Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2019 14:07:36 GMT
Well well... Turns out the Kiwis won.
Umpire broke the rules, and was wrong giving violent criminal Stokes 6 runs in the extra over.
It should only have been 5.
Bet England don't do the gentlemanly thing, and hand the trophy over.
Cheating shysters! Can't trust em. Never could.
They steal your country.
They stole the football world cup.
They stole the cricket world cup.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl LaFong on Jul 15, 2019 14:43:08 GMT
 Already mentioned on the Cricket WC Final thread (by me.) Another umpiring mistake. England certainly had 90% of the luck on the day. Just the way the cookie crumbles. Nice to see pimpin hasn't topped himself though! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2019 16:11:11 GMT
Another umpiring mistake. England certainly had 90% of the luck on the day. Luck be bollocks! Fucking fix more like. You're not telling me the world cup final umpire doesn't actually know the bloody rules of the game? They haven't even got the decency to fess up, and hand the title over to it's rightful owners. The English have always been dishonest cheating scum. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2019 16:17:16 GMT
The ICC are saying 'no comment'.
They know it's wrong, the cup has been robbed, and they won't even back up their own umpire.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl LaFong on Jul 15, 2019 16:20:00 GMT
The ICC are saying 'no comment'. They know it's wrong, the cup has been robbed, and they won't even back up their own umpire. Nah. Perfectly possible Rashid Ali would have hit a boundary off one of the last two balls. let your hatred go!
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl LaFong on Jul 15, 2019 16:21:19 GMT
The ICC are saying 'no comment'. They know it's wrong, the cup has been robbed, and they won't even back up their own umpire. The umpire who hasn’t asked for the result to be changed?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2019 16:22:27 GMT
The ICC are saying 'no comment'. They know it's wrong, the cup has been robbed, and they won't even back up their own umpire. Nah. Perfectly possible Rashid Ali would have hit a boundary of one of the last two balls. let your hatred go! Ifs and maybes about the last two balls are irrelevant. This isn't an umpire unsighted on something... It's an umpire breaking the rules of a sport, and giving England a run, and trophy, that isn't theirs... and England not fessing up. It's cheating. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2019 16:23:42 GMT
The ICC are saying 'no comment'. They know it's wrong, the cup has been robbed, and they won't even back up their own umpire. The umpire who hasn’t asked for the result to be changed? Well, he wouldn't would he? That would be admitting he either cheated, or is an incompetent ass. |
|
|
|
Post by Carl LaFong on Jul 15, 2019 16:26:57 GMT
Another umpiring mistake. England certainly had 90% of the luck on the day. Luck be bollocks! Fucking fix more like. You're not telling me the world cup final umpire doesn't actually know the bloody rules of the game? They haven't even got the decency to fess up, and hand the title over to it's rightful owners. The English have always been dishonest cheating scum. Of course they know the rules. They just didn’t notice the batsmen hadn’t crossed when the throw came in. Not sure whether they would have been allowed to send it up to the 4th umpire to check. P.S. How can you bear living in such a vile country!?
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl LaFong on Jul 15, 2019 16:28:11 GMT
The umpire who hasn’t asked for the result to be changed? Well, he wouldn't would he? That would be admitting he either cheated, or is an incompetent ass. You’re getting mixed up. The person who pointed out the error is a retired umpire who was not officiating at the match.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2019 16:30:08 GMT
Luck be bollocks! Fucking fix more like. You're not telling me the world cup final umpire doesn't actually know the bloody rules of the game? They haven't even got the decency to fess up, and hand the title over to it's rightful owners. The English have always been dishonest cheating scum. Of course they know the rules. They just didn’t notice the batsmen hadn’t crossed when the throw came in. Not sure whether they would have been allowed to send it up to the 4th umpire to check. What, you reckon the pitch umpires didn't notice that two grown men hadn't crossed each other? What was in their sightline, an elephant? Of course the pitch umpires noticed... they either cheated, or don't know the rules. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2019 17:50:55 GMT
Luck be bollocks! Fucking fix more like. You're not telling me the world cup final umpire doesn't actually know the bloody rules of the game? They haven't even got the decency to fess up, and hand the title over to it's rightful owners. The English have always been dishonest cheating scum. P.S. How can you bear living in such a vile country!? I'm moving back to Scotland, as soon as you all stop being pussies, and get independence. It'll be fun, my council house swap might even be to Edinburgh... We can go drinking together in spoons wearing our Irish and Celtic shirts, and Easter Lilies 👍 We can go to auld firm games together, and sing songs at the hun (we're sitting in the Green Brigade section by the way). See... you're looking forward to it already 👍 |
|
|
|
Post by Zos on Jul 15, 2019 18:56:11 GMT
I'm English, we won. Ner ner ne ner ner.
|
|
|
|
Post by Midi-Chlorian_Count on Jul 15, 2019 19:22:44 GMT
It's been pointed out elsewhere that New Zealand benefitted from a number of no balls incorrectly given in their favour over their innings so you can't just look at the England additional run in isolation.
