World Cup 2019

[Sin Hombre]

@SKS
Dhoni was not sent at 7, he decided that he wanted to come in late to face an older ball.

Hiding behind a kid in Pant and Hardik/DK, as he has done repeatedly.

If it was a flat pitch, he would have walked in at 4 or 5 as he has in every other instance in the last few years.

[jayakris]

Wow what a finish at Lords! Lord, Lord...

[Tolamu]

I don't know which one to watch. My TV remote is going wild Wimbledon Vs WC. Both nailbiting and ties.

[jayakris]

The greatest game ever in cricket history (Tests, ODI, T20, whatever). It will never be surpassed. A world cup final at the greatest of cricket grounds... and it went to two ties and to tiebreaker rules, for the birth place of cricket to finally claim a WC after a 44 year wait. But I will for ever count NZL to have shared the world cup. Down down, piddly island!

[Prashant]

How very frustrating that they don't just play another super over. I hate the tiebreaker rules. Keep playing one over at a time until someone wins. Just like penalty kicks if they are tied after 5 apiece.

[Sin Hombre]

Greatest fluke in cricket history and English fans and commentators have been as ungracious as expected.

Nasser with England deserved this.

No.

[RohitG]

Might as well have a coin toss for a tiebreaker

[Atithee]

Per Simon Taufel, the retired umpire, the rules dictate that for the overthrow incident, England should’ve been awarded five runs and Rashid should’ve been on strike and not Stokes.

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id ... mon-taufel

In my opinion, this match should be replayed. But, it’s not going to happen.

[Atithee]

This may please our hombre:

“If Dhoni doesn’t quit, he may not be automatic pick in team.”

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/spo ... 220463.cms

[arjun2761]

How very frustrating that they don't just play another super over. I hate the tiebreaker rules. Keep playing one over at a time until someone wins. Just like penalty kicks if they are tied after 5 apiece.

Or even 1 ball at a time!

[PKBasu]

Wow what a finish at Lords! Lord, Lord...

So, Jay, were you actually watching the cricket rather than the tennis? I was riveted to Federer-Djokovic, including the heartbreaking failure of Fed to capitalise on two Championship points.

Only after the speeches by loser and winner at SW19 did I switch to the cricket. I missed the six and overthrow for six (illegal) by Stokes, but watched the last 3 balls of the final over and the two Super Overs. I’m among the few cricket fanatics who didn’t watch the best World
Cup final (albeit a low-scoring one). 241/8 surely is better than 241 all out (if there has to be a tiebreaker). To count boundaries instead was ludicrous. The Cup should have been shared — given that umpiring errors are part of the game. If egregious umpiring errors can be overturned, then only one team should have won the Cup — NZ. Guptill choked of course, and Boult wasn’t particularly good in the two key overs.

[prasen9]

In hindsight, it seems Dhoni as a keeper was not too bad a decision. Pant scored in 16 ODIs at 26.71 at 103.6 SR. India lost because not because of the run rate but because we did not have enough solid players to deal with the swing in the early overs.

I still do not like the Dhoni decision as a gut feeling though. Would Karthik have done better? He had improved his batting and played some memorable innings in T20Is. But, who knows!

I think in England, we should have taken a backup batsman who was more solid such as Pujara or maybe even Rayudu. He rescued us in such a situation in New Zealand when the ball was swinging and the need was not to just hit and giggle. Don't play the slower batsman in regular venues but if it is swinging, pout that person in.

[Sin Hombre]

Pant actually batted well in that semifinal. Replace Dhoni with a competent #4 and we would have not lost. 220 odd should always be chased down even if the top 3 fail.