What's new

New Zealand were the better team in the 2019 World Cup final

Taylor was wrongly given out.

Boult’s lack of awareness when taking the catch and poor bowling.

Guptill’s throw hitting Stokes bat.

Sending out Guptill to bat instead of De Grandhomme.

England tied the 50 over game, NZ tied the super over - yet it’s NZ who lose the World cup.

Lot’s of things to take into account - still believe NZ got robbed but they made some poor decisions today.
 
Theo_14 said:
Taylor was wrongly given out.

Boult’s lack of awareness when taking the catch and poor bowling.

Guptill’s throw hitting Stokes bat.

Sending out Guptill to bat instead of De Grandhomme.

England tied the 50 over game, NZ tied the super over - yet it’s NZ who lose the World cup.

Lot’s of things to take into account - still believe NZ got robbed but they made some poor decisions today.
Click to expand...

Pathetic umpiring in general. Kiwis played superior cricket.
 
At least India and Pakistan can unite on one thing - both are sure that the Kiwis deserve to lift the trophy and England are lucky.
 
100%. Overthrow rule WILL change, and rightly so. In all my years of watching cricket I have never seen that happen and it happened it the worst moment for NZ. As KW said, it just wasn't meant to be. They should not feel sad.

England have to be the luckiest team in the World Cup.
 
NZ were the luckiest team to make the semi final but were the unluckiest team to have lost the final. There is no way England ties the score with either Boult having a better awareness at the boundary or the ball doesn't hit Stokes bat while running. These are the unkindest cut of them all.....
 
aloo paratha said:
100%. Overthrow rule WILL change, and rightly so. In all my years of watching cricket I have never seen that happen and it happened it the worst moment for NZ. As KW said, it just wasn't meant to be. They should not feel sad.

England have to be the luckiest team in the World Cup.
Click to expand...

I have seen it happen before in an India Pakistan game and it lead to an altercation between Shoaib Akhtar and Rahul dravid. Shoaib was the bowler. The throw came in and Just as Rahul put his bat forward to slide it into the crease, the ball hit the bat and went for 4. Shoaib didnt hold back and blamed Rahul for it lol.
 
NZ should've won it. Stupid overthrow rule gave England the win. Not the fault of England but definitely fault with ICC rule.
 
Madplayer said:
I have seen it happen before in an India Pakistan game and it lead to an altercation between Shoaib Akhtar and Rahul dravid. Shoaib was the bowler. The throw came in and Just as Rahul put his bat forward to slide it into the crease, the ball hit the bat and went for 4. Shoaib didnt hold back and blamed Rahul for it lol.
Click to expand...

It is as stupid as it gets. The fielding team shouldn't get punished for things like this. Whether it ricochets off a player or off the stumps, it is an uncontrollable part of the game and the fielding team should not be punished for it. Ball should be called dead once it hits the batsmen or the stumps.
 
Why the **** is boundaries looked before wickets


This is so **
 
And what is more unfortunate is the fact that it was Martin Guptill who got run out and fell short.. Their best ever runner..

It is really hard to find logic on where exactly NZ lost that match.. Really unfortunate..!!!
 
Aman said:
No you're not, you were all out and won because of an extremely dumb rule.
Click to expand...

You show me respect!

Im a world cup winning fan and better than everyone else here except the other English supporters
 
Matty said:
You show me respect!

Im a world cup winning fan and better than everyone else here except the other English supporters
Click to expand...

Leave him. He's just salty that his team didn't fluke yet another win.

Fluked it against wi and ind.

The most undeserving semifinalists are suddenly talking about rules. The irony.
 
Please don’t forget the biggest “luck” factor in all cricket matches - winning the toss!! NZ won the toss and batted first, on a wicket that got slower and slower, on a tournament where batting first has been a significant advantage and in the pressure of a World Cup final! They did not make the most of it. In the end that came to bite them. Their batting is just not good enough. Can’t always blame luck when it goes the other way.
 
babubengali14 said:
Please don’t forget the biggest “luck” factor in all cricket matches - winning the toss!! NZ won the toss and batted first, on a wicket that got slower and slower, on a tournament where batting first has been a significant advantage and in the pressure of a World Cup final! They did not make the most of it. In the end that came to bite them. Their batting is just not good enough. Can’t always blame luck when it goes the other way.
Click to expand...
That is an absurd statement to make. A toss is completely a random event where both teams have equal chance of winning or getting that "luck" you speak of.
 
An absolute embarrassment for the ICC if they had any shame.

From shambolic umpiring to the stupid rules.
 
NZ had their moments luck was not with them those overthrows ho many times it happens in cricket. the game is tied NZ were just unlucky, that catch by Boult on rope Taylor lbw so many things
 
Madplayer said:
That is an absurd statement to make. A toss is completely a random event where both teams have equal chance of winning or getting that "luck" you speak of.
Click to expand...

