12/30/24
July 14, 2019
England win Cricket World Cup: This is a match that was all New Zealand behind their incredible bowling and ever better fielding, but England's bats did just enough to tie the match and force a super over where they put 15 runs. New Zealand chased it and it came down to needing 2 runs on the last ball. They literally fell just inches away from getting that many to win, but alas for them, they couldn't get it. Amazing match!
I don't understand that play. I'm probably not capable of understanding a simple explanation, though. Now that the U.S. is supposed to get eight cricket stadiums, including ones in Orlando and Atlanta, I'm starting to feel the temptation to debaffleize myself about this sport.
posted by rcade at 10:42 AM on July 15, 2019
The match ended up in a tie, so they went into a super over to determine a winner. The super over also ended up in a tie, 15 runs each. In the case of a super over ending in a tie, some tie-breakers come into place, and in this particular case, the boundary quantity rule is what determined England as the winner. They simply hit more boundaries than New Zealand.
From this article:
The clause, which also applies to semi-finals, states that the team that hit the most boundaries (fours and sixes combined) during their batting innings and super over innings combined will be declared the winner. In the final England hit 26 boundaries to New Zealand's 17.
posted by NoMich at 11:18 AM on July 15, 2019
For those who don't understand cricket perhaps a layman's explanation from a baseball perspective might be helpful.
In cricket, the bowler (think pitcher) delivers the ball to one of two batsmen. When the batsman hits the ball, he and the other batsman run between the two wickets (bases). It would be like hitting a baseball and then running to first base, but at the same time you have a man on first who is running to home plate.
The fielding team can get you out if they throw the ball back to the infield and dislodge the bails before you cross the batting line (very similar to tagging a runner out).
So on the play linked above, New Zealand needed two runs to win. Guptill hit the ball and he and Neesham completed one run. They then turned and tried to complete a second run, but Roy was able to throw the ball back in, and Buttler dislodged the bails before Guptill crossed the line. Guptill is out.
Because Guptill was out, the second run was not completed so they only scored one. New Zealand needed two runs to win, so by only scoring one the game was tied (again). As NoMich mentioned, they went to the next tiebreaker to determine the winner (both teams knew that England would win if the scores were tied, which is why they celebrated when they got Guptill out).
As a Canadian who lived in England and got into cricket, this was without doubt the most exciting conclusion to a cricket match I've ever seen. That it would happen in the world cup final was all the more amazing. Finals in any sport are so often anti-climactic, but this was one for the ages " it will never be duplicated. The slow build of tension that culminated in the last hour of play was excruciating
posted by geneparmesan at 02:57 PM on July 16, 2019
The final play of the world cup