FootballNews

Obviously we had the easier draw in the semi final, just hope the lads don't get it as easy in the final. The fans pay their money to see a decent game of cricket, not these miss matched games. Starc nearly had a century. Bring him on from both ends. The aussies must have had their sandpaper taken off them at the gate.

MegaBonus wrote:Devasting opening bowling spell by the Poms set up the win....should go on and win it now. Must learn to accept the umpires decision though.

Hard when you get one that bad though. Hope he ripped into Bairstow when he got back in the changing rooms.

Well someone is going to win their first ever ODI World Cup, so either way we will be streets ahead still. :wink:

Bomber wrote:Well someone is going to win their first ever ODI World Cup, so either way we will be streets ahead still. :wink:

MegaBonus wrote:Devasting opening bowling spell by the Poms set up the win....should go on and win it now. Must learn to accept the umpires decision though.

Have to blame Bairstow for the Roy dismissal, why did he challenge the lbw when he was plumb out?

MegaBonus wrote:Devasting opening bowling spell by the Poms set up the win....should go on and win it now. Must learn to accept the umpires decision though.

As soon as Finch & Warner were out cheaply I knew Aussies were in trouble.
Stoinis, Handscombe and Maxwell - what the?
Why wasn't Wade used instead of Stoinis/Maxwell

Great to see Smith Stick it to the poms and that run-out by Buttler.... the ball went through his legs!

England bowlers were amazing, Woakes what a spell. And to think he only bowled 8 overs!

Great to see the "lack" of sportsmanship from Jofra.
He couldn't be bothered to check up on Carey after he was hit with a high ball.
Thankfully the rest of the English team are not like him.


Best team won on the day, and both teams have 1-1, but the poms won the match that counted.

when was the last time that the 2 top teams after the minor rounds be both knocked out in semi's?

Michael wrote:

MegaBonus wrote:Devasting opening bowling spell by the Poms set up the win....should go on and win it now. Must learn to accept the umpires decision though.

As soon as Finch & Warner were out cheaply I knew Aussies were in trouble.
Stoinis, Handscombe and Maxwell - what the?
Why wasn't Wade used instead of Stoinis/Maxwell

Great to see Smith Stick it to the poms and that run-out by Buttler.... the ball went through his legs!

England bowlers were amazing, Woakes what a spell. And to think he only bowled 8 overs!

Great to see the "lack" of sportsmanship from Jofra.
He couldn't be bothered to check up on Carey after he was hit with a high ball.
Thankfully the rest of the English team are not like him.


Best team won on the day, and both teams have 1-1, but the poms won the match that counted.

when was the last time that the 2 top teams after the minor rounds be both knocked out in semi's?

See some of the Indians complaning about the finals format not giving enough avantage to the top side in the group stage.

Game was won in the first ten overs by Englands bowlers.

Very poor form by Jofra not checking on Carey after he was hit, no doubt the usual suspects will defend him.

Carey catching his helmet so quickly was quite amazing. Probably our player of the tournament.

Ka ma te ka ma te...................let's see a Haka before the final. :wink:

ozzie owl

See some of the Indians complaning about the finals format not giving enough avantage to the top side in the group stage.

love seeing them fail....it was because of them that we have this elongated format...a couple of tournaments ago they failed to get out of the group stage which meant millions were lost in TV advertising revenue and their board complained....

Could have had 1v2 (winner straight to final) and 3v4 - loser out and winner plays loser of 1v2 as a prelim final. Format didn't bother me too much though - went a bit long if anything.
Ideal would be 4 groups of 4 (include Ireland, Scotland, Zimbabwe & Netherlands/Canada) - top team each group plays runner-up of other group in quarter finals, then semis etc.
Where's the next one being held?

Bomber wrote:Could have had 1v2 (winner straight to final) and 3v4 - loser out and winner plays loser of 1v2 as a prelim final. Format didn't bother me too much though - went a bit long if anything.
Ideal would be 4 groups of 4 (include Ireland, Scotland, Zimbabwe & Netherlands/Canada) - top team each group plays runner-up of other group in quarter finals, then semis etc.
Where's the next one being held?

