Most of the time between 2 Rich horses, except Team NZ get's funded by the tax payer as well as private sponsorship.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Cricket] Cricket World Cup Final: ENGLAND v New Zealand *** Official Match Thread ***
- Thread starter Sussex Nomad
- Start date
Most of the time between 2 Rich horses, except Team NZ get's funded by the tax payer as well as private sponsorship.
& with the last goal the Krauts thought the game was already over.
Jason Roy was born in South Africa.....
Ginger, Maori and Geordie. A fierce mix.
Up for New Zealander of the Year. Be great if he beats Kane.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/49042726
https://www.americascup.com/en/history
**** me, what a load of self-congratulatory w@nk
"This was more than a simple boat race however, as it symbolised a great victory for the new world over the old, a triumph that unseated Great Britain as the world’s undisputed maritime power."
WTF? The UK was still the world's strongest maritime power up to the second world war.
"The trophy would go to the young democracy of the United States and it would be well over 100 years before it was taken away from New York."
Er, yeah, because the same competition hasn't been held since 1851.
It's like me saying I won a trophy for best boogying at the school disco in 1979, symbolising a great victory over between old world powers, a triumph that unseated Cuba as the world's leading Latin dancers. I have still yet to be beaten, so it's a trophy I look set to keep.
"The America’s Cup is without a doubt the most difficult trophy in sport to win."
How is it difficult? There are only 2 ****ing competitors, and one of them is going to win it!
"In the more than 160 years since that first race off England, only four nations have won"
That's because no one ****ing enters!
Americans
https://www.americascup.com/en/history
"The America’s Cup is without a doubt the most difficult trophy in sport to win."
How is it difficult? There are only 2 ****ing competitors, and one of them is going to win it!
Americans
It is difficult to win because not only do you generally need the best boat & crew (which costs big bucks) but also the best lawyers.
It'll be interesting to see what happens at the next defence in Auckland, as in who bothers to turn up.
It's not really a 2 horse race because up to a dozen challengers race against each other to see who will sail off against Team New Zealand in the final.
But a lot of people down here are over it.
Be great if a UK consortium won it and then hold it off Brighton, it could reinvigorate interest.
I listened to Stokes's parents being interviewed on Radio Sport a couple of days ago. Seems like you couldn't meet a nicer family.
On a side note when NZ lost the America's Cup to a Swiss Syndicate skippered by Russell Coutts in 2003 (who jumped ship from Team NZ) That same year Coutts was nominated for NZ Sportsman of the year, which is probably more in keeping with what Stokes should be nominated for.
How many times have the 2 teams in it not included the US?
Garry Nelson's teacher
Well-known member
Couldn't we use the upcoming England V NZ netball match as the decider and put this one to bed?
- Apr 5, 2014
- 25,859
His father was a NZ rugby league player.
Both Stokes and Roy have been here from a young age. Stokes has a broad Cumbrian accent although Roy still has a slight Saffer about him.
- Apr 5, 2014
- 25,859
For sure it's a Cumbrian accent he has.
There's always been a team in it from the US they haven't always made it to the final. Oracle seem to have been the main one in recent years I think Larry Ellison bank rolls it.
Yeah I meant in the final. It hasn't always been the case that other teams competed for a place in the final, and originally anyone competing against the US would find themselves with one boat against many US boats. It was a farce of a competition.
Despite the many entries from other US syndicates the New York Yacht Club (I think) always seemed to win the final & retain the cup.
It wasn't until Australia won it in 1983 that the New York Yacht club were no longer the holders.
To be sure, to be shore. How about ginger, Maori and Cockermouth?
Quote Originally Posted by knocky1
Ginger, Maori and Geordie. A fierce mix.
Up for New Zealander of the Year. Be great if he beats Kane.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/49042726
Oddly though, the West Cumberland accent is quite resonant of the Geordie accent. There's a sort of band across the Pennines and down the west coast that is all slightly Geordie-like.
Ginger, Maori and Geordie. A fierce mix.
Up for New Zealander of the Year. Be great if he beats Kane.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/49042726
Oddly though, the West Cumberland accent is quite resonant of the Geordie accent. There's a sort of band across the Pennines and down the west coast that is all slightly Geordie-like.
You are correct. Stokes should have been at the non strikers end.
Also: onfield umpire who called it 6 has admitted it was incorrect per the rules. But I happen to agree that he should have no regrets. https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/27232695/i-never-regret-decision-kumar-dharmasena
warmleyseagull
Well-known member
Apologies if these points raised before (not wading through 1100+ posts) but watching highlights again, two things struck me:
1. 30 extras for NZ - 12.4% of their including 17 wides and 1 NB. OK, that included wacky 4w but even so England could have won with nearly an over to spare..;
2. Santner's negative impact: completely avoiding last ball of 50th over - OK it was short but at least have a swot at it, then throwing to wrong end to run out Rashid. Completely unfair to pick on one guy in such a close match, but he might be having some 'if only' thoughts.
1. 30 extras for NZ - 12.4% of their including 17 wides and 1 NB. OK, that included wacky 4w but even so England could have won with nearly an over to spare..;
2. Santner's negative impact: completely avoiding last ball of 50th over - OK it was short but at least have a swot at it, then throwing to wrong end to run out Rashid. Completely unfair to pick on one guy in such a close match, but he might be having some 'if only' thoughts.
Has Triggaaar seen this?
ManOfSussex
We wunt be druv
At the cricket match I was at yesterday, there was a conversation going on which I listened into with the 2 match umpires at the end of the tea break on this. They're both experienced Panel Umpires in The Sussex Cricket League. Their humble opinion on it basically was:
A. They would have awarded 6 runs and they thought most umpires in the world would also have given 6 runs.
B. It's ultimately still The MCC's game and laws though, so if someone from The MCC says 5 runs should have been given, 5 runs it should have been.
C. They'd never seen it happen before, but in the very unlikely event they ever have an incident like that in a game they're umpiring in the future, they would give 5 runs if they saw it. If in the very unlikely event it ever happens again in a match with DRS, there'd be an umpire's review and the TV umpire will give 5 runs too.