Umpires make the odd mistake all the time in cricket matches. You just don't complain about it as that just isn't cricket...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2019 19:43:41 GMT
It's been pointed out elsewhere that New Zealand benefitted from a number of no balls incorrectly given in their favour over their innings so you can't just look at the England additional run in isolation. Umpires make the odd mistake all the time in cricket matches. You just don't complain about it as that just isn't cricket... Well England complain about umpiring often enough 🤔 "ENGLAND TO COMPLAIN AFTER COSTLY UMPIRE ERROR" Plenty of times. |
|
|
|
Post by Carl LaFong on Jul 15, 2019 20:21:05 GMT
P.S. How can you bear living in such a vile country!? I'm moving back to Scotland, as soon as you all stop being pussies, and get independence. It'll be fun, my council house swap might even be to Edinburgh... We can go drinking together in spoons wearing our Irish and Celtic shirts, and Easter Lilies 👍 We can go to auld firm games together, and sing songs at the hun (we're sitting in the Green Brigade section by the way). See... you're looking forward to it already 👍 Last time I wore my Celtic top outside I was called a Papist!
|
|
|
|
Post by weststigersbob on Jul 16, 2019 1:39:23 GMT
Another umpiring mistake. England certainly had 90% of the luck on the day. Luck be bollocks! Fucking fix more like. You're not telling me the world cup final umpire doesn't actually know the bloody rules of the game? They haven't even got the decency to fess up, and hand the title over to it's rightful owners. The English have always been dishonest cheating scum. Except a) the Umpire that made the call is Sri Lankan, not English and b) The law is vague and somewhat contradictory.
|
|
|
|
Post by weststigersbob on Jul 16, 2019 1:44:30 GMT
The problem lies with the rule, not the application of it.
On one hand, it states that because the batsmen hadn’t crossed when the ball was thrown, second run shouldn’t count. It also states that all runs completed when the ball touches the boundary are to be scored additionally to the boundary. It says nothing about one law cancelling out the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Jul 16, 2019 1:48:11 GMT
The law is also ridiculous if applied in the way Taufel wanted it to be. The overthrow was caused specifically by the ball hitting Stokes' bat as he dived to complete the second run, yet Tauffel states the boundary caused by the deflection should stand, but the 22 yards he'd run to cause the deflection shouldn't because of where the bstsmen were when the throw was made, even though the thriw did not cause the overthrow. I'm sorry, but that's a ridiculous law. I'm glad it wasn't applied.
And to say that this cost NZ the game: how do you know Rashid wouldn't have hit the next ball over midwicket for 6 or 2 twos, or snicked a boundary, or got a single abd Stokes hit a 4, 6 or 2 off tge last ball? 4 off 2 or 3 off 2, that ask is in the batting team's favour.
|
|
|
|
Post by weststigersbob on Jul 16, 2019 7:09:07 GMT
The law is also ridiculous if applied in the way Taufel wanted it to be. The overthrow was caused specifically by the ball hitting Stokes' bat as he dived to complete the second run, yet Tauffel states the boundary caused by the deflection should stand, but the 22 yards he'd run to cause the deflection shouldn't because of where the bstsmen were when the throw was made, even though the thriw did not cause the overthrow. I'm sorry, but that's a ridiculous law. I'm glad it wasn't applied. And to say that this cost NZ the game: how do you know Rashid wouldn't have hit the next ball over midwicket for 6 or 2 twos, or snicked a boundary, or got a single abd Stokes hit a 4, 6 or 2 off tge last ball? 4 off 2 or 3 off 2, that ask is in the batting team's favour. The way Taufel wants it’s applied is ridiculous, I agree. What happens if the batsmen decide etiquette gets thrown out the window, and start running again. The ball doesn’t reach the boundary, but they run an additional 2. Is it 3 runs or 4 ? The fact that both batsmen ran, and made good their ground, 4 times, and the fielding side errs by throwing the ball wildly whereby it hits the batsman, the batting team is penalised a run. That makes no sense. Likewise, let’s say a batsman blocks it, starts running, the batsmen haven’t crossed, the bowler picks it up, throws it, grazes the batsman’s rump, the back up fielder midfields and it goes for four. That’s 5 runs everyday if the week, and twice on Sunday. According to Taufel, no, that’s only 4.
|
|
