FlawlessThaw
most 'know it all' poster
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2005
- Messages
- 29,724
Nah New Zealanders have everything right to have a moan. The fact that the players have been so gracious is a credit to them. Least Cnuty team in the world.
Why were so many Indians supporting New Zealand/are salty England won?
Is there some sort of Anti-England agenda amongst Indian fans?
Nah New Zealanders have everything right to have a moan. The fact that the players have been so gracious is a credit to them. Least Cnuty team in the world.
And that is stupid. Rules are rules. England won the game with counts of boundary. Hard luck to NZ.Nah if you check his tweets he just wanted it shared
Woohoo a first World Cup for Wales in cricket.
Could England theoretically offer to share the world cup? Would make them look very classy, and didn't really feel like there was a winner or a loser yesterday.
Not going to happen
Nah New Zealanders have everything right to have a moan. The fact that the players have been so gracious is a credit to them. Least Cnuty team in the world.
Why were so many Indians supporting New Zealand/are salty England won?
Is there some sort of Anti-England agenda amongst Indian fans?
I have no issue with England winning because of the tied super over rules. That was the rule in place before the tournament.
I do think in the future though, that a tied super over should result in another super over being played. Shane Warne mentioned this. Seems a fairier way to do it.
Another generalizing stupid comment. Not only many indians but many people around the world cheered for NZ, because they were the underdogs and nothing to do with anti england brigade. If India or Australia were playing against NZ yesterday many English people would have cheered for NZ. Just go back to the semifinals game and you will see a lot of anti indian posts and people celebrating when each indian wickets fell. So would that mean there is some agenda against Indian side too.
Secondly apart from couple of posters a lot of people (Indian) have congratulated and actually called england deserving winners, not only here but all across social media. Maybe you are just focusing on those couple of posters and are choosing to ignore other posters. So stop generalizing.
Could England theoretically offer to share the world cup? Would make them look very classy, and didn't really feel like there was a winner or a loser yesterday.
Could England theoretically offer to share the world cup? Would make them look very classy, and didn't really feel like there was a winner or a loser yesterday.
Why were so many Indians supporting New Zealand/are salty England won?
Is there some sort of Anti-England agenda amongst Indian fans?
It was a question and not a comment, you tit. It genuinely comes across from this thread/social media that a lot of Indian fans are angry England have won and I asked why.
If NZ/Australia won I probably wouldn't invest time in telling people that England cheated, England were lucky, England didn't deserve it.
And once again, asking a question isn't generalising, and a couple of people praising England doesn't change the general fact that a lot of Indians seem to be weirdly against England. It's not just here, it's all over the internet that I've observed it.
It was a long time ago now. Should we be still angry with the french for invading England? Or countless other countries from the past.There might be some hangover from this thing called colonialism.
Should England have got five, and not six, for overthrows?
It was a contest that could not be separated by runs scored, in regulation play or the Super Over, but were England inadvertently awarded one run too many during the chaotic scenes of Trent Boult's final over to Ben Stokes in their chase?
In what was later pinpointed by New Zealand's captain Kane Williamson as the key "uncontrollable" of England's run chase, Stokes inadvertently sent a throw from deep midwicket skimming to the third-man boundary with his bat, after diving for his crease in a bid to complete a second run.
After consultation with his colleagues, Kumar Dharmasena signaled six runs for the incident, meaning that England - seemingly drifting out of contention needing nine runs from three balls, were suddenly right back in the hunt needing three more from two.
However, according to Law 19.8, pertaining to "Overthrow or wilful act of fielder", it would appear that England's second on-field run should not have counted, making it a total of five runs for the incident, not six.
The law states: "If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be any runs for penalties awarded to either side, and the allowance for the boundary, and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had already crossed at the instant of the throw or act."
The crucial clause is the last part. A review of the footage of the incident shows clearly that, at the moment the ball was released by the New Zealand fielder, Martin Guptill, Stokes and his partner, Adil Rashid, had not yet crossed for their second run.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/27191816/should-england-got-five-not-six-overthrows
Dedicated to all those who were asking me how me how england were undeserving to be declared winners.
And again you are generalizing by just focusing on Indians. And also no one is angry, many (even non indians) are upset that NZ could not win and again nothing to do with England, you are just reading too much into the english hatred crap. No one hates this English cricket side and just because one guy here has some hatred towards England does not mean all are like that or most are like that because there are some here who hate Indian people and their cricket, does that mean all english people hate Indians.
Again to repeat people in general are upset for NZ and not upset because England freaking won it. And fun fact many Indians fans actually have a more heated rivalry with Aussies and won't mind england winning the cup. You are just choosing to focus on Indians in particular when there are many people from different nationalities who wanted NZ to win because they were the underdogs, just like many neutral non spurs rivals were supporting you lot in the CL final as you were the underdogs. Not that difficult to understand unless you are thick.
Feels pretty great today knowing we won the World Cup I have to say.
Think I'll still be buzzing for a long time.
Will you care if you lose the Ashes?
Of course. It's the Ashes.
Australia are our main rivals.
It was a long time ago now. Should we be still angry with the french for invading England? Or countless other countries from the past.
It was a long time ago now. Should we be still angry with the french for invading England? Or countless other countries from the past.
I mean, that's just the way it comes across to me on social media. It's packed full of people from India spamming chats about how England are cheats, it's undeserved, etc etc .. I can only say what I see. It's not just because there's one guy here, it's something I've observed over numerous platforms.
I'm not choosing to focus on anything, I saw mostly Indian people on social media being the ones who were most bitter about England's win, so came in and asked if that was generally the case/if there's some sort of big rivalry in cricket. You'd have to be really thick to not work out the difference between making a generalisation and asking a damn question.
It'll hurt less, don't you think?
I guess theres the advantage of having a few different players.
Losing to Australia in tiddlywinks would be painful.
Win the Ashes and really make this the greatest year in English cricket.
I think we will win too.
I think the players needed to have ran past each other before the ball was thrown, and they didn’t.Why?
They ran 2 and got four overthrows?