about it while trying to compare it to Warner, Smith, Bancroft cheating with the sandpaper and getting a ban. He also didn't get the irony that all those players' bans ended in ample time before the World Cup so they had time to get some form beforehand and play in it, as well as being available for the Ashes.

He also had a dig about Jofra Archer but again I refer to the players involved in Sandpaper-gate. Also, when the ECB suspended Ben Stokes, he missed an Ashes series, yet remarkably Smith, Warner and Bancroft are all likely to play in the Ashes.

Oh and beautifully, apparently the World Cup wasn't important to the Aussies at all, only the Ashes matter. :LOL:

If you're referencing Jon Pierik, then the guy is an absolute plum.

My favourite (read, least favourite) quote was something about how it "seemed unfair that England were allowed to bat on [in the Super Over] with Stokes and Buttler already warmed up".

A grown adult journalist with the writings of the playground....embarrassing lack of grace, to say the least.
 
It's been heartening to see how salty the Aussies are now as well.

It's also worth pointing out that the umpires spent a lot of time deliberating on the Stokes over throw, so they clearly discussed what they thought was correct at the time. And considering one was Erasmus, the best umpire in the world, I am comfortable that the standing umps did what they thought was correct.
 
Should it still be 'The Ashes'? Or if they win the series, should we present them with a small pot of 'The Sawdust'?
 
Back
Top Bottom