ICC teaches FIFA. No Penalties! If game is tied after ET team with most corners wins

[mr_mister]

5 in 50 tied super overs. That's more frequent than I thought when making my point


After so much time and money spent on this 6 week tournament i'd want a better than 90% chance of my tiebreaker working properly


What % do we give our astronauts of survival when we send them to space generally?

 

[stephen]

Yeah over 6 balls the standard deviation would be quite low when there's only 6 potential scores per ball. I imagine the mean would be around 14 and the standard deviation around 3. That means a huge portion of scores will end up within a range of 7 runs. 10% chance of a tie feels pretty close to accurate.

 

[cnerd123]

5 in 50 tied super overs. That's more frequent than I thought when making my point


After so much time and money spent on this 6 week tournament i'd want a better than 90% chance of my tiebreaker working properly


What % do we give our astronauts of survival when we send them to space generally?

But that's why the boundary count is the final tie-breaker. You first need to have a tied ODI, then a tied super-over (which doesn't happen a 90% of the time), and then the boundary count. In the freak occurrence of something that has literally never happened before (albeit without much of a sample size), you go to boundary count.

I disagree with using the boundary count too, but you can't blame anyone for thinking that it would not come to that. That's not an excuse for using boundary counts, but for why they probably didn't think too much about it to begin with. Lots of people knew this would be used to determine the winner in a situation like this, and no one said a single thing in the lead up to the WC. Fans, players, media, coaches, etc. The entire cricketing community was blind to it, so fair enough that the event organisers overlooked it too IMO.

But i'm apparently an apologist for the establishment so who cares what i think.

 

[mr_mister]

But i'm apparently an apologist for the establishment so who cares what i think.



You do what you're told like a good boy but we need mavericks today. Umpires around the world should lay down their clicky over counter things til justice is done

 

[cnerd123]

But i'm apparently an apologist for the establishment so who cares what i think.



You do what you're told like a good boy but we need mavericks today. Umpires around the world should lay down their clicky over counter things til justice is done

but justice was done. England won the World Cup.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I disagree with using the boundary count too, but you can't blame anyone for thinking that it would not come to that. .

What an idiotic post. Of course you can. Just because something isn't very likely to happen, you half-ass the rule? You absolutely can blame the people who wrote the rule. They didnt think it through.

 

[cnerd123]

What an idiotic post. Of course you can. Just because something isn't very likely to happen, you half-ass the rule? You absolutely can blame the people who wrote the rule. They didnt think it through.

the rule has been in place in T20 cricket for a while now, and was announced a long time ago for the WC. Not a single fan, player, coach, commentator or journalist had a problem with it. Every person on this planet Earth who cares about this sport had no qualms with this being used to ultimately decide the World Cup winner until it was actually used.

Yea, look, I'm a lot more forgiving of the administrators than you are in this scenario. The ball deflecting off the bat thing is something that has happened before and has been spoken about for decades now, that's a Law you can rightfully criticize the MCC/ICC for not being proactive enough to change (or explain the reasoning behind not changing it). But not a single soul foresaw the World Cup being determined in this manner. Assuming the administrators of the sport have any more foresight than literally every other person who makes a living from the sport, or who follows the sport obsessively, is expecting a bit too much from them IMO. They're not super human.

 

[TheJediBrah]

But that's why the boundary count is the final tie-breaker. You first need to have a tied ODI, then a tied super-over (which doesn't happen a 90% of the time), and then the boundary count. In the freak occurrence of something that has literally never happened before (albeit without much of a sample size), you go to boundary count.

I disagree with using the boundary count too, but you can't blame anyone for thinking that it would not come to that. That's not an excuse for using boundary counts, but for why they probably didn't think too much about it to begin with. Lots of people knew this would be used to determine the winner in a situation like this, and no one said a single thing in the lead up to the WC. Fans, players, media, coaches, etc. The entire cricketing community was blind to it, so fair enough that the event organisers overlooked it too IMO.

But i'm apparently an apologist for the establishment so who cares what i think.

wrong again

the rule has been in place in T20 cricket for a while now, and was announced a long time ago for the WC. Not a single fan, player, coach, commentator or journalist had a problem with it. Every person on this planet Earth who cares about this sport had no qualms with this being used to ultimately decide the World Cup winner until it was actually used.

because virtually no one knew it existed. You realise that right?

 

[cnerd123]

You speak for yourself TJB, as you usually do. You do not speak for everyone else.

Either people knew and didn't realise it would lead to this, or people did not know and didn't care enough to find out. Either way, if the whole cricket community can overlook this, then I can forgive the administrators for overlooking it too. They're no better than anyone else. They're just people as well.

Don't confuse this for me saying that this was the right method to decide this or anything. All I'm doing is offering some sympathy to the admins. Countering some of the hate they're getting here. These things happen. Just got to hope they learn from this and make changes moving ahead.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Either people knew and didn't realise it would lead to this, or people did not know and didn't care enough to find out. Either way, if the whole cricket community can overlook this, then I can forgive the administrators for overlooking it too. They're no better than anyone else. They're just people as well.

What garbage. It is literally their job to care enough about this to do it right.

Of all the people to have sympathy for in this situation, the administrators who half assed their job aren't the ones to deserve it.

 

[TheJediBrah]

You speak for yourself TJB, as you usually do. You do not speak for everyone else.

Nah I'm speaking for the vaaaaaast majority. That's the point.

Either people knew and didn't realise it would lead to this, or people did not know and didn't care enough to find out.

pretty much this. It's not "people's" job to monitor it. Someone is paid to do it.

Either way, if the whole cricket community can overlook this, then I can forgive the administrators for overlooking it too. They're no better than anyone else. They're just people as well.

They are different. It is their job that they are getting paid to do. How do you not get this?