India 9th Feb to 26th March 2023 .

Bomber wrote:Could have had 1v2 (winner straight to final) and 3v4 - loser out and winner plays loser of 1v2 as a prelim final. Format didn't bother me too much though - went a bit long if anything.
Ideal would be 4 groups of 4 (include Ireland, Scotland, Zimbabwe & Netherlands/Canada) - top team each group plays runner-up of other group in quarter finals, then semis etc.
Where's the next one being held?

Bollocks, the advantage is you play the lowest team.

The win you have when you don't win. Cant blame the poms from taking it though. Should be the team that lost fewest wickets after all that.

If the semifinal can have a second day why not the final have a replay?

It all came down to luck in the end but a cracking game of cricket!

Some points to note:
- Eraismus is terrible - 2 very contentious LBW decisions both falling in favour of England - how he gave Roy not out first ball is ridiculous but luckily Roy sucked enough after that not to make an impact
- Trent Boult will be kicking himself - his 'Super Over' over was no good and that catch he took he should have been more aware of the rope and just thrown in to Guptill as soon as he took the first step back
- I've never seen the ball hit the batsman and go for a boundary like that and for it to happen in the final over and basically ensure England not lose was unbelievable!

- Also GIAE was correct in his prediction (except he did say England would beat NZ in the final and while technically they won the World Cup the game ended in a tie)

Frank Costanza wrote:
- Also GIAE was correct in his prediction (except he did say England would beat NZ in the final and while technically they won the World Cup the game ended in a tie)

Depends on how he placed the bet.

But yes, that game surely tops that semi-final tie Aus v SA now. You couldn't write a script like that.

Watch the All Blacks make up for it in the Rugby WC now. :wink:

that game was bottle of shiraz insane feel sorry for kiwis a bit when they didn't really lose

Eyjafjallajökull wrote:If the semifinal can have a second day why not the final have a replay?

Because it wasn't drawn/tied and it finished with a winner wthin the regulations.

poms have now caught up to sri lanka , well done

well, it did take a Kiwi to beat the Kiwis...

Dave now from No 9 wrote:poms have now caught up to sri lanka , well done

And still waiting for aus to win both the T20 and ODI competitions. aus clearly haven’t mastered all forms of the game.

MegaBonus wrote:well, it did take a Kiwi to beat the Kiwis...

I am sure he was very English when his court case was gong on. No Aussie then called him a kiwi.

The convicts must be hurting bad, very bad. To have a new one ripped in the semi like that & by 8 wickets too. Oh, the pain, then to see England go on to be World Champions. But it's ok aussies, maybe it will make the Ashes a bit more of a contest for us. Perhaps you aussies should take note of the way New Zealand conducted themselves after the final too.

B.Toomer wrote:The convicts must be hurting bad, very bad. To have a new one ripped in the semi like that & by 8 wickets too. Oh, the pain, then to see England go on to be World Champions. But it's ok aussies, maybe it will make the Ashes a bit more of a contest for us. Perhaps you aussies should take note of the way New Zealand conducted themselves after the final too.

Especially the New Zealander that won Man Of The Match....he looked stoked !

How did England bat a super over when they had no wickets in hand?

Chiko Roll wrote:How did England bat a super over when they had no wickets in hand?

The same way Geoff Hurst scored without the ball crossing the line...

Chiko Roll wrote:How did England bat a super over when they had no wickets in hand?

because that's not how super overs work

Talk Is Cheap wrote:

Chiko Roll wrote:How did England bat a super over when they had no wickets in hand?

The same way Geoff Hurst scored without the ball crossing the line...

Dodgy officials.

God is an Englishman wrote:

Chiko Roll wrote:How did England bat a super over when they had no wickets in hand?

because that's not how super overs work

I don't know know the rules, but would have thought it would be like extra time/penalties, where you continue on with the players you have on the park.