Common dear, it was final ,and pretty awkward final rain intreptet several times for hours and yet the did it. Duck Luis system was applied in the final.
Ithink it should have been played on next day.
2007-04-28 22:59:41 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Cricket
Whats the name of that other team. All I know is my team the Aussies cleaned up a very inferior team in the best manner possible and are the greatest ever.~~
2007-04-28 23:05:53 · answer #1 · answered by burning brightly 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
It was a fiasco! How can you have a world cup final that starts out with less than fifty overs? Were we to rely on Duckworth Lewis? That is not how a final should be played, it's one thing in the pool matches or the super 8 but in the final? That is just plain wrong and not in the spirit of sportsmanship or fair play. Sri Lanka was disadvantaged by the rain and stop-start play. The game should simply have been replayed today.
Not to mention Australia's shocking behaviour, I didn't see the end of the match (the game ended well after midnight local time) but I was told in disgust how Australia celebrated a victory that was clearly not yet theirs. And how when the umpires informed them of this they were unhappy to return to the game and unwilling to continue play today. It's disgusting!
2007-04-29 07:25:43 · answer #2 · answered by mel_b 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Duckworth Lewis had almost nothing to do with the result. It was just 38 overs a side. The revised D/L total for the TWO overs lost was hardly different from the already impossible chase Sri-Lanka had after Jayasuria was out. Even if it had been 50 Overs Australia would have got 340+ instead of 281 from 38 and it would have been just as much a thrashing.
2007-04-30 00:12:23 · answer #3 · answered by securitron_ch 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yeah....i thought so...
D/L method just spoils the fun & excitement of the match with rain...
as it was final, there should have been a reserve day and if there's rain & some overs lost...it's the best idea to postpone the match to the next available day....no reason of playing reduced over....
ICC is dumb in this area....no sense at all....
2007-04-29 06:13:02 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
To play an event that comes in four years on a rain affected day is ridiculous. I think it were better played on another day
2007-04-29 06:29:36 · answer #5 · answered by Smruti 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh come on dude! Australia was in the match, and it