It could have gone either way YET it went to NZ's favour. It is still a bit of luck which they needed to have gone their way.

And toss is a big factor. You know why BD struggled so much in the latter end of the world cup? This is the results of their last 4 tosses - L,L,L,L. Being able to bat first and score runs is BIG advantage UNLESS a team scores 220/230. In the entire world cup 250+ has been chased only 2 times out of 25 occasions.
 
Executioner said:
It could have gone either way YET it went to NZ's favour. It is still a bit of luck which they needed to have gone their way.

And toss is a big factor. You know why BD struggled so much in the latter end of the world cup? This is the results of their last 4 tosses - L,L,L,L. Being able to bat first and score runs is BIG advantage UNLESS a team scores 220/230. In the entire world cup 250+ has been chased only 2 times out of 25 occasions.
Click to expand...

The comparison with the luck during toss is not valid here because both teams had equal chance of winning the toss.
 
Madplayer said:
The comparison with the luck during toss is not valid here because both teams had equal chance of winning the toss.
Click to expand...

Not only that. Yes it got harder to score runs at the end of them game, but it also had best bowling conditions at the beginning of the game. If NZ bowled first England could have easily collapsed in a heap. The toss is only a factor if there is a clear advantage to winning it, but both options were good and Morgan even said he would bowl first.
 
NZ went badly off the boil in the group stage, lost a bunch of games heavily (including a thrashing from England) and scraped through on NRR.

I agree that England had the rub of the green in the final and the ball bounced nicely for them in the climax, that was clear.

But frankly it is just as easy (if not easier) to make the argument that NZ were lucky to be in the final in the first place.

Devil’s advocate aside, I am personally not in the business of trashing anyone’s achievements.

It was a great final - the two best teams, the right final, for a superb tournament - and it was barely possible to separate these two quality sides, just edged by England in the end, but the champion could have been either team.
 
I would argue that NZ had a massive advantage by winning the toss on a wicket that suited their medium pacers better than the English quicks.
 
Robert said:
I would argue that NZ had a massive advantage by winning the toss on a wicket that suited their medium pacers better than the English quicks.
Click to expand...

you also have a home advantage that you dont know how to play on those tracks.
 
andy0204 said:
you also have a home advantage that you dont know how to play on those tracks.
Click to expand...

I didn’t play, England did.

There aren’t many green tops in England now, they tend to be dead. When Anderson was given a greentop in a India test, he didn’t know how to bowl on it.
 
Robert said:
I would argue that NZ had a massive advantage by winning the toss on a wicket that suited their medium pacers better than the English quicks.
Click to expand...

You had massive advantage over every country for having the ability to include a West Indian player at the last second.
 
A tie was the fairest result.New Zealand won the hearts of everyone and did not deserve to lose.I commiserate with the Kiwis feeling the rules were unfair and England had great luck with the overthrow and the catch dropped at the conclusion.Above all I salute the Kiwi sportsmanship.

However remember how lucky the Kiwis were to make it into the semi-final stage staving of defeat by a margin of a whisker against West Indies ,narrowly beating South Africa,wining a technical point against India and even being beaten by Pakistan.England were without doubt the best ODI side in the world in the last 4 years even if India was more talented.We must complement England overall for staging such a magnificient ressurection in ODI cricket like a phoenix from the Ashes .They also outplayed the Kiwis in the league match.It is also unlikely the Kiwis would have beaten India had the Indian innings not been posted to the next day and rain intervened .New Zealand also had the fortune of not batting second in the semi-final and final.

No doubt considering they were the dark horses and their superlative improvement New Zealand could be the moral winners of the final.However If you balance it with their inabilty to chase scores,conditions and performance in league then arguably England deserved the title.Above all England have not made a world cup semi-final for 27 years being the founders of the game let alone ODI cricket.

In this edition in the league stage India were possibly the best team but fell out on temperament which the Englishman and Kiwis displayed.
 
jnaveen1980 said:
You had massive advantage over every country for having the ability to include a West Indian player at the last second.
Click to expand...

Awwww, don’t players from overseas want to come and play for your country?

Why not?
 
Logistical complications have prevented any chance of a homecoming ceremony for the BLACKCAPS world cup squad.

NZC chief executive David White said while the team appreciated endeavours to arrange a homecoming function upon arrival and was grateful for the sentiment, it would not be feasible given the players’ different post-tournament arrangements.

Mr White said there were ongoing discussions with the Government regarding an opportunity to recognise the squad once all had returned to New Zealand.

“We’ve been in conversations with the Minister for Sport and Recreation, Grant Robertson, and are mindful of the Prime Minister’s enthusiasm for a welcome-home celebration,” he said.

“At the moment, however, with some players arriving back at different times, some not arriving back at all, and others having alternative playing commitments, it’s just not practical.

