This is why we dont go to the Kiwis forums, they are far too dignified in defeat. Fair play, pretty gutted for your lads, they played a great tournament, really classy side. Sincerely hope you can get your hands on the trophy before too long.
The argument that NZ would have won if Eng only received 5 not 6 for the deflection doesnt hold water either, because it too would have effected the rest of the game. Stokes might not have tried to bunt the final ball for a certain single if he needed a minimum of two, he might have leathered...
I completely believe that England wouldnt have thrown away their last two wickets just trying to get Stokes on strike if wickets were the main deciding factor in the case of a draw. Of course they wouldnt. Just like you Aussies knew that if you tied with SA in 1999 then you would win the match...
But England would not have lost their last two wickets if wickets had been part of the equation. They would have just had to tie the game as they were winning on all other methods that could have been used. Just like the Aussies did in 1999 vrs SA, you tied the game but the chosen method to...
Whilst I understand that many of you wanted England to lose, no complaints there, if you had made the final I would have been rooting for the Ziwis, you seemed to have missed a pretty important factor.
If wickets had been the first deciding factor in the case of a draw (not Super Over or...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.