[vibbs]

Originally Posted by A M

But they allowed more singles/doubles and the scores tied. I don't think this is "better" fielding in any way.
.

Bingo! You saved the boundaries but gave away more singles and doubles and result is same.
Boundaries can also be saved by having an ultra defensive field set up. It does not signify better fielding or bowler if the oposition managed the same result without having the need to hit boundaries!!

[Nalin1]

We will go absolutely mad if we dig in to all the aspects of the game!

Very simple. The game either needs to come to a proper conclusion with a clear winner (like the soccer world cup final) or declare both teams as joint winners.

What is the next step if the super over is tied? Exactly the same as a tie breaker in the soccer world cup final. It is a shoot out. No shoot out will go on for hours. Someone will blink any moment. And that is the end of the match!

Go back in the match and pick up some aspect in which one side or the other will be ahead and declare them winners?

[msdivy]

Rule 19.8 from https://www.lords.org/mcc/laws/boundaries

19.8 Overthrow or wilful act of fielder

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.

Originally Posted by hemanth.anand

In this case, if the batsmen had crossed each other when the ball was thrown(the time when the ball left the fielder's hand), it is 5 runs. Else it is 4 runs.

ICC has to clarify what 'or act' mean (underlined above). Does 'the act' mean when ball goes past the stumps?

That way, a 2nd re-match could've been played isn't it (there was a reserve anyway)?

Note: Eng - NZ finals is done & dusted. The 2nd super over plan is for future matches.

A full ODI takes 8 hours to complete. A super over match (1 over each & time for changeover) will take around 15 minutes. If the 1st super over is tied, we can try 2nd super over (with different sets of batsmen & bowler) and we will have the result in 15 minutes, instead of waiting another day. (ala tiebreaker in the final set of a tennis match)

For once, I agree with Sachin - Another Super Over should decide winner instead of boundaries

There was only one group in the tournament!

The rule has to generic for all ICC tournaments, either with a single group or multiple groups.

So, after there was nothing to separate between the teams in batting, the team with better fielding and bowling (conceding less boundaries) will be declared winners.

Originally Posted by DigitalOne

Runs being equal, World cup was won by the team which did better fielding and thus conceded lesser number of boundaries than the opposite team.

As shared by others, NZ scored fewer boundaries but has same runs as England. Which means England allowed more singles, double & triples by their poor fielding. Hence counting boundaries may not be a fair play to decide the winner.

Originally Posted by thoma

Atleast they could have given it to the team with the least number of wickets lost, either in the 50 overs or in the super over or together. Because, now they are degrading the runs taken against the boundaries scored.

The number of wickets lost should not be the criteria because that is a non-entity in the game of cricket. When teams go out to bat, they target the number of runs, and on not how many wickets they must-have in the end.

Originally Posted by Nalin1

Go back in the match and pick up some aspect in which one side or the other will be ahead and declare them winners?

Rightly said. When teams head to super over, they must leave all baggage behind. Winner of super over wins the match.

Originally Posted by Nalin1

What is the next step if the super over is tied? Exactly the same as a tie breaker in the soccer world cup final. It is a shoot out. No shoot out will go on for hours. Someone will blink any moment. And that is the end of the match!

Yes, if the penalty shoot out is tied, the winner is not declared on the number of shots at the goal in the first 90 minutes of the game.

[DigitalOne]

Originally Posted by msdivy

Rule 19.8 from https://www.lords.org/mcc/laws/boundaries

ICC has to clarify what 'or act' mean (underlined above). Does 'the act' mean when ball goes past the stumps?

I think the "act" word has to be read together as the phrase "wilful act of fielder" as it is in the title of the rule. The "or act" is probably added to make it generic. Otherwise some team later will claim it is not an overthrow if the fielder kicks the ball .

[pratyush6]

Phew! What a game. Its been a few days and it still feels NZ were robbed of the WC. Maybe its just luck. For once at the end, both teams deserved to be winners. If you cannot decide even after a super over (which is a farce if you ask me in a ODI), then the trophy should have been shared.
The way match was decided was absolutely ridiculous.

[msdivy]

Originally Posted by DigitalOne

I think the "act" word has to be read together as the phrase "wilful act of fielder" as it is in the title of the rule. The "or act" is probably added to make it generic. Otherwise some team later will claim it is not an overthrow if the fielder kicks the ball .

Ok, even the umpire on the ground thinks it must be 5 - Kumar Dharmasena admits his 'error' in World Cup 2019 final overthrow controversy, doesn't regret decision

So it is indeed 5. To make this judgment, both the umpires agree that TV replay would be required, hoping that a single frame captures batsmen running and fielder throwing. Instead, if the act is defined as the ball going past the stumps, then on-field umpires would be enabled to make the decision.

It is one of those rules that wouldn't change to make it easy for on-field umpires. Back-foot no-ball rule being another.

[redCherry]

Originally Posted by msdivy

Ok, even the umpire on the ground thinks it must be 5

Ever since this overthrow happened, I am thinking it was unfair on the fielding side (NZ) to award the 4 runs overthrow to the batting side. Because, neither the throw from the fielder was deliberate to hit the batsmen/bat, nor the batsman earned those runs. Fielder was aiming for the stumps, but it hits the bat, deflects to the boundary. Why penalize the fielding side for no fault.

This is yet another example of rules being in favour of the batting side....

[PPS]

The least one expects from Umpire Dharmasena is to show a bit of remorse regarding the whole incident ! But all he says is that he has no regrets. Next year there's the World Cup for T20, hopefully ICC would be wary of him officiating in the big games.
Btw, who is the no. 1 ranked umpire in the world? Assuming there are rankings, if any!

[ValarMorghulis]

Originally Posted by PPS

...Umpire Dharmasena ...

He was one of the worst, if not the worst, umpires during the ICC 2019 WC.
His repeated blunders were noted across matches, especially against teams playing Eng and Aus. In one of the matches, he gave 2 incorrect decisions against Gayle in the same over, only to be over turned twice!


ICC should have demerit points against umpires too. Truant umpires should be penalized as well.

[deehunk]

The umpires should not be allowed to wear glasses, their expressions should be shown live on the field.

[Eddy]

Note from Support: The world cup is over, so let us switch to the regular cricket thread (The Cricket Thread).