Cricket World cup

[rich munn]

Brilliant, brilliant drama. Even if you don't get cricket, you have to appreciate the theatre of what just happened, luck and all. And the mental strength to see that through is astonishing.

Amazing stuff. That is up there as one of the greatest finals I have ever seen in any sport.

And furthermore, having played club cricket for years and watched it forever, I have never seen what happened today with that deflection off Stokes' bat which really won us the game.

I have said many times that I never played a game of cricket without seeing something I'd never seen before. But for it to happen with just 2 balls to go in a World Cup Final was simply amazing.

Cricket is the greatest sport in my opinion.

Football second.

[life on mars]

Taking away the usual (yawn ) Wales v England issue, when this sport is good its brilliant, the England/Wales WWC (yes advertised as that in all grounds, has been superb .)

The 4 runs of Stokes bat was a surreal moment,and will be discussed /debated for years to come .

Cricketers are a shining example of how sport should be played.

The ECB are very supportive and engaging , of our country and county's cricket, and its involvement, having brought the ashes to our ground twice in recent years, it shows we are one.

[Hot Shot Hamish.]

More like WG Grace

Twat!!

[Pedro de la Rosa]

The ECB are very supportive and engaging

I love cricket but his this a wind up?

[Don Corleone]

As exciting as it was I still don’t get how England won - surely the point of cricket is to score runs and take wickets. If in the event of a tie like yesterday then it would make more sense to declare the team that had lost the least wickets the winner (NZ). Winning it on most boundaries is as someone else said like winning a football match on corner count. Just seems a strange rule, I’m sure it used to be the case that if a match was tied the team losing the fewest wickets won

[qccfc]

As exciting as it was I still don’t get how England won - surely the point of cricket is to score runs and take wickets. If in the event of a tie like yesterday then it would make more sense to declare the team that had lost the least wickets the winner (NZ). Winning it on most boundaries is as someone else said like winning a football match on corner count. Just seems a strange rule, I’m sure it used to be the case that if a match was tied the team losing the fewest wickets won

They changes that ruling as it was a disadvantage to the team batting 2nd. England lost wickets yesterday going for the win.

You could also say NZ lost more wickets in the super over, and would have deserved to lose based on that.

To be fair the umpires explained the rules at the start and commentators made it clear that England would win on boundary count if the super over was a tie.

[xsnaggle]

I don't agree with your wording of it but I do find it baffling that Welsh people are going along with this. I commented in a cricket thread that a west-country cricket pundit had questioned whether West-Country cricket fans would support a team called Wales/Glamorgan in the 100 ball tournament if it wasn't going to publicise that it actually represented the West-Country too, and that I couldn't see any reason that Welsh cricketer's aren't doing so on a national level. We even had one poster on here wanting to get rid of national anthems before the game (something which is part of Welsh history) so they could feel more comfortable supporting a side that almost totally refuses to mention they represent Wales?!?!

#weareengland trending again today shows you all you need to know. If you want to support the team then at least start vocalising the need for greater representation of the W part of the ECWB. Wales deserves that at least.

(posting in this thread too because I suspect they other will be deleted by morning).

The Welsh national anthem was the first ever sung at a rugby international and I believe the first ever sung at any sporting event.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

I don't agree with your wording of it but I do find it baffling that Welsh people are going along with this. I commented in a cricket thread that a west-country cricket pundit had questioned whether West-Country cricket fans would support a team called Wales/Glamorgan in the 100 ball tournament if it wasn't going to publicise that it actually represented the West-Country too, and that I couldn't see any reason that Welsh cricketer's aren't doing so on a national level. We even had one poster on here wanting to get rid of national anthems before the game (something which is part of Welsh history) so they could feel more comfortable supporting a side that almost totally refuses to mention they represent Wales?!?!

#weareengland trending again today shows you all you need to know. If you want to support the team then at least start vocalising the need for greater representation of the W part of the ECWB. Wales deserves that at least.

(posting in this thread too because I suspect they other will be deleted by morning).

The South West has incredible support for cricket. Look at the players Somerset produce and the gates Somerset and Glos get for t20s. Frankly, its an absolute joke they haven't got one of the City based teams in the absolute farce that is the 100. People are attached to their country and their club/county. If you force people to support regions (look at welsh rugby) it probably won't work. This isn't the best analogy I've ever seen. I love cricket, and I am probably going to boycott the 100 because I'm so against it. After all, England have just won the world cup, and we aren't even going to play any 50 over cricket domestically! Seriously, the ECB are a disgrace at times.

[qccfc]

The South West has incredible support for cricket. Look at the players Somerset produce and the gates Somerset and Glos get for t20s. Frankly, its an absolute joke they haven't got one of the City based teams in the absolute farce that is the 100. People are attached to their country and their club/county. If you force people to support regions (look at welsh rugby) it probably won't work. This isn't the best analogy I've ever seen. I love cricket, and I am probably going to boycott the 100 because I'm so against it. After all, England have just won the world cup, and we aren't even going to play any 50 over cricket domestically! Seriously, the ECB are a disgrace at times.

