The final of the Cricket World Cup 2019 was arguably one of the greatest one-day international games in the history of the sport.
Although there had to be a winner, many believe that New Zealand did not lose the match based on merit.
Encouragement from the Prime Minister
This was New Zealand’s second successive loss in the final of the tournament but the New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern focused on the positives from their campaign.
Jacinda, on her Instagram, posted:
https://www.instagram.com/p/Bz6GGRtg8QP/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
In an interview, she further added:
I think probably like a lot of New Zealanders I’m still feeling quite traumatized by that match. It was an incredible game, I can’t recall seeing a game like it and I think it will just go down in history for just being a remarkable game of cricket.
But regardless of that final outcome I just feel incredibly proud of the Black Caps and I hope every New Zealander does because they played remarkable cricket across the course of that tournament, and they certainly did in that last match.
New Zealand Sports Minister Questions Super Over
The New Zealand Sports Minister Grant Robertson, however, questioned the tie-break method.
https://twitter.com/grantrobertson1/status/1150467301684047872
He further boosted the morale of the team by praising them and claimed that the New Zealand team are a gutsy and a team with integrity.
https://twitter.com/grantrobertson1/status/1150474544143986688
‘ICC – You’re a Joke’
Former Kiwis legendary cricketer Scott Styris labeled the governing body as a joke following the conclusion of the match. He took to Twitter to express his views.
Nice work @ICC … you are a joke!!!
— Scott Styris (@scottbstyris) July 14, 2019
He then retweeted a tweet which emphasized that the match should be considered a tie.
https://twitter.com/scgmacgill/status/1150476262760038400
Later on, Scott further explained his disappointment in response to a question by a renowned Indian commentator Harsha Bhogle.
He said that ICC should have shared the trophy after the scores were tied in the Super Over as well.
Shared. This isnt franchise cricket, nor is it a match to find a winner to advance a stage. It was two fabulous teams who battled for 100 overs. Simply a tie https://t.co/PywsqHrDRE
— Scott Styris (@scottbstyris) July 15, 2019
Exciting Final but a Cruel One
Another former New Zealand legend Stephen Fleming, in an interview, claimed that New Zealand did not deserve to lose the game. He also took to Twitter and posted the following tweet:
Cruel!
— Stephen Fleming (@SPFleming7) July 14, 2019
Massive Support for New Zealand
A Herald Sun journalist Sam Landsberger said that ICC’s rules are unfair.
ICC rules state that the World Cup trophy is shared if the final is washed out.
So it seems strange that England and New Zealand would be declared joint winners after rain, but not after they literally cannot be split. Two ties and it goes to a boundary countback. Hmmm. #CWC19
— Sam Landsberger (@SamLandsberger) July 14, 2019
Arbitrary method of a winner.
I know it won't happen, but, does anyone else agree that, when you need to resort to such an arbitrary method to find a winner between two such evenly matched teams, the Cricket World Cup title and trophy should be shared between England and New Zealand for the next four years?
— Mauve and Yellow Army. (@MauveAnd) July 15, 2019
Cricketing legend, Sir Gary Sobers, had his say.
#WorldCup2019 |
The ICC World Cup 2019 trophy should have been shared by England and New Zealand, felt Sir Garfield Sobers after both teams' scores were tied after 50 overs as well as the Super Over.
Story by: Bipin Danihttps://t.co/c1u5GsSc65— Mid Day (@mid_day) July 16, 2019
India’s Test cricketer, Pujara, agrees to a shared trophy.
Cheteshwar Pujara says both the teams–England and New Zealand–should have shared the trophyhttps://t.co/T39l34ZHhY
— News Nation (@NewsNationTV) July 15, 2019
Do you think the World Cup trophy should have been shared by New Zealand and England? Let’s discuss in the comments section below.
No, it should not have been shared. Rules were pretty clear before the start of final and Newzeland’s team was very well aware what they needed to win the world cup. If they couldn’t then that means they lost. We could say that for NRR method which resulted in Pakistan team not qualifying for semis. Many people also argued against this method but rules were defined beforehand and all teams were aware to keep the NRR better for their position. One who couldn’t is to be blamed not ICC.
Finally a sane comment. Completely agree with you.
If you say rules to be followed then how about the same rules which umpires didn’t follow regarding overthrow. And also y didn’t ICC itself didn’t follow these defined rules made by them after such situation. Is it written anywhere in rules book that any umpire can oversee his decision based utterly on not knowing about any action happens on the field. Or just by simply saying I was totally unaware about what just happened on the field. I think rules should be thoroughly memorised by the two main person (umpires) who are deciding the faith of a player n a team.
Yes, I agreed the trophy shared with them.
Yes, NZ did not lose the game. It is a tie. There was no NRR issue in the final. It should have been very simple . Not of boundaries but which team kept more wickets should have been declared winner.
England was playing with 13 players. 2 of them were on field umpires. Otherwise NZ was the actual winner. ICC should have split the trophy and prize because it was a tie. Boundry count is not a good way to declare a winner.
thats right. trophy should be divided between them.