cricket - Page 7

JC · 29-04-2007, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philxy351

that was intense.. why cant it end i need sleep lol. first all nighter ive pulled in years. congrats to aust.. YEWWWW

Me too - but I stayed awake by doing a few minor (and mostly quiet) mods to the car. Now I need sleep!

Congrats to McGrath, Buchanan, Ponting, Gillie and the rest of the team. It doesn't matter how it ended, the best team still won, and McGrath and co will be able to hold on to that fact forever.

Franky · 29-04-2007, 09:41 AM

Pretty pathetic game, but I guess you can't predict the weather.

Was shaping up to be a cracker with Sangakkara and Jayasuriya in and chasing down Aussie's total pretty quickly, as soon as it rained that was it. Feel sorry for the Sri Lankans they really had no luck at all. Great to see Gilchrist in form too, he needed it to cap off a pretty average tornament.

TheSneakiness · 29-04-2007, 10:17 AM

Did we win?

I only just got up...

Bill_R · 29-04-2007, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Axe

Did we win?

I only just got up...

yup! Gilchrist was awesome.

So, what happened to make it a farce as some have said? I dozed during the Sri Lanka innings. I saw them with about 8 overs to go but the next I remember was seeing a glimpse of the umpires being presented with something.

rodderz · 29-04-2007, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill_R

yup! Gilchrist was awesome.

So, what happened to make it a farce as some have said? I dozed during the Sri Lanka innings. I saw them with about 8 overs to go but the next I remember was seeing a glimpse of the umpires being presented with something.

Apparently the game was stopped due to bad light and everyone presumed it was finished and the aussies started celebrating. They did their victory lap, McGrath got his stump for his last match and they started setting up for the post match entertainment. Then the indian umpy came over to tell ponting that the game wasnt over yet, there was talk of playing 3 overs tomorrow but they used their brain and finished it off in near darkness after setting up the ground again for play

I thought the aussie innings was a cracker, it would of been high 300's had it been a full 50 overs...but they cant help the coin toss and the rain with the outcome

blueoval · 29-04-2007, 02:21 PM

alim darr is a ****er. talk about taking the puff out of the win. The win was inevitable and they had to play by the book in almost pitch black darkness. What a joke.

**Fordman1** · 29-04-2007, 03:06 PM

The shots of the ground in the end were amazing.

On TV the light intensifying shots Vs the real light situation were black vs white.

Yep in those last 3 overs it was pitch black - it was amazing the batsmen or fielders could see the ball at all !!!

prydey · 29-04-2007, 03:21 PM

was not aleem dar's fault. the on field umpires are doing as they are told by 3rd and 4th umpires and match referee.

jayawardene agreed to go and face the final 3 overs just to keep everybody happy. he had already conceded that the match was won by the aussies. the controversy at the end had no bearing whatsoever on the result. they had lost wickets and the weather had again turned bad. its not the first time this has happened and australia have been on the losing end of the d/l system plenty of times.

the best team won the tournament. it was daylight for 2nd.

Night Runner · 29-04-2007, 11:15 PM

Excellent win guys and well done from across the ditch. Gil"church" is the man, no doubt.
Hope he stays on for some time yet, don't care what team you support he's good value.

Not only was this final a circus act in terms of organising and officialdom but the entire world cup has been a big mess from day one. Can't recall the last time 2 or 3 big teams got knocked out in the minor rounds, coach murdered, match fixing allegations, poor, poor, poor spectator numbers (average 2-3,000 a game) and the final was the cherry on top. I had a hard time wondering if I was watching the Cricket world cup or Monty Pythons lol. One thing is for sure, this world cup has been a huge disaster for the West Indies and I doubt we'll see it hosted by them for a very, very, long time. I feel NZ could comfortably claim 3rd place, that'll do.

Once again, well done to Australia pleasure to watch.
Without doubt the best team there and on the day - deserving champions. ;)

Cheers,
Carl

BA GT-HO · 30-04-2007, 03:27 AM

Three in a row, great isn't it.

I had to laugh at the President of the ICC's speech, labelling the tournament a HUGE success with HUGE crowds.. errrrrrrrr.. was he watching the 2003 World Cup or the 2007 World Cup?

Worst World Cup EVER. No atmosphere besides last night, and way too long. Non cricket people kept asking me, is that STILL going!? Malcom Speed lives in a dream world.