Are people that attached to the counties. I mean in Wales the county attendances are poor. For all the talk on here for wanting to support Wales in Cricket, people do not support Wales in Cricket, or Glamorgan, or their local clubs.

The franchise system works well in Australia and in Indian systems, and i do not think it will hurt to have a look at it in this country.

Im a traditional cricket fan, i support Glamorgan I attend matches, i am not a fan of the 100. However i do feel that something has to be done to attract new fans to the game, especially in Wales.

[dandywarhol]

Umpire decision to award 6 runs for throw in that hit Stokes was wrong.The batsman hadn't crossed for the second run.So 5 runs should have been awarded and Stokes would not have been on strike.

[insider]

Umpire decision to award 6 runs for throw in that hit Stokes was wrong.The batsman hadn't crossed for the second run.So 5 runs should have been awarded and Stokes would not have been on strike.

He dived into his crease the ball was deflected for 4.
They did not run for a 3rd out of sportsmanship.
The umpire had no other decision to make other than to signal a 4 plus the 2 completed runs.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

Are people that attached to the counties. I mean in Wales the county attendances are poor. For all the talk on here for wanting to support Wales in Cricket, people do not support Wales in Cricket, or Glamorgan, or their local clubs.

The franchise system works well in Australia and in Indian systems, and i do not think it will hurt to have a look at it in this country.

Im a traditional cricket fan, i support Glamorgan I attend matches, i am not a fan of the 100. However i do feel that something has to be done to attract new fans to the game, especially in Wales.

Yes, I am, anyway! I love county cricket. They need to get the game on freeview. While cricket is behind a paywall, nobody is going to care. You can't take the Sky money and then whine that nobody can see your game. God, I hate the ECB. Colin Graves and Giles Clarke, wouldn't wish them on the Jacks .

I am not a fan of the City based franchise but I get it. I don't think it will work though, they've alienated the core cricket fans by telling them, they don't matter, the game isn't for them etc. Also, saying its to get the best players in the world over, except that they won't now be playing because it's at the same time as our test match summer. It's already a point of ridicule in the press and on social media.

Australia has had a state system for as long as anyone can remember and India is absolutely cricket mad, so they could all play in tutus and tiaras and people would still come.

[qccfc]

Umpire decision to award 6 runs for throw in that hit Stokes was wrong.The batsman hadn't crossed for the second run.So 5 runs should have been awarded and Stokes would not have been on strike.

Of course they crossed for the 2nd run Ben Stokes was diving in to make his ground when it hit him. It was the correct and only decision.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

Umpire decision to award 6 runs for throw in that hit Stokes was wrong.The batsman hadn't crossed for the second run.So 5 runs should have been awarded and Stokes would not have been on strike.

As insider says, they could have kept running until the ball hit the boundary rope. The umpire was correct, and it was pretty good sportsmanship from Stokes to say, let's not run the third.

[qccfc]

Yes, I am, anyway! I love county cricket. They need to get the game on freeview. While cricket is behind a paywall, nobody is going to care. You can't take the Sky money and then whine that nobody can see your game. God, I hate the ECB. Colin Graves and Giles Clarke, wouldn't wish them on the Jacks .

I am not a fan of the City based franchise but I get it. I don't think it will work though, they've alienated the core cricket fans by telling them, they don't matter, the game isn't for them etc. Also, saying its to get the best players in the world over, except that they won't now be playing because it's at the same time as our test match summer. It's already a point of ridicule in the press and on social media.

Australia has had a state system for as long as anyone can remember and India is absolutely cricket mad, so they could all play in tutus and tiaras and people would still come.

I appreciate there are core cricket fans. However the game, in this area is in a downwards spiral. I dont think the ECB can sit back and let the game drift.

The money over access to tv games is a difficult one. The 100 is going to be on free to air tv.

What would we rather paid professional coaches working with children, or the ability to watch the game on tv.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

I appreciate there are core cricket fans. However the game, in this area is in a downwards spiral. I dont think the ECB can sit back and let the game drift.

The money over access to tv games is a difficult one. The 100 is going to be on free to air tv.

What would we rather paid professional coaches working with children, or the ability to watch the game on tv.

Some games are going to be on FTA TV.

They ballsed up in 05. They should have kept it on c4 and grown the game after the hype. We might not even need the Sky money had they done it well. Ancient history now but they've got to get England on TV. Whether that's all ODIs/t20s or just the lesser sides playing England on TV, with the Ashes behind a paywall I don't know. It's an incredibly difficult decision. People don't get Sky to watch the ODIs though, in my belief, they're buying it to watch the tests. Perhaps C4 and Sky could split the revenue or something when they show games (like I presume they did for the WCF).

