What a game of cricket

Great game by two fantastic sides 241/8 and 241 all out then 15/0 and 15/1 in the super over played in a brilliant manner by both sets of players. Stokes and Buttler for England with bat and Ferguson, Henry and de Grandhomme for NZ with the ball. England in the end just got over the line and were the best side of the WC so deservingly are the winners.

Was fantastic drama, had to feel sorry for New Zealand, with the umpires home boys and the bad luck

Super game neither side deserved to lose, you have to feel for NZ though so darn close for them. It all happened in England this evening heard the tennis was a cracker as well.

i have no interest in the winners but i think the rules stink. to say if the scores are level and go straight to a boundary count is retarded. surely wickets down is more important than a boundary count ? in any cricket match 7 down beats all out. so my argument is nz should have won on a countback because they lost fewer wickets during their innings. in addition if a superover ends tied just play another one.

Imo, there are actually 2 talking points in this world cup that i dont agree with...
The First point is the semi final between NZ and India..

This is a ODI world cup... ODI - One day International... The match needs to be played and a winner announced in one day... After they could not complete the match on the first day, i believe they should have started from ball one on the rain day. Not half way through the game....

Point 2 is the final... I agree with Jim that the rule of boundries during the game identifying the winner is not the way to go and that another super over should have been played.. Whoever was more wickets down or who hit the most boundries is immaterial to me...

Other than that, it was a great world cup to watch with some very entertaining cricket played... I think that the scores where porbably lower than alot had expected, but i think that can be put down to some very good work from the ground staff around Eng and Wales who prepared wickets that had something to offer for both Bat and Ball...

Sunday 14 July 2019 was a great day of sport from cricket to tennis.

New Zealand, no doubt unlucky from the overthrows to the catch on the boundary which was a six.

If ever there was a game of margins this was it.

This game surely was the best cricket game ever surpassing the tied game of South Africa and Australia in 1999.

There was no losers in the game but due to tournament rules England was declared the champions which was a pity after all that excitement.

Ben Stokes after the World Cup Final T20 last over got his respite due to lucky circumstances.

Amazing match! Really feel sorry for NZ though.

On the betting front, would punters be refunded if they backed either team as the result was a tie on the last ball?

naresh wrote: Sunday 14 July 2019 was a great day of sport from cricket to tennis.

New Zealand, no doubt unlucky from the overthrows to the catch on the boundary which was a six.

If ever there was a game of margins this was it.

This game surely was the best cricket game ever surpassing the tied game of South Africa and Australia in 1999.

There was no losers in the game but due to tournament rules England was declared the champions which was a pity after all that excitement.

Ben Stokes after the World Cup Final T20 last over got his respite due to lucky circumstances.

Have to agree - best game ever - NZ grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory - and definitely the 'more boundaries scored' rule is pathetic after such an epic struggle

IMHO the ball should be declared dead if it hits the batsman or bat and no more runs should be allowed to be scored off the ball once that happens. Wickets definitely are more important than boundaries but well done to England anyway.

Press wrote: Amazing match! Really feel sorry for NZ though.

On the betting front, would punters be refunded if they backed either team as the result was a tie on the last ball?

depends on who you bet with
Hollywood was Tie No Bet - most others "to lift the cup"

Oh dear!!!!

www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/27194046...ns-says-simon-taufel

The umpires made an "error of judgement" in awarding six runs, instead of five, to England for the overthrow that hit Ben Stokes' bat and ran to the boundary, says Simon Taufel, confirming the story that ESPNcricinfo broke right after the World Cup 2019 final. Currently part of the MCC's laws sub-committee that makes the rules governing cricket, Taufel told foxsports.com.au that England should have been awarded five runs, not six.

"It's a clear mistake.. it's an error of judgment," Taufel said. "They (England) should have been awarded five runs, not six."

Law 19.8, pertaining to "Overthrow or wilful act of fielder", says: "If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be any runs for penalties awarded to either side, and the allowance for the boundary, and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had already crossed at the instant of the throw or act."

A review of the footage of the incident - which took place off the fourth ball of the last over - shows clearly that, at the moment the ball was released by the New Zealand fielder, Martin Guptill, Stokes and his partner, Adil Rashid, had not yet crossed for their second run.

ALSO READ: Should England have got five, and not six, for overthrows?

Taufel also said that Stokes and Rashid should have switched ends once the run was found to be incomplete - which meant Rashid would have played the fifth ball with three runs required to win.

Taufel defended the officials, saying the moment involved many things happening at the same time. "In the heat of what was going on, they thought there was a good chance the batsmen had crossed at the instant of the throw," Taufel said.

"Obviously TV replays showed otherwise. The difficulty you (umpires) have here is you've got to watch batsmen completing runs, then change focus and watch for the ball being picked up, and watch for the release (of the throw)," he said.

"You also have to watch where the batsmen are at that exact moment."

The former umpire acknowledged the call "influenced the game", but said it should not be viewed as costing New Zealand the match - and the tournament.

"It's unfair on England, New Zealand and the umpires involved to say it decided the outcome," Taufel said.

Craig Eudey wrote: IMHO the ball should be declared dead if it hits the batsman or bat and no more runs should be allowed to be scored off the ball once that happens.

agree with you there - this rule must be changed
there's a 'gentleman's agreement' not to run if that happens, but a boundary will stand
still want to see what happens if the ream needs 1 run to win, and ball hits batsman or bat and goes halfway to boundary -- thousand pounds to a piece of shit they ignore the "gentleman's agreement"