What's new

Martin Guptill in the Super Over of the World Cup final...

gani999

First Class Star
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Runs
3,999
This decision will give KW the nightmares for the rest of his life.

Why could he not play himself, or give the bat to Taylor or Nicholls? What was he thinking?

Sad brain fade from Williamson, and it cost NZ the WC.
 
Guptill was the first pick actually.. He had to be there.. It wasn't really his fault..

If NZ would think hard where exactly did they lost the match, they would keep wondering all day and end up with a conclusion, that, it was just bad luck, fate wasn't for them.
 
Guptill's running was amazing in the last over. He ran like a madman. Had it anybody else, they would never have gotten that close.
 
Boult for the bowler was a more stupid decision IMO.He hadnt been good today.
 
Guptill was the first pick actually.. He had to be there.. It wasn't really his fault..

If NZ would think hard where exactly did they lost the match, they would keep wondering all day and end up with a conclusion, that, it was just bad luck, fate wasn't for them.

In a crunch situation like the Super over in a World Cup Final, it is the most in-form batsmen who should be at the crease.

Just look at England. They gave the batting to Stokes and Buttler, two of their best contributors.

And NZ chooses Guptill who has been woefully out of from :facepalm:
 
They stuck with their experienced players. Hindsight is a blessing. Had KW or Ross Taylor gone out and not got the job done people would be saying they should've tried Guptill.
 
Boult for the bowler was a more stupid decision IMO.He hadnt been good today.

Boult still bowled well. He really would be shattered today. That four extra runs of Stokes bat... he would curse that for all his life.. Then there was a catch of Stokes on boundary.. Went for a six.. Oh Boult!!!
 
They stuck with their experienced players. Hindsight is a blessing. Had KW or Ross Taylor gone out and not got the job done people would be saying they should've tried Guptill.

Taylor is way more experienced than Guptill is. And he was in better form too.
 
Destiny had it written England. All the luck England had today was mind blowing
 
I understand why they sent Guptill in, but I’m still questioning why Kane didn’t back himself instead.

Despite not being a big-hitter, he’s hit sixes to win important games in the past, and I had faith he could do it again.

I can’t fault his decision though, he’s been brilliant all-round throughout the tournament.
 
We can start finding logic on where exactly did NZ lost the game..

But I bet they would eventually think this just wasn't meant for them and that is what they have to make piece with..
 
did anyone notice the ;ast ball would have been a wide if he just left it it was pitching outside leg...easy leave pick up free run if anything run bye!!!
 
Guptill’s running was superb and it’s a testament to his superior fitness. Our players could learn from this and see the value of true fitness beyond the minimum standards set as a yo-yo score of 16.
 
It's not a bad decision. England just had the rub of the green on the day, both teams were equally as brilliant. Not much NZ could've done today to stop England winning.
 
Guptil was the right choice. Nothing wrong with him. They expect him to last an over at least. He is the biggest hitter of the ball for them.
 
No Guptil had to come out for the super over. His running was incredible and really put England under pressure. On top of he's definitely one of the cleanest strikers NZ had. Was just absolutely unlucky in the end
 
I think not bowling ferguson in super over was even more ridiculous. Guptill was more suited to hitting from the get-go. Ross needs time to settle
 
We can start finding logic on where exactly did NZ lost the game..

But I bet they would eventually think this just wasn't meant for them and that is what they have to make piece with..

peace*
 
Boult still bowled well. He really would be shattered today. That four extra runs of Stokes bat... he would curse that for all his life.. Then there was a catch of Stokes on boundary.. Went for a six.. Oh Boult!!!

Yes it was not his day.His figures werent terrible but were the worst of all bowlers today so shouldnt have been handed the superover IMO.
 
I'd have gone with Taylor.

Guptill looked short of confidence most of the tournament and when it came to 2 off 1 ball I thought this guy isn't going to do it.
 
If it wasn’t for his running they wouldn’t have gotten that close. No other NZ player would have been able to run that 2.

I think Bairstow deserves credit for that throw. It was brilliant.
 
The World Cup final between England and New Zealand at Lord's had all the elements of an all-time classic. Eoin Morgan and Co. lifted the trophy, winning the match on boundary count after scores were levelled in the match and the subsequent Super Over as well. Losing the title by the closest of margins made the result that much more heartbreaking for the Black Caps.

One of the key moments in the game came in the 50th over of England's chase, when a throw from Guptill "hit the back of Stokes' bat, and trickled off for four." That proved to be a pivotal moment, swinging the momentum back England's way in a game that underwent numerous trips and turns.

"Up until the third ball we were right in the box seat," Guptill said. "And then it wasn't to be, but that's just the way cricket goes, as players. It was one hell of a final.

"I guess it was the throw that I threw in from the boundary and hit the back of Stokes' bat, and trickled off for four," he said. "You know when that sort of thing happens, from a throw from the boundary, it tends not to go your way."

Guptill acknowledged that the mood in the New Zealand dressing room after losing such a close encounter was 'sombre', but said the team was soon able to appreciate that they had produced one of the "greatest games" in the history of the sport.

"The support that we had from back home and even around here, and what you see on social media, everyone just loved the game, whether they were cricket watchers or not," Guptill said. "Everyone was all over the game and they loved it and it was just a shame for us about the result.

