I must say that was 1 of the best sporting events I've watched for years!!!!

There were half a dozen times in the last hour where I was certain England were going to lose. Including the last ball!

Incredible, freakish, written in the stars, couldn't make it up.




Oh, and in shite bumpy cars Hamilton won the British Grand Prix for the 6th time....

That was incredible drama, New Zealand were ridiculously unlucky with the four off Stokes bat sliding in when the game looked lost, but I am not sure I have ever seen a sporting event better than today, and England got over the line and did it.

It was amazing stuff. HCC was bouncing what a day!! On the quiet our little nation is the first to have bagged World Cup wins in the Worlds three biggest team sports.

Were you down Park Drive PJ?

Didn’t see you, but it was busy as fk like!

That has got to be the best game of anything I’ve seen

Agree with above, best sporting game ever and you just couldnt write what happened in them closing stages.

Park drive hat cam


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was stood near the bar in the little room, not seen an atmosphere like it watching anything!

I cant think of any sporting event that was so exciting.
So pleased it was on C4 so all could see.
The cricket authorities see to be getting things right now and on the horizon is a new format called The Hundred which would you believe is 100 balls.
It will be on Sky and BBC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hundred_%28cricket%29

Nothing right about the 100 it’s a ridiculous idea that needs scrapping.

Difficult to understand why it’s called the Cricket World Cup as only 10 teams in it, now people want a victory parade !
Why does my post say the shite rounders World Cup, I didn’t post that !

Why is it difficult to understand?

Does every team participate in FIFA World Cup finals?

Around 210 countries compete in the FIFA World Cup, there were 14 in the previous Cricket World Cup, 10 this time, winning the Cricket World Cup is not much of an achievement compared too winning the FIFA World is it considering the games required to qualify then the actual finals where 32 teams compete.
There will be shouts all round for knighthoods etc

I think when a subject crops up that you clearly know nothing about like this one for you it’s best to not talk about it.

HTH.

Just stating facts that’s all.

You aren’t you are completely wrong.

Wrong about what ?

But you aren't. It's like saying only 32 countries in the world play football because that was the number that qualified for the 2018 FIFA World Cup Finals in Russia.

Best game of high level sport I have ever seen, for it to come down to those fine margins in a World Cup Final with that level of tension and pressure was unbelievable. Celebration scenes at the end were incredible, I can't stop watching that final ball and the scenes afterwards, still getting goosebumps each time

But you aren't. It's like saying only 32 countries in the world play football because that was the number that qualified for the 2018 FIFA World Cup Finals in Russia.[/quote]

Only 10 countries entered I believe ?
Full Members are India, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand, England, West Indies, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Ireland, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Full Members can play International Test matches among them. only 14 countries play cricket, out of them 10 are regular qualifiers of World cup.

There were no preliminary rounds with other countries in the world, that’s the point I making

Full Members – The twelve governing bodies of teams that have full voting rights within the International Cricket Council and play official Test matches.

Associate Members – The 93 governing bodies in countries where cricket is firmly established and organized, but have not been granted Full Membership yet.

Not as bad as Baseball's World Series!!!!

Qualification for 2019 started immediately after the 2015 tournament based on a minute spent searching online.

I'm guessing that makes it about the same size as the Rugby World Cup as the IRB has 105 members as well

Exactly this. To suggest it was just ten countries is utterly ridiculous.

There was a preliminary round involving Scotland, Ireland, UAE, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan and West Indies, with the last two winning through.

Yet another competition Scotland have boycotted

Plus you have associate nations who didn’t qualify for the qualifying tournament which West Indies and Afghanistan got through. The ICC has 12 full members and 93 associate members who if they got to the required level could technically qualify for the World Cup.

Even if you weren’t talking shite what is the mentality of someone trying to suggest that England winning a World Cup isn’t much of an achievement. It’s absolute pinnacle of any elite sport to achieve that. It reminds me of some of crap spouted about the football team and Harry Kane winning the golden boot last summer. Such a depressing soul destroying outlook on life...

I’m not sure but did the England football team manager and Harry Kane receive knighthoods for finishing 4th in the World Cup? What will Morgan and the likes of Stokes or others receive, if anything for winning the World Cup?

Saint Benjamin

I am in complete agreement and am delighted that England is etched on the World Cup trophy.

However we won because we. we satisfied an arbitrary tie break rule concerning boundaries. Now as far as I am concerned, runs are runs and discriminating between boundaries and other runs is rubbish. I have played in limited overs competitions which had the much more craicket based tie break rule 'team losing fewest wickets wins'.
Had that rule been applied, New Zealand would be the champions.

ODI C ricket is all about attacking and hitting boundaries is what that’s all about not preserving wickets so I don’t think it’s a fairer or more or less rubbish way to decide things.

Plus the decider upon a tie is a super over this was the one in a million occasion when the game was tied twice, both teams knew that New Zealand had to beat our score going into those last 6 balls.

England have become the best team over a four year period because of the aggressive style of play they have adopted, so it’s quite fitting that it’s what got them just over the line. It was very hard on New Zealand, they were incredible, but that’s sport and its why we love it.

Southgate got an OBE - two down from a knighthood, and Kane got an MBE - three down. His was for winning the Golden Boot in Russia.


Not even a government as desperate as this one is would dish out knighthoods for doing quite well in one tournament! Winning the ICC World Cup probably rates a bit higher, but not knighthoods unless, say, Bayliss announced his retirement.

It’s the worlds second most popular sport old boy. Officially.

One other thing not mentioned much is before the semi finals the general consensus of opinion was that England had to win both tosses to win the tournament. Lost them both still won the World Cup.

Wickets would have been just about the only rule that NZ would have won under. We’d finished with more points, a better bet run rate and also beaten them in the group - surely in the event of a tie one of those 3 would have been a better indicator of the best team given the World Cup was held over 7 weeks

The best way to decide who won would be to have a drinking competition with the last man standing taking the honours for the team.

Ben Stokes would have won it............again.

....and the gay lad bashing contest.....just saying

Wrong again!

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7017269/g ... es-affray/

Just saying? Just saying something totally off the mark?

Standard really.

Wickets would have been just about the only rule that NZ would have won under. We’d finished with more points, a better bet run rate and also beaten them in the group - surely in the event of a tie one of those 3 would have been a better indicator of the best team given the World Cup was held over 7 weeks[/quote]

You are right gums. The winner of the corresponding match in the all play all part of the competition would be a better tie break rule.