Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
ODI World Cup.

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Nick's Sports Bar
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 100, 101, 102, 103  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:25 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

NZ are in danger of becoming the Netherlands of international cricket (except, of course, that Cruyff plays for Australia).
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:58 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Well that’s weird but YAHOOOOO
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Bucks5 Capricorn

Nicky D - Parting the red sea


Joined: 23 Mar 2002


PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 8:21 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

How is it that boundaries have higher value than wickets lost? Seems strange that NZ didn't win when they lost fewer wickets across both innings.
_________________
How would Siri know when to answer "Hey Siri" unless it is listening in to everything you say?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Jezza Taurus

2023 PREMIERS!


Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End

PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 9:28 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Were the Kiwis robbed?

https://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/cricket-world-cup/2019-cricket-world-cup-were-new-zealand-robbed-after-losing-tied-final-to-hosts-england-ng-b881260474z

_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 |
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 9:41 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

A far better rule would be to keep going.

If it's tied after the Super Over, have another one.

Think of penalty shoot-outs in football (soccer). A penalty shoot-out is not ideal, of course, but officials don't end it by counting the corners in the match. They just keep going. In practice, it's rare for penalty shoot-outs to last too long. Does anyone know the record for the longest WC penalty shoot-out?

In the next Super Over, teams should have to choose a new bowler, and three batsman who did not appear at the crease in the first Super Over. Whoever is chosen at number 3 in the first Super Over can be chosen to open (or be number 3 again) in the second Super Over, as long as no wickets have been lost in the first. (In the match, they didn't have to nominate the number 3 ahead of time, so we don't know for sure who they would have been.)

The order of the overs would keep alternating, so the fielding side remains in the field.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:08 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

What about just awarding it to the team with the most players born in the country they represent? Or the least players who have been charged with crimes or the least players who have disputed an umpire’s decision when there was no review left?

If you’re going to press on with the Super Over thing, you would certainly change bowlers - but if your batsmen weren’t dismissed, shouldn’t you just be able to keep on with them?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:16 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Actually, shouldn’t you only be allowed to continue down your batting order in the Super Over? It’s a bit of a joke to let the English go out and bat another over when they have no wickets left? Surely, they should have to bowl out the last two NZ batsmen for 0 runs before qualifying to send out their already-dismissed flat track bullies?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:27 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Certainly wickets lost is a better countback criterion than boundaries hit, which is borderline silly.


As for batsman and bowler rules for Super Overs, it depends what you want to reward. If you want to reward depth of batting and bowling, you should try to involve more of them. It is a team sport, after all. In the football penalty shoot-out example, the penalty taker isn't allowed to take all penalties as long as he doesn't miss. He can come back for another go, but only after they've cycled through the others.


The issue of fake representatives of a country (in cricket and in all sport) is worthy of a separate post, if not a separate dedicated thread. (A famous American sportsman once said of a fellow competitor who suddenly became "English", "He's as English as I am Nigerian.")
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:49 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

chill guys! we are all collingwood fans here, you should be used to getting robbed in a grand final!!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:00 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, I was going to leave this to a future post, but now you mention it, I'll say watching the match felt in many ways like watching a Collingwood Grand Final, in honesty.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:11 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Speaking of Collingwood GFs, I'd say the best solution (which the ICC would hate) is to copy what happened in the 2010 AFL GF and have another full 50-over game the next day, which was the reserve day for rain.

Keeping on going with more Super Overs (which the ICC might accept) would follow not just football penalty shoot-outs, but also golf. (Someone mentioned this on radio, with the British Open coming up.) They don't do the 18th hole once as the playoff and then give up and do a countback on the number of birdies. (That would be stupid, because if you have more birdies, it just means you also have more bogies.) They go and keep doing the 18th hole as many times as it takes to split the leaders.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:21 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Golf Today says:

"The Major Championships, however, historically used longer playoff formats, although the US Open is now the only event that calls for an 18 hole format*. 36 hole playoffs were the norm for all the major championships in the early years, and sometimes had to be prolonged to 37 or even 38 holes, when sudden death was needed after a 36 hole tie.

* Modern playoff formats in the other Majors:
• The Masters introduced sudden-death playoffs in 1976, the first taking place in 1979.
• The US PGA Championship introduced sudden-death in 1976, the first taking place in 1977.
• The Open Championship introduced a four-hole playoff in 1985, the first taking place in 1989."


https://golftoday.co.uk/the-longest-playoffs-in-professional-golf/


The 18-hole playoff for the US Open is getting close to the old "GF Replay" and my preference for a second ODI WC final on the rain day (with Super Overs if they are still tied then).
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:39 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

On football penalty shoot-outs:

"Penalty shootouts have been used to determine the winners of World Cup knockout matches since 1982, in the event that teams are level after extra time. Teams face-off in a best of five contest with additional "sudden death" penalties taken if scores are level after five apiece.

Prior to the kicks a coin is flipped to determine which team goes first. This flip is actually quite important according to a study by Ignacio Palacios-Huerta from the London School of Economics because the team that takes the first penalty wins 60 per cent of the time.

FIFA have been trialing the ABBA system of penalty taking - as seen in last season's Community Shield - in an attempt to iron out this advantage but the traditional ABAB pattern is still in place for this World Cup."
(i.e. 2018.)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-cup/2018/07/11/definitive-guide-penalty-shootout-rules-techniques-win1/



For Super Overs, I reckon the chasing side may be better off, because they know exactly what they need to score. If we had unlimited sudden-death Super Overs, it'd be in the ABBA system, as it was for the single Super Over (probably because they wanted to minimise change-over logistics by keeping the fielding side in the field for the next over).



The FIFA football museum says:

"At World Cups there had been a provision for replays up until the 1958 finals in Sweden, but four years later in Chile, drawn matches in the quarter and semi-finals would have been decided by the drawing of lots.

That doesn’t sound very fair!

It wasn’t and thankfully it never happened at a World Cup. The Final itself could have also been decided on lots in both 1962 and 1966, because although there was the provision for a replay for the Final until 1982, if the second game ended in a draw, there was no arrangement for a third game."


http://www.fifamuseum.com/stories/blog/why-the-lottery-that-is-penalty-shoot-outs-were-introduced-2610606/


Yep, replays are best (though the pathetic ICC would never consider them; it's claimed the TV people don't like them) --- but you need the unlimited sudden-death Super Overs in the WC rules in the event of the second game being tied too.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 9:25 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Yep, replays are best (though the pathetic ICC would never consider them; it's claimed the TV people don't like them)

sitting through one match is bad enough!!

_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 9:29 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think it's wise to have a World Cup in England with a replay scheduled for the "reserve" day. In a country where it rains every second day in summer (unless you're playing in Manchester, in which case it rains every day), if you can bowl 102 overs on one day, the chances of a washout or rain-affected game the next are ridiculously high.

Of course, important cricket games (World Cups, any match involving Australia etc) should never be played in such a silly climate - but that's for another thread.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Nick's Sports Bar All times are GMT + 11 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 100, 101, 102, 103  Next
Page 101 of 103   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group