[Cricket] Cricket World Cup Final: ENGLAND v New Zealand *** Official Match Thread ***

[ManOfSussex]

There also was actually an Indian umpire who publicly said it should have been 5 runs too - Krishna Hariharan.

https://www.thehindubusinessline.co...ires-icc-declines-comment/article28444212.ece

Attention grabbing language like - "Kumar Dharmasena killed the World Cup for New Zealand. It should have been five runs not six." - might explain the reaction of some of the Indian supporters on those Facebook groups.

 

[BensGrandad]

Why dont people just let this go as totally irrelevant. Had 5 been given our approach to the final overs would have been totally different, it wasnt so the records show we won.

 

[drew]

Why dont people just let this go as totally irrelevant. Had 5 been given our approach to the final overs would have been totally different, it wasn't so the records show we won.

Nobody as far as I can see is demanding the result is overturned. We all know that had 5 been given the dynamics of the following balls would or could have been different. Exactly the same way we discuss penalties ad infinitum after the result. We all know that refs make mistakes and I assume we are all aware that results don't get overturned.

Are you saying we are not allowed any post match discussion anymore?

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Why dont people just let this go as totally irrelevant. Had 5 been given our approach to the final overs would have been totally different, it wasnt so the records show we won.

Most people have let it go.

But it is a talking point that will never go away.

 

[loco61]

World Champions!! … watched it again this afternoon! … so much fun!

 

[Audax]

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.

I'd hazard a guess that A. would be the product of unfamiliarity with the rule and its interpretation; given C, it's a very, very rare occasion when the rule is required so expecting the umpires to correctly rule on it on the spot is/was expecting too much (hence why Kumar should have no regrets).

I've umpired in a few club games. Had the exact same thing happened while I was umpiring, I would have called it 6. Having seen all the coverage since this event, I'd call it 5.

 

[northstandsteve]

Are we talking inches here, if Stokes had made his ground and the throw struck his bat presumably would have been six. I find it quite funny that England are on the winning side in this scenario, because if we had of lost as a result of 5 being given, there would have been meltdown all over the country, everyone against us etc..... Bit like the Albion and the apparent slowness of Transfers, NSC would be in meltdown if no further activity. !!

 

[Stat Brother]

SkySports Cricket now, Ben Stokes has just come out to bat.

Gonna watch for a bit but it's beginning to look like a lost cause, NZ are bowling really well.