“Hopefully, given the interest surrounding this, we can organise something appropriate in the weeks to come.”

Mr White said NZC and the BLACKCAPS were overwhelmed by the outpouring of support from New Zealand and were just as keen to have the chance to publicly express their own appreciation and gratitude.
 
New Zealand were a “little bit lucky” to reach the 2019 World Cup final and it is time for them to draw a line in the sand and achieve something really special, said former skipper Brendon McCullum. “I know they got very close last year in the World Cup – but I did feel they were a little bit lucky there as well to actually get themselves in that situation,”
McCullum, who is currently the head coach of IPL team Kolkata Knight Riders, said in a recent podcast.

Last year, New Zealand had lost the dramatic World Cup final to hosts England on boundary count-back rule after scores were tied even after the super over.

India will be hosting two World Cups in next three years — the 2021 T20 World Cup and the 2023 ODI World Cup, while this year’s T20 showpiece which was postponed due to the raging COVID-19 pandemic will be held in Australia in 2022.

“I think they’re close to doing something really really special, and under Kane Williamson’s captaincy and under the leadership of some of the other senior players, there’s no reason why they shouldn’t,” McCullum said.


https://www.cricketcountry.com/news...eve-something-special-brendon-mccullum-948482
 
MenInG said:
New Zealand were a “little bit lucky” to reach the 2019 World Cup final and it is time for them to draw a line in the sand and achieve something really special, said former skipper Brendon McCullum. “I know they got very close last year in the World Cup – but I did feel they were a little bit lucky there as well to actually get themselves in that situation,”
McCullum, who is currently the head coach of IPL team Kolkata Knight Riders, said in a recent podcast.

Last year, New Zealand had lost the dramatic World Cup final to hosts England on boundary count-back rule after scores were tied even after the super over.

India will be hosting two World Cups in next three years — the 2021 T20 World Cup and the 2023 ODI World Cup, while this year’s T20 showpiece which was postponed due to the raging COVID-19 pandemic will be held in Australia in 2022.

“I think they’re close to doing something really really special, and under Kane Williamson’s captaincy and under the leadership of some of the other senior players, there’s no reason why they shouldn’t,” McCullum said.


https://www.cricketcountry.com/news...eve-something-special-brendon-mccullum-948482
Click to expand...

Making statements to delight Indian viewers - can’t even support his team and calling New Zealand lucky against India!
 
New Zealand certainly played better cricket that day. The fielding standards shown by them considering it was the second inning of a world cup final was brilliant, those quick takes and run-outs.

England batting was miserable and it took them a Ben Stokes special along with some luck to cross the line.
 
England never won, they will forever be known as "champions?" but not champions. In the words of Ric Flair to be the man you have to beat the man.
 
There should've been another super over. It would've settled a lot of ifs,ands, and buts.
 
Ab Fan said:
New Zealand certainly played better cricket that day. The fielding standards shown by them considering it was the second inning of a world cup final was brilliant, those quick takes and run-outs.

England batting was miserable and it took them a Ben Stokes special along with some luck to cross the line.
Click to expand...

But they got as many runs as the Kiwis, so was the Kiwi batting miserable too?

It wasn’t a great match to be honest. The wicket prevented a lot of stroke play. But England hit more boundaries and that was the decider.
 
Robert said:
But they got as many runs as the Kiwis, so was the Kiwi batting miserable too?

It wasn’t a great match to be honest. The wicket prevented a lot of stroke play. But England hit more boundaries and that was the decider.
Click to expand...

Kiwis did not have many superstars in that team, yet they played beyond their capabilities. Their batting relied on Kane and Taylor. Their fielding was high quality for a world cup final 2nd innings calibre.

The fact that England batted miserably against Collin de Grandhomme and barely managed to reach the total after a Ben Stokes special tells us about their batting that day.

If England played to their potential, they could have slaughtered NZ quite easily but rather they just managed to sneak a win on the count of boundary rule.
 
Leaving all this aside, New Zealand knew if the scores were tied in the super over, they would lose; yet they COULD NOT prevent it. So England deserved to win.

Moreover, New Zealand won the toss, and that was luck too. The luck balanced out in the end.
 
They were the better team in the finals but just by a whisker but
They were arguably the worst of the top 4 in the group stage ,England deservedly won the title.
 
Ab Fan said:
Kiwis did not have many superstars in that team, yet they played beyond their capabilities. Their batting relied on Kane and Taylor. Their fielding was high quality for a world cup final 2nd innings calibre.

The fact that England batted miserably against Collin de Grandhomme and barely managed to reach the total after a Ben Stokes special tells us about their batting that day.

If England played to their potential, they could have slaughtered NZ quite easily but rather they just managed to sneak a win on the count of boundary rule.
Click to expand...

