Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
ICC Cricket World Cup 2019
Comments
-
I did get that lol .. my point is, crystal or not, England are not gonna do it and I fancy Australia to win the thing .. I backed them before the tournament and nothing has really made me regret that decision .. SO far that isChizz said:
No, my point is that England's task is now crystal clear and it's in their own hands. They "only" have to win the next four in a row.Lincsaddick said:
can't see it .. Oz for me even if the Kiwis beat them today .. change channel now ((:>)Chizz said:
Yep. And 4/4 from 4 very strong sides to win the cup.Lincsaddick said:so England need 2/2 from 2 very strong sides
1 -
did they not have any reviews left?PrincessFiona said:Why did they not review the not out decision when Wasim was on 1? Captain's decision not to
0 -
cant get over that appalling over from Gulbadin - and then he still chooses to bowl the 50th ??0
-
Maybe, I wasn't able to watch earlier. The dodgy overs were strange enough on their ownThe_President said:
did they not have any reviews left?PrincessFiona said:Why did they not review the not out decision when Wasim was on 1? Captain's decision not to0 -
I doubt if there will be a 'stewards' into this game .. Cricket has had enough scandal recently .. the powers that be will certainly not want any hint of corruption or fixes, even in circumstances as seemingly dodgy as this.0
-
The decision to bring himself on was much worse than the decision to bowl the final over. There's no way he should have brought himself on, they were completely in charge at that point. But, by the last over, they had lost it and the only thing he could do was bowl himself to try to rectify the appalling earlier decision.The_President said:cant get over that appalling over from Gulbadin - and then he still chooses to bowl the 50th ??1 -
If there was ever a 'dodgy' over that Gulbadin over was right up there.Lincsaddick said:I doubt if there will be a 'stewards' into this game .. Cricket has had enough scandal recently .. the powers that be will certainly not want any hint of corruption or fixes, even in circumstances as seemingly dodgy as this.
1 -
You wouldn't 'rectify' a 20 run over by bowling again.Chizz said:
The decision to bring himself on was much worse than the decision to bowl the final over. There's no way he should have brought himself on, they were completely in charge at that point. But, by the last over, they had lost it and the only thing he could do was bowl himself to try to rectify the appalling earlier decision.The_President said:cant get over that appalling over from Gulbadin - and then he still chooses to bowl the 50th ??
0 -
Someone on Wiki has changed Gulbadeen's name to 'Match Fixer' hahahahahah .. AND if true and not another false entry, named his birthplace as Lahore
EDIT .. now been changed back lol
1 -
As captain, you have to back yourself. He'd thrown it away with his atrocious over. So I can understand why he'd want to make up for his calamitous decision. The game was over by the start of the 50th over.The_President said:
You wouldn't 'rectify' a 20 run over by bowling again.Chizz said:
The decision to bring himself on was much worse than the decision to bowl the final over. There's no way he should have brought himself on, they were completely in charge at that point. But, by the last over, they had lost it and the only thing he could do was bowl himself to try to rectify the appalling earlier decision.The_President said:cant get over that appalling over from Gulbadin - and then he still chooses to bowl the 50th ??0 -
Sponsored links:
-
so, by it being 'over' (which it wasn't) by the 50th over means you bowl yourself after going for 20 the previous when you have bowlers with overs left who have gone for 4 an over ….nah, its bollox, and 'dodgy'Chizz said:
As captain, you have to back yourself. He'd thrown it away with his atrocious over. So I can understand why he'd want to make up for his calamitous decision. The game was over by the start of the 50th over.The_President said:
You wouldn't 'rectify' a 20 run over by bowling again.Chizz said:
The decision to bring himself on was much worse than the decision to bowl the final over. There's no way he should have brought himself on, they were completely in charge at that point. But, by the last over, they had lost it and the only thing he could do was bowl himself to try to rectify the appalling earlier decision.The_President said:cant get over that appalling over from Gulbadin - and then he still chooses to bowl the 50th ??
2 -
Lincsaddick said:Someone on Wiki has changed Gulbadeen's name to 'Match Fixer' hahahahahah .. AND if true and not another false entry, named his birthplace as Lahore
EDIT .. now been changed back lol
And the birth place wasn't changed in the main text
1 -
6 from 6 against spinners they been struggling to get.away in a WORLD CUP environment. Thats pressure on the batsmen would’ve been huge.Chizz said:
As captain, you have to back yourself. He'd thrown it away with his atrocious over. So I can understand why he'd want to make up for his calamitous decision. The game was over by the start of the 50th over.The_President said:
You wouldn't 'rectify' a 20 run over by bowling again.Chizz said:
The decision to bring himself on was much worse than the decision to bowl the final over. There's no way he should have brought himself on, they were completely in charge at that point. But, by the last over, they had lost it and the only thing he could do was bowl himself to try to rectify the appalling earlier decision.The_President said:cant get over that appalling over from Gulbadin - and then he still chooses to bowl the 50th ??