Anyway, great innings by Gilchrist to set up a farcical win in the end. Win is a win tho!

pb02 · 30-04-2007, 09:57 AM

Eric Gilchurch was amazing!!! To be in bad form and be able to come out and score like that is testament to how he plays and how good he can be. Great effort by all the team, head and shoulders above anyone else in the competition unfortunately.

I was really looking forward to some great games, but after the first round it was pretty dissapointing. The whole structure of the event needs to be looked at. Way too long....

blueoval · 30-04-2007, 05:09 PM

I agree, the tournament was way too drawn out. perhaps it needs to be 20/20 matches instead?

**Fordman1** · 30-04-2007, 05:21 PM

PB02 "Eric Gilchurch was amazing!!!"

Who ??????

Lumpen Proletariat · 30-04-2007, 05:26 PM

OK...now the pajama cricket is over we get back to the real game.

Wonder what our test side is going to look like? Sans Langer and the Old Fart. Hopefully Tait has secured his spot. Who will open though?

Lumpy

blueoval · 30-04-2007, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barraxr8

PB02 "Eric Gilchurch was amazing!!!"

Who ??????

There is a story behind that name. Gillys teams mates call him 'church' because a fan assumed his name was actually "Eric Gilchurch". Thats it in a nutshell.

BZINGA · 30-04-2007, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueoval

I agree, the tournament was way too drawn out. perhaps it needs to be 20/20 matches instead?

I dissagree, its played every 4 years, plenty of countries involved, the system works well, it was just poorly run this time, crowds were down because of the ridiculous prices, im sure the heads of cricket will be looking into it for the next world cup in hope another dissaster doesnt happen again.

**Fordman1** · 30-04-2007, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueoval

There is a story behind that name. Gillys teams mates call him 'church' because a fan assumed his name was actually "Eric Gilchurch". Thats it in a nutshell.

Got it !!

Thanks mate...

prydey · 30-04-2007, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueoval

I agree, the tournament was way too drawn out. perhaps it needs to be 20/20 matches instead?

20/20 is not cricket. its entertainment for those who wouldn't ordinarily watch cricket.

Racecraft · 30-04-2007, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

20/20 is not cricket. its entertainment for those who wouldn't ordinarily watch cricket.

which is 95% of the world...

You know the tourament is too long when even the players say so...

prydey · 30-04-2007, 08:17 PM

the comments regarding the length of the tournament were made regarding the scheduling and not the type of cricket being played.

i'd like to see a test match competition. not sure how they could do it. maybe something similar to davis cup in tennis. it will probably never happen though as most teams around the world are already playing a lot of cricket. no real point either as we all know the aussies are top in that area as well, although with no langer, warne and mcgrath the future could be a little more challenging. be good to see lee and tait working in tandem. pace and more pace. worked for walsh and ambrose.

BZINGA · 30-04-2007, 08:17 PM

World cup cricket started off with 60 overs per side, now its played as 50 overs per side as a standard ODI, 20/20 games are fun to watch but should not be introduced to world cup, theres been 9 world cups played, why now do we need to change it all, it hasn't been a problem in the past.

Rodp · 30-04-2007, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ED Classic

Good to see Sri Lankans were good sports. There time will come...

It already has, in 1996.

Racecraft · 30-04-2007, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TRIK67

World cup cricket started off with 60 overs per side, now its played as 50 overs per side as a standard ODI, 20/20 games are fun to watch but should not be introduced to world cup, theres been 9 world cups played, why now do we need to change it all, it hasn't been a problem in the past.

the biggst thing is they could play 2 games in a day.. Halving the length of the tournament and offer a great day of cricket for the spectators..

GreenMachine39 · 30-04-2007, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueoval

I agree, the tournament was way too drawn out. perhaps it needs to be 20/20 matches instead?

there is a 20/20 championship next year i believe

BZINGA · 30-04-2007, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Racecraft

the biggst thing is they could play 2 games in a day.. Halving the length of the tournament and offer a great day of cricket for the spectators..

I had a quick look at the games played:-

24 group matches played in 12 days
24 super 8 matches played in 24 days
3 finals played in 7 days

Maybe something like all games are 20/20, playing 2 games a day, the 3 finals could be played normally at 50 overs each? Should take out about 2 weeks.