[qccfc]

Some games are going to be on FTA TV.

They ballsed up in 05. They should have kept it on c4 and grown the game after the hype. We might not even need the Sky money had they done it well. Ancient history now but they've got to get England on TV. Whether that's all ODIs/t20s or just the lesser sides playing England on TV, with the Ashes behind a paywall I don't know. It's an incredibly difficult decision. People don't get Sky to watch the ODIs though, in my belief, they're buying it to watch the tests. Perhaps C4 and Sky could split the revenue or something when they show games (like I presume they did for the WCF).

With regards to the 100 and the city based system it will go one of 2 ways, it will either be a success or it will fail. Either way we will get a clear message from fans of cricket in this country, and whether it will attract new fans to the games. If it fails you still have the county system running, so no harm will be done.

With regards to the tv money, i accept it is an extremely difficult decision. The money available for local clubs and the initiatives available for clubs is much greater than it was in 2005. However children in schools have little or no knowledge of cricket and cricketers. That being said Cardiff Cricket club are currently teaching 100 children aged 5-8 through the all stars system on a Friday night and Saturday morning, and thats just 1 club alone, many others in the region host smaller schemes.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

With regards to the 100 and the city based system it will go one of 2 ways, it will either be a success or it will fail. Either way we will get a clear message from fans of cricket in this country, and whether it will attract new fans to the games. If it fails you still have the county system running, so no harm will be done.

With regards to the tv money, i accept it is an extremely difficult decision. The money available for local clubs and the initiatives available for clubs is much greater than it was in 2005. However children in schools have little or no knowledge of cricket and cricketers. That being said Cardiff Cricket club are currently teaching 100 children aged 5-8 through the all stars system on a Friday night and Saturday morning, and thats just 1 club alone, many others in the region host smaller schemes.

The harm is, they've devalued the 50 over competition, which people still go to. How have we just won a world cup and then not even bothering with the 50 over game back home? It is lunacy.

[qccfc]

The harm is, they've devalued the 50 over competition, which people still go to. How have we just won a world cup and then not even bothering with the 50 over game back home? It is lunacy.

The 50 over format has been constantly changing, from 40 to 50, from the pro40 to the one day cup to the Sunday League. The international game will remain the same, attendances for the one day cup for Glamorgan were not great.

The Counties want shorter format games. T20 is where they make their money, and without that money they are dependent on ECB funding, and that funding comes from SKY.

We need to answer the question of whether 9 big city based teams will bring in the crowds better than the 16 counties. Until we try that the question will remain and hang over the game.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

The 50 over format has been constantly changing, from 40 to 50, from the pro40 to the one day cup to the Sunday League. The international game will remain the same, attendances for the one day cup for Glamorgan were not great.

The Counties want shorter format games. T20 is where they make their money, and without that money they are dependent on ECB funding, and that funding comes from SKY.

We need to answer the question of whether 9 big city based teams will bring in the crowds better than the 16 counties. Until we try that the question will remain and hang over the game.

8 City based teams isn't it? The whole thing has been an utter disaster from a PR point of view and they're going to ruin a potentially good thing. Also, the team names are the worst things I've ever seen. The Leeds Supercharges, Manchester Originals. What the hell is that

[qccfc]

8 City based teams isn't it? The whole thing has been an utter disaster from a PR point of view and they're going to ruin a potentially good thing. Also, the team names are the worst things I've ever seen. The Leeds Supercharges, Manchester Originals. What the hell is that

Yeah 8 teams, i was thinking of the 9 test grounds. Its going to be put down by the traditional cricket fans, so was T20.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

Yeah 8 teams, i was thinking of the 9 test grounds. Its going to be put down by the traditional cricket fans, so was T20.

T20 was always going to work, it's what everyone played for starters at club level for ages. Durham have lost their test status, due to the ECB making them push and then punishing them for pushing for test status.

[dandywarhol]

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...8aArwtEALw_wcB

5 not 6 as I. Said

[Pearcey3]

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...8aArwtEALw_wcB

5 not 6 as I. Said

You are correct. There is photographic evidence to show that at the point the ball was thrown they had not crossed. It should have been five runs with Rashid and not Stokes facing the strike.

[MacAdder]

You are correct. There is photographic evidence to show that at the point the ball was thrown they had not crossed. It should have been five runs with Rashid and not Stokes facing the strike.

Farcical really when you think of all the technology that has been brought into cricket with the focus on getting decisions right.
There is no excuse for such an error and the umpire should have gone upstairs straight away. They even go upstairs for things like run out appeals blatantly obvious to the naked eye that the batsmen have made their ground.

Even though I am glad that England won, I would not be happy at all if I was a New Zealander.
Would such a decision have been allowed had it been Australia the opposition and not "little" New Zealand?