The wicket didn’t suit England’s power hitting style. Once again, English groundsmen made a wicket that helped the oppo. NZ would have been blasted off the park on a flat deck.

Even then, winning the toss in the WC Final is huge. The first five finals were one by the toss winner. I think only two of the thirteen finals have been won by the loser of the toss, though I could be wrong in that.

So you could say England actually batted brilliantly to overcome the huge toss disadvantage.
 
Robert said:
The wicket didn’t suit England’s power hitting style. Once again, English groundsmen made a wicket that helped the oppo. NZ would have been blasted off the park on a flat deck.

Even then, winning the toss in the WC Final is huge. The first five finals were one by the toss winner. I think only two of the thirteen finals have been won by the loser of the toss, though I could be wrong in that. Teams in the first 5 World Cups were not good enough to overcome the disadvantage of losing the toss then. Interesting.

So you could say England actually batted brilliantly to overcome the huge toss disadvantage.
Click to expand...

5 out of the last 6 World Cup finals have been won by the team losing the toss. Groundsmen at the CWC could not prepare wickets because of the weather although it is interesting how England got a fresh pitch before they faced India at Edgbaston just when they were about to be eliminated.
 
Robert said:
The wicket didn’t suit England’s power hitting style. Once again, English groundsmen made a wicket that helped the oppo. NZ would have been blasted off the park on a flat deck.

Even then, winning the toss in the WC Final is huge. The first five finals were one by the toss winner. I think only two of the thirteen finals have been won by the loser of the toss, though I could be wrong in that.

So you could say England actually batted brilliantly to overcome the huge toss disadvantage.
Click to expand...

Only Stokes and Buttler batted brilliantly, rest choked with the bat.
 
Remember that New Zealand had luck reaching the final. In the final, England got the luck. If you are winning close games by luck, eventually things will turn around.
 
England battered New Zealand in the group stage — group stage results have been used as tiebreakers before in World Cups — it was clear in the context of the tournament that England were the best team.
 
Nikhil_cric said:
5 out of the last 6 World Cup finals have been won by the team losing the toss. Groundsmen at the CWC could not prepare wickets because of the weather although it is interesting how England got a fresh pitch before they faced India at Edgbaston just when they were about to be eliminated.
Click to expand...

Despite the unpredictable weather? Come on. Nobody can rig pitches in England, the weather is all over the place.
 
James said:
England battered New Zealand in the group stage — group stage results have been used as tiebreakers before in World Cups — it was clear in the context of the tournament that England were the best team.
Click to expand...

Concur. Most runs scored, most boundaries hit, best bowling figures too.
 
As crazy as it sounds, ECB should have offered to share the trophy as a gesture. Taking nothing away from England who were leading tk the competition, clearly and by far the best ODI team in tje world for 3-4 years but on that given day NZ were not second to anyone.
 
Commiserations New Zealand. You have been outstanding throughout the tournament.

I still believe you were the better team in 2019 final and were the deserving winners ahead of England. That was your moment and England cheated their way to the trophy with that overthrow boundary off Ben Stokes’ bat.
 
Bhaijaan said:
Commiserations New Zealand. You have been outstanding throughout the tournament.

I still believe you were the better team in 2019 final and were the deserving winners ahead of England. That was your moment and England cheated their way to the trophy with that overthrow boundary off Ben Stokes’ bat.
Click to expand...

Bottom line is England won.
 
England were much better team that day and Deserved WC Champions. Everything favoured New Zealand that day besides last 2 overs which apparently the only thing stupid fans remembers.
 
Bhaijaan said:
NZ deserved to win.

England were awarded 4 free runs that proved to be the game changer.

Even the tied super over was a disgrace
Click to expand...
Fortune was on the side of NZ in the semi final. They huffed and puffed to reach last 4. In the semi final, one day match happened over 2 days. India had to deal with morning freshness of the pitch next day. If India had chased on the same they would have won comprehensively.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Savak
New Zealand becoming the new Australia for Pakistan since 2011
Replies
29
Views
952
GoUgandaCranes
GoUgandaCranes
mominsaigol
A new low? Pakistan’s dismal ICC record since 2022
2
Replies
95
Views
3K
Mesozoic
Mesozoic
FearlessRoar
  • Locked
  • Poll Poll
What total can New Zealand defend to beat India in the ICC Champions Trophy 2025 final?
Replies
12
Views
483
Kriketer
Kriketer
Ball Blazer
New Zealand (180/5) beat South Africa (177/6) by 3 runs in final to win Zimbabwe Twenty20 Tri-Series 2025
Replies
43
Views
1K
Nikhil_cric
N
Savak
Should Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis performances against New Zealand in the 90's have any value, given they were a horribly weak side back then?
Replies
18
Views
1K
Ab Fan
Ab Fan
Back
Top