[johnwales]

There are claims that England were allocated an extra run to which they were not entitled during the super over !! What is the general view concerning this ?

Matchday officials making wrong on field decisions cannot have them rectified; but if this is the case, then the umpires, secondary match officials and several others have conspired to ruin the game. To me it looked as though Butler and Stokes had given up running when the ball was deflected off the bat; a very sporting gesture. But once it crossed the boundary the umpires made their questionable decision.

[gmdf]

It wasn't Buttler (it was Rashid). And if the ball hadn't crossed the boundary, then Stokes & Rashiod wouldn't have run any more runs...but once it does there is nothing the Umpires or players can do.


In answer to the question posed in the thread title, all one can say is: 'look at the newspapers/websites etc'!!

[johnwales]

Rashid ??? Butler and Stokes were batting, or am I going mad ???

[gmdf]

The issue was in the last over of the main game, when a ball thrown in hut Stokes' bat and sped to the boundary - normally players don't run in situations like this, but as it went for 4 that had to count...they had run 2 so 2 + 4 = 6..However it turns out in the small print, they should have been given the number they had completed when the ball was thrown, not when it went past the stumps, so 1 + 4 = 5. Apparently no-one knew/realised this at the time.

In the Super Over there was no similar controversy...but that was tied too! England won on no. of boundaries on the day! Some controversy over whether that was a fair way of deciding the result, but that was the system all countries knew about.

[johnwales]

I am going mad...…… I was convinced that the incident was in the super over.

[TWrex]

It's a bit like Tom Baker's sea captain in Blackadder, there are two opinions about having a crew to sail a ship. I say you don't need one, everbody else says you do.
I wouldn't worry about being confuse about what happened, I'm almost getting like the moon landing doubters, it was all a set up. Well if both events were hoaxes they were very well done and exciting to watch so who cares.
Now the 100 has to follow that, good luck.
The schoolboys playing cricket games (the rules of which made the super over appear very clear and simple) at Canterbury yesterday all wanted to be Jason Roy throwing in that final ball, Jos Buttler didn't get a mention.

[gmdf]

I am going mad...…… I was convinced that the incident was in the super over.

Don't worry - I was there and I still needed to watch the highlights to work out what really happened!

[johnwales]

Glad of the kind comments. But I feel a class A Prat !!!

Looking at the replay last night, I cannot really work out why some feel only five runs should have been rewarded. Clearly two runs were taken and then the deflection resulted in a further four being added.

One thing I think should happen is that the rule ought to be changed so that if the ball comes into contact with an opposing player or his equipment, then a dead ball should be called. Although on this occasion there is no suggestion that the deflection was implemented deliberately, there is always the possibility that it could happen. The extra four runs in this case probably deprived New Zealand of victory.

[chris]

One thing I think should happen is that the rule ought to be changed so that if the ball comes into contact with an opposing player or his equipment, then a dead ball should be called. Although on this occasion there is no suggestion that the deflection was implemented deliberately, there is always the possibility that it could happen. The extra four runs in this case probably deprived New Zealand of victory.

Apparently the problem with that is that after the deflection, in another similar case, the ball could go on and hit the stumps with the batsman being run out, but that would not be the case if the deflection immediately resulted in a dead ball.

In this particular instance, Stokes should have been caught the previous ball. Problem solved.