The World Cup Final - Who Will Win? - Page 3

irfan · 27-04-2007, 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chaminda_00

Haha bowl out, don't know what would be worse having Tait in your side or Dilhara...

Mick Lewis

GIMH · 27-04-2007, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

Dire.

How anyone could think that would be a fair way to see who had the better cricket team is beyond me. I'd just award the Cup to whoever finished higher after the Super 8 stage in the event of a tied final - or even just have joint-winners.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pasag

Preferably a re-match. But I don't mind joint winners either. A bowl-out to decide a World Cup final is the epitome of direness, imo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LA ICE-E

Why? I think it's exciting. A tournament doesn't have to be fair. Also, how is it not fair it's the same rules for both teams. Penalty shoots the best part of soccer and i think bowl out's a exciting part of cricket.

A replay is the best bet, failing that a shared trophy. I don't agree with alternative methods of selecting a winner, be it a bowl-out, or the side that finished higher in the Super 8. Neither of them have any relevance to the match.

And penalty shoots aren't the best part of soccer. They're the worst part of football.

Jono · 27-04-2007, 07:51 AM

Australia.

FaaipDeOiad · 27-04-2007, 10:31 AM

I'd be seriously pissed off if the WC was decided by a bowl out. I can't imagine a worse thing for cricket. Penalty shoot outs are awful in football, but they're a necessary evil of sorts, and at least they test a genuinely relevant skill in the game. Players actually have to take and defend penalties in football, they don't have to bowl at stumps without a batsman in cricket, and to decide matches via that is a joke. They may as well arm wrestle. Obviously most people realise this already, but if that's actually part of the rules, someone somewhere must think it's a good idea, and that just blows my mind.

Jono · 27-04-2007, 10:49 AM

I refuse to believe, no matter what Wikipedia says, that by some instance of a tie, the ICC would have the balls in ending what they believe to be cricket's biggest stage in a bowl-off. I simply cannot fathom this occurring.

marc71178 · 27-04-2007, 05:40 PM

But then again, considering the likelihood of a tie, is it ever likely to come into force?

SJS · 27-04-2007, 10:43 PM

Its amazing that the difference between those who say tie and those who say Sri Lanka is just 2. Considering that less than 1% of all ODI's have been tied (22 out of 2580) what does this tell us of Sri Lanka's chances ??

..... or of the seriousness of those voting for a tie , undersigned included

Athlai · 28-04-2007, 12:50 AM

What about cricket overtime on the event of a tie?

An extra 5 overs. Each main bowler gets one over. With only a certain amount of wickets in hand, like 2? That could be fun, I could see how it could into a slog fest but with wickets more valuable you never know.

Jono · 28-04-2007, 01:43 AM

Nah better if you had to send in your number 11 to face two overs. Whichever number 11 scored more runs in those two overs wins.

McGrath vs. Murali in a batting contest would be awesome.

howardj · 28-04-2007, 02:18 AM

We will, I reckon.

C'mon Macca. Go out in a bullying blaze of glory!

Salamuddin · 28-04-2007, 02:37 AM

C'mon Sri Lanka --- hand Mcgrath a defeat in his last game.

cover drive man · 28-04-2007, 09:06 AM

9 people vote tie.

PhoenixFire · 28-04-2007, 09:07 AM

and......

Trigger_Tiger · 28-04-2007, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamee999

Simple question - simple answer

Considering the weather's erratic behavior, it doesn't seem so simple ATM

!

View Poll Results: Who do you predict will win the World Cup Final
Australia	37	63.79%
Sri Lanka	12	20.69%
Tie	9	15.52%
Voters: 58. You may not vote on this poll

27-04-2007, 10:31 AM	#34 (permalink)
FaaipDeOiad Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 18,682	I'd be seriously pissed off if the WC was decided by a bowl out. I can't imagine a worse thing for cricket. Penalty shoot outs are awful in football, but they're a necessary evil of sorts, and at least they test a genuinely relevant skill in the game. Players actually have to take and defend penalties in football, they don't have to bowl at stumps without a batsman in cricket, and to decide matches via that is a joke. They may as well arm wrestle. Obviously most people realise this already, but if that's actually part of the rules, someone somewhere must think it's a good idea, and that just blows my mind. __________________ I know a place where a royal flush Can never beat a pair

27-04-2007, 05:40 PM	#36 (permalink)
marc71178 Eyes not spreadsheets Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: England Posts: 56,343	But then again, considering the likelihood of a tie, is it ever likely to come into force? __________________ marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good! Anyone want to join the Society? Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

28-04-2007, 02:37 AM	#41 (permalink)
Salamuddin International Debutant Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Lakemba, Sydney Posts: 2,074	C'mon Sri Lanka --- hand Mcgrath a defeat in his last game. __________________ Zinedine Zidane is the greatest footballer ever ! Richard Dickinson - you little beauty !!!!

28-04-2007, 09:06 AM	#42 (permalink)
cover drive man International Captain Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Liverpool, England Posts: 7,049	9 people vote tie. __________________ Everyone wants to change the world, noone wants to change himself. -Tolstoy

27-04-2007, 07:51 AM	#33 (permalink)
Jono Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Virat Kohli Posts: 47,499	Australia.

27-04-2007, 10:49 AM	#35 (permalink)
Jono Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Virat Kohli Posts: 47,499	I refuse to believe, no matter what Wikipedia says, that by some instance of a tie, the ICC would have the balls in ending what they believe to be cricket's biggest stage in a bowl-off. I simply cannot fathom this occurring.

27-04-2007, 10:43 PM	#37 (permalink)
SJS Hall of Fame Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Mumbai India Posts: 19,170	Its amazing that the difference between those who say tie and those who say Sri Lanka is just 2. Considering that less than 1% of all ODI's have been tied (22 out of 2580) what does this tell us of Sri Lanka's chances ?? ..... or of the seriousness of those voting for a tie , undersigned included

28-04-2007, 12:50 AM	#38 (permalink)
Athlai Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Wellywood, NZ Posts: 26,001	What about cricket overtime on the event of a tie? An extra 5 overs. Each main bowler gets one over. With only a certain amount of wickets in hand, like 2? That could be fun, I could see how it could into a slog fest but with wickets more valuable you never know.

28-04-2007, 01:43 AM	#39 (permalink)
Jono Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Virat Kohli Posts: 47,499	Nah better if you had to send in your number 11 to face two overs. Whichever number 11 scored more runs in those two overs wins. McGrath vs. Murali in a batting contest would be awesome.

28-04-2007, 02:18 AM	#40 (permalink)
howardj International Coach Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: brisbane Posts: 12,104	We will, I reckon. C'mon Macca. Go out in a bullying blaze of glory!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
LOOK OUT WORLD: Bangladesh is the future(COUNT THE YEAR 2007 IN TOO) World Champion	bdcricmad	World Cup 2007	46	21-03-2007 04:11 PM
You dream world cup final	Wasimullah	2006 Football World Cup - Germany	73	14-06-2006 04:29 AM
WC 2007 Squad Selection	Barney Rubble	Cricket Chat	40	06-12-2005 01:46 AM
World Cup XI's	Ford_GTHO351	Cricket Chat	35	17-02-2004 03:10 AM