Seems like a very shortsighted comment.1 -
I totally agree. I hope they do look into it. Would not be right not toLaddick01 said:
6 from 6 against spinners they been struggling to get.away in a WORLD CUP environment. Thats pressure on the batsmen would’ve been huge.Chizz said:
As captain, you have to back yourself. He'd thrown it away with his atrocious over. So I can understand why he'd want to make up for his calamitous decision. The game was over by the start of the 50th over.The_President said:
You wouldn't 'rectify' a 20 run over by bowling again.Chizz said:
The decision to bring himself on was much worse than the decision to bowl the final over. There's no way he should have brought himself on, they were completely in charge at that point. But, by the last over, they had lost it and the only thing he could do was bowl himself to try to rectify the appalling earlier decision.The_President said:cant get over that appalling over from Gulbadin - and then he still chooses to bowl the 50th ??
Seems like a very shortsighted comment.0 -
looking into it would only be classed as racism.
0 -
Have we become that nation that assumes if we're knocked out of an event, it must have been because some foreigners were cheating? I hope not.5
-
Not what I am thinking at all. This is a stand alone opinion of what happened at the end of the game. In my case, mutually exclusive to what happens to England. The gorunds for looking in to it would have nothing to do with race and 100% to do with what happened. I would expect the same whatever teams were involvedChizz said:Have we become that nation that assumes if we're knocked out of an event, it must have been because some foreigners were cheating? I hope not.2 -
and the main text states he was born in Afghanistan .. such a shame that his behaviour has brought a very dark cloud of suspicion over the tournament. IF England lose out to this and despite my earlier post opining that I don't think the powers that be will investigate, the English press will be all over it like a rash when the tournament is done and dusted ..PrincessFiona said:Lincsaddick said:Someone on Wiki has changed Gulbadeen's name to 'Match Fixer' hahahahahah .. AND if true and not another false entry, named his birthplace as Lahore
EDIT .. now been changed back lol
And the birth place wasn't changed in the main text
Also remember the Pakistan team contains a player (Amir) who's done prison time for match fixing (a k a conspiracy to accept corrupt payments) and in my opinion, should never have been allowed back, especially as he is a VERY fine bowler ((:>)
0 -
Gulbadin should have kept the spinners on - end of. The game at that stage was very much in Afghanistan's favour, it was their's to lose. Not only was it a poor decision to replace pace off the ball with pace on, he further exacerbated that decision with a series of full tossses and length balls, with a wide thrown in for good measure. The game was lost by the time he came back to bowl the last over, but still managed to bowl a full toss, and then made a hash of collecting the ball when a run out was a distinct possibility.
Afghanistan were denied the victory that they deserved. I am sure that they will be analysing the reasons why they clutched defeat from the jaws of victory.1 -
What, wait, England were knocked out. Who knew.Chizz said:Have we become that nation that assumes if we're knocked out of an event, it must have been because some foreigners were cheating? I hope not.
Anyway, who would dare think that Pakistan would cheat ?
Ludicrous thought.....0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Explain what you mean by a "shortsighted comment". I have said Gulbadin shouldn't have come on to bowl the 46th over and he shouldn't have come back to bowl the last. But, in the context of the game, I think the first of these two mistakes was worse than the second. Which bit of that do you think is a "shortsighted comment"?Laddick01 said:
6 from 6 against spinners they been struggling to get.away in a WORLD CUP environment. Thats pressure on the batsmen would’ve been huge.Chizz said:
As captain, you have to back yourself. He'd thrown it away with his atrocious over. So I can understand why he'd want to make up for his calamitous decision. The game was over by the start of the 50th over.The_President said:
You wouldn't 'rectify' a 20 run over by bowling again.Chizz said:
The decision to bring himself on was much worse than the decision to bowl the final over. There's no way he should have brought himself on, they were completely in charge at that point. But, by the last over, they had lost it and the only thing he could do was bowl himself to try to rectify the appalling earlier decision.The_President said:cant get over that appalling over from Gulbadin - and then he still chooses to bowl the 50th ??
Seems like a very shortsighted comment.
And, while we're at it, would you have backed Shinwari to come back on and bowl the last over and conceded four or fewer?