"We actually had quite a good party," he added. "I mean, obviously it was quite a sombre mood for a while but then we realised we were part of one of the greatest games in cricket history, so we got over it fairly quickly. We had a good time together, because we're not going to be together as a group like that for a while yet."

https://www.cricketworldcup.com/news/en/1288967
 
I'd have gone with Taylor.

Guptill looked short of confidence most of the tournament and when it came to 2 off 1 ball I thought this guy isn't going to do it.
Absolutely. It was a mad choice to send Guptill.
 
Yep, I would have gone with Taylor as well.

He can hit the ball a long way.

Also, could have thought about De Grandhomme because he can hit it long is well.
 
Last edited:
Guptil was the right choice, in my opinion.
NZ only had 3 big hitters in their team - neesham, guptil and grandhomme.
Unfortunately for NZ guptil was out of form for the entire wc.
Grandhomme had a poor match, so it was all up to neesham and he nearly pulled it off!
Taylor is a slow starter and can't hit big straight away and kane is not a big hitter!
I think boult was the right choice as bowler, you have to go with your best bowler!
This is the problem with a super over, some teams, like englaand, just have more big hitters and that gives them an advantage in a super over!
Before people say that england are therefore the better team, why did they not win the match in 50 overs?
You don't have to have a team of big hitters to be a good team, as the saying goes - theres more than one way to skin a cat!
 
It made sense.

Other than his bad form, he's a great runner, opens the batting (used to facing pace first up), experienced, and an attacking batsman.
 
Brain freeze by Williamson to bowl Boult, would have won if he bowled Ferguson in the super over. His bowling was really troubling England and would have come in handy for the super over.
 
Guptill was the right choice.

Kane shouldn't have used Boult for the super over, but he was backing his spearhead. Unfortunately he was having a bad day.
 
Brain freeze by Williamson to bowl Boult, would have won if he bowled Ferguson in the super over. His bowling was really troubling England and would have come in handy for the super over.

Finally someone who also believes Bolt was the wrong choice and Ferguson should have been preferred. Bolt cost NZ the world cup!
 
Guptill was the right choice.

Kane shouldn't have used Boult for the super over, but he was backing his spearhead. Unfortunately he was having a bad day.

All the choices made were correct and all of us would have made the same choices if we were in Kane's place.

Guptil and Neesham the only two big hitters with decent technique of hitting fast bowlers. Colin D'homme cannot hit fast bowlers and would have simply given away his wicket.

Boult was the right choice too.
 
Guptill was the right choice.

Kane shouldn't have used Boult for the super over, but he was backing his spearhead. Unfortunately he was having a bad day.

I think not bowling ferguson in super over was even more ridiculous. Guptill was more suited to hitting from the get-go. Ross needs time to settle

This. Boult cost NZ the game. He was atrocious the whole day. Ferguson was really difficult to hit on that pitch.
 
Bit harsh on Boult. He has been NZ’s premier bowler for a number of years. It was an entirely logical decision to pick him for the Super Over.

Pick Ferguson, and if that goes wrong then the captain is accused of throwing the new guy to the wolves and exposing him too young. One cannot win in these matters.

Purely “on the day” Boult was undoubtedly NZ’s poorest bowler, but it has not affected his reputation. These things happen.
 
People saying that Boult cost NZ the world cup do not know what they are saying. Boult is the spearhead of NZ bowling and bowled beautifully against England and India. Williamson mismanaged Boult by bowling him in the super over and final over. It was just one bad moment that cost NZ the cup. Boult is fine, they say that for all the saves you have made, your only gonna be remembered for the mistakes you have made
 
Can't make much put of a super over. 2 needed of the last ball. Even an in form Virat Kohli wouldn't have a 100 chance to win form there
 
I definitely would have selected Taylor over Guptil. It was a no-brainer considering Guptil's poor form. NZ screwed up.
 
Picking an out of form Guptill was strange. His running is a plus but his timing was lacking.
 
Ahead of his return to international cricket after the heart-breaking defeat in the ICC Men's Cricket World Cup 2019 final at Lord’s, New Zealand opener Martin Guptill called 14 July, the day of that epic encounter against England, "the best and the worst day" of his career.

Guptill, who was not a part of New Zealand’s Test squad for their two-match series against Sri Lanka, will feature in the limited-overs leg, featuring three Twenty20 Internationals, the first of which takes place on Sunday, 1 September. Looking back at the final, which ended with his run-out by the slimmest of margins, Guptill said: "I guess you see it as the best and the worst day of your cricketing career. The ebbs and flows of the game made it such a good one for the spectators. It was just unfortunate we came out on the other side of it.”

Life in international cricket, though, moves fast, and the disappointment of Lord’s notwithstanding, the New Zealand opener will have to put that behind him as he prepares to look ahead to next year’s T20 World Cup in Australia as well as regain some personal form.

Guptill was responsible for some of the most electric moments on the field during the World Cup, but had a middling tournament with the bat, totalling 186 runs in 10 innings, crossing fifty just once in that time.

After a break, Guptill headed back to the UK for the T20 Blast, and is now back for international duty on the Sri Lanka tour. He is relishing the change in format. "T20 World Cups are always good fun. With it being in Australia next year, it's completely different conditions to what we face at home as well,” he said.

"It's going to be nice to start off our preparation here, playing in some trying conditions and then head home with a good five [match] T20 series against England to lead off the summer."

https://www.icc-cricket.com/news/1328215
 
Another disastrous performance by Guptill in a world cup final. Arguably the biggest choker in last 20 years?
 
Back
Top