Don't confuse this for me saying that this was the right method to decide this or anything. All I'm doing is offering some sympathy to the admins. Countering some of the hate they're getting here. These things happen. Just got to hope they learn from this and make changes moving ahead.

That's fair. I wouldn't advocate for anyone to lose their job or even be punished severely. All I said was that it was a really dumb decision. Which you decided to tell me was wrong.

 

[cnerd123]

What garbage. It is literally their job to care enough about this to do it right.

Of all the people to have sympathy for in this situation, the administrators who half assed their job aren't the ones to deserve it.

You're assuming they half assed it when it's completely plausible they just screwed up. Think about the magnitude of work that goes into running a tournament like the World Cup, or just global cricket in general. It's huge. There are literally hundreds of people working to hold everything together. To me, it's very likely they either overlooked how this situation could play out, or they screwed up when planning. It's atleast as likely as them 'half assing' their job.

Everyone in every field in every walk of life screws up. Screwing up is human. In cricket itself - players screw up, coaches screw up, match-officials screw up, groundsmen screw up. Screwing up is part of the human appeal of cricket. And so some people screwed up here. It happens. And as far as screwups go, failing to see a potential outcome that literally every other human on Earth failed to see as well...that's a fairly understandable screw up.

Trent Boult screwed up in the final, yet the thread dedicated for that is filled with loads of sympathy for him. Yet over here, no one wants to offer up any sympathy to the administrators. CW seems to have this deep seated belief that people who dedicate their lives and careers to taking care of the sport are the enemies for some reason. It's not a school of thought I buy into, sorry.

 

[cnerd123]

Nah I'm speaking for the vaaaaaast majority. That's the point.

pretty much this. It's not "people's" job to monitor it. Someone is paid to do it.

They are different. It is their job that they are getting paid to do. How do you not get this?

That's fair. I wouldn't advocate for anyone to lose their job or even be punished severely. All I said was that it was a really dumb decision. Which you decided to tell me was wrong.

Journalist, support and coaching staff, administrators within every cricket board in the planet, and even the players themselves are all paid to care about the sport. I don't know for a fact what the ICC's dealings with the member cricket boards and the match officials for this particular tournament were, but I do know that there are open lines of communication to raise up concerns with things like playing conditions in major tournaments. These are circulated to every playing country and there is an open channel for discussion. Now, maybe the BCCI, ECB, NZC, etc all did make a stink about this before the tournament, and maybe the ICC just ignored it and pressed on. Plausible. But it's also plausible that they didn't spot this either. And no one in the cricket media (that get paid to know all this stuff) talked about it either. Which is my point. Every person on Earth paid to care about this, at whatever level, failed to see it happening. That's why I think it is an understandable, and imo forgivable, error.

You seem to agree with that too.

 

[OverratedSanity]

To me, it's very likely they either overlooked how this situation could play out

It is literally impossible to overlook it. If was overlooked, there's be nothing in the rulebook about what's supposed to be done when a super over was tied. They just didn't think it through properly and arrived at a very poor solution.

 

[cnerd123]

It is literally impossible to overlook it. If was overlooked, there's be nothing in the rulebook about what's supposed to be done when a super over was tied. They just didn't think it through properly and arrived at a very poor solution.

yea look we're saying the same thing now. The people who wrote the rule obviously thought about it to some extent. I said they overlooked 'how the situation could play out', which is basically what you said - 'didn't think it through properly'. We're in agreement that that they clearly arrived at a poor solution.

But the people who wrote this down weren't the only ones aware of this rule. This was read and approved by every participating country before they agreed to take part. These were published on their website for free, easily accessible to any human on Earth, from day one of the tournament, if not before that. The Boundary Count rule itself has been used alongside the Super Over in T20 cricket for quite some time now (didn't the IPL use it too?)

If the entire planet could not foresee this sort of ending to a World Cup final, then it's fair enough that the organizers failed to see it happening too. That's all.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Journalist, support and coaching staff, administrators within every cricket board in the planet, and even the players themselves are all paid to care about the sport. I don't know for a fact what the ICC's dealings with the member cricket boards and the match officials for this particular tournament were, but I do know that there are open lines of communication to raise up concerns with things like playing conditions in major tournaments. These are circulated to every playing country and there is an open channel for discussion. Now, maybe the BCCI, ECB, NZC, etc all did make a stink about this before the tournament, and maybe the ICC just ignored it and pressed on. Plausible. But it's also plausible that they didn't spot this either. And no one in the cricket media (that get paid to know all this stuff) talked about it either. Which is my point. Every person on Earth paid to care about this, at whatever level, failed to see it happening. That's why I think it is an understandable, and imo forgivable, error.

You seem to agree with that too.

I just said it was forgivable. Literally my only point is that it was dumb. And that it was an error. And ICC (or whoever) needs to learn from it.

 

[91Jmay]

I can't actually believe people think sharing the trophy would in any way be a good result?

I 100% get the thought behind playing Super Overs till the cows come home or finding another tie breaker that isn't something like boundaries or wickets but you can't share the World Cup ffs unless weather literally forces you too.

 

[stephen]

Agree with the pom on this one. Keep playing super overs, or, if you can't, use a meaningful metric like who won the previous match up, who finished higher on the table or net run rate.

It's not rocket surgery.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I can't actually believe people think sharing the trophy would in any way be a good result?

It's only one guy on this forum posting his petition, that's it. Which is the kind of thing this forum would be better off without, like England and a 5th fast bowler.

 

[Flem274*]

i think the boundaries meme just caps the jammier aspects of the final where england did get the rub of the green on every 50/50 call, and dharmasena didnt know the rules

if it was india in our place erasmus wouldn't have a job ever again. both umpires would be bucknor 2.0