0 -
As far as looking into the game is concerned, if the ICC anti-corruption team feel that the ending merits an element of investigation, they should do this to preserve the integrity of the international game, irrespective of which teams were involved.0
-
At best it's shocking captaincy by Gulbadin which has cost Afghanistan a famous victory, their first ever in a World Cup1
-
Do we ?Chizz said:
No, my point is that England's task is now crystal clear and it's in their own hands. They "only" have to win the next four in a row.Lincsaddick said:
can't see it .. Oz for me even if the Kiwis beat them today .. change channel now ((:>)Chizz said:
Yep. And 4/4 from 4 very strong sides to win the cup.Lincsaddick said:so England need 2/2 from 2 very strong sides
I haven't checked but if Bangladesh beat Pakistan, wouldn't we only have to win one of the next two games ?0 -
You said the game was over. 6 off of 6 isn’t over especially in a high pressure environment. That is a shortsighted comment.Chizz said:
Explain what you mean by a "shortsighted comment". I have said Gulbadin shouldn't have come on to bowl the 46th over and he shouldn't have come back to bowl the last. But, in the context of the game, I think the first of these two mistakes was worse than the second. Which bit of that do you think is a "shortsighted comment"?Laddick01 said:
6 from 6 against spinners they been struggling to get.away in a WORLD CUP environment. Thats pressure on the batsmen would’ve been huge.Chizz said:
As captain, you have to back yourself. He'd thrown it away with his atrocious over. So I can understand why he'd want to make up for his calamitous decision. The game was over by the start of the 50th over.The_President said:
You wouldn't 'rectify' a 20 run over by bowling again.Chizz said:
The decision to bring himself on was much worse than the decision to bowl the final over. There's no way he should have brought himself on, they were completely in charge at that point. But, by the last over, they had lost it and the only thing he could do was bowl himself to try to rectify the appalling earlier decision.The_President said:cant get over that appalling over from Gulbadin - and then he still chooses to bowl the 50th ??
Seems like a very shortsighted comment.
And, while we're at it, would you have backed Shinwari to come back on and bowl the last over and conceded four or fewer?
Whilst the spinners may not have won it, the decision to bowl yourself again is either incredibly stupid or dodgy.1 -
Is this a serious suggestion? The worst team in the tournament has lost their eighth game in a row, against a team that ranks four places higher, and the ICC needs to "investigate" it?Isawsummersplay said:As far as looking into the game is concerned, if the ICC anti-corruption team feel that the ending merits an element of investigation, they should do this to preserve the integrity of the international game, irrespective of which teams were involved.0 -
I am not sure why you are missing the obvious point; it is not the result but the on balance highly suspicious way it happened. Can you really not see how highly suspicious it is?Chizz said:
Is this a serious suggestion? The worst team in the tournament has lost their eighth game in a row, against a team that ranks four places higher, and the ICC needs to "investigate" it?Isawsummersplay said:As far as looking into the game is concerned, if the ICC anti-corruption team feel that the ending merits an element of investigation, they should do this to preserve the integrity of the international game, irrespective of which teams were involved.3 -
Very much a serious suggestion, a considered view based on 11 years spent working in professional cricket, which included staging international and World Cup games.
You should also note the use of the phrase 'if the ICC anti-corruption team feel that the ending merits an element of investigation'.
I did not say they need to.0 -
IF Pakistan beat Bangla they will be on 11 points .. England can get to 12 by winning both their games .. a win and no result will be enough for England on net run rate .. PROBABLY, depending on scores in the 3 matches at issue .. potentially, though very unlikely, England could overtake either India or NZ ((:>)Covered End said:
Do we ?Chizz said:
No, my point is that England's task is now crystal clear and it's in their own hands. They "only" have to win the next four in a row.Lincsaddick said:
can't see it .. Oz for me even if the Kiwis beat them today .. change channel now ((:>)Chizz said:
Yep. And 4/4 from 4 very strong sides to win the cup.Lincsaddick said:so England need 2/2 from 2 very strong sides
I haven't checked but if Bangladesh beat Pakistan, wouldn't we only have to win one of the next two games ?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/world-cup/table
0 -
Articulate the "suspicion". Are you suggesting that Gulbadin threw the match? And if you are, can you not see how preposterous that appears, compared to the fact that good team beats bad team by taking six off the last over?PrincessFiona said:
I am not sure why you are missing the obvious point; it is not the result but the on balance highly suspicious way it happened. Can you really not see how highly suspicious it is?Chizz said:
Is this a serious suggestion? The worst team in the tournament has lost their eighth game in a row, against a team that ranks four places higher, and the ICC needs to "investigate" it?Isawsummersplay said:As far as looking into the game is concerned, if the ICC anti-corruption team feel that the ending merits an element of investigation, they should do this to preserve the integrity of the international game, irrespective of which teams were involved.1
