Crossword Help Forum
Forum Rules

Anyone else a nervous wreck!!?

Although I'm obviously pleased that England won, the manner wasn't all that satisfactory. The 4 overthrows off Stokes's bat (no fault at all of his - that's the law), then tieing the super over and winning on boundaries scored (which I'm surprised about - I didn't see much of the NZ innings, but we didn't seem to get many)..... I feel very sympathetic to NZ, who are always the most congenial of opponents.

I agree Chris that NZ appear to have none of the brashness or arrogance often associated with some of the other teams.

The scheduling also left a lot to be desired, with the British Grand Prix, the Men's Singles Final at Wimbledon and the ICC world Cup all overlapping!

Brendan & Chrise

A tie was the right result - neither team deserved to lose, and didn`t lose under the Laws of Cricket.

If there had to be a winner they may as well have tossed for it!

Obviously I`m pleased for the English team and hope Cricket gets more youngsters (boys & girls) playing and watching the game. Bad luck NZ.

NZ really are a class act and were so gracious in 'defeat' -

I used inverted commas because, as I'm sure you probably already know, the 4 overthrows that came off Stokes' bat were added to the 2 he'd run, but, when the ball was fielded, the the two runners hadn't actually crossed so the they only ran 1, not the 2 the umpire incorrectly awarded.

This was put to the NZ captain afterwards and just brushed off as 'rub of the green' type incident. He then went on to say that England have been the best One Day side for the past 4 years and rightly deserved to be crowned world champions - now that's what i call class.

Firstly, I don't understand a great deal about cricket.
However, in football they have penalty shoot- outs until there's a clear winner.
Why couldn't they have had another super over?
To me the boundary rule seems silly.

Hi Rossim, Chris and Tyke,

I was totally unaware about the number of boundaries being the deciding factor in the event of a draw. I don't know why, but I'd just assumed that the winners would be the side who lost the fewest wickets in reaching the run total - of course that could also have been the same, so......?

Hi Rossim, Brendan & Chris,

In Test matches and County Championship matches, if both teams score the same number of runs the result is a tie.

Special rules apply to knockout `Cup` competitions as there can be only one (sounds familiar!) winner. I`d have thought the team scoring the most runs throughout the competition should be the winner - in the event of a tie in the final.

That sounds reasonable enough to me ......but what if it's still a draw?!

I enjoyed the tennis final. It was the first time there's been a tie breaker in the fifth set when it reached 12 all.

Rossim,

Tennis seems to have found a fair way to settle close matches - which the players and spectators accept - the Wimbledon Final was a credit to both players.

I think Cricket needs to come up with better ways to separate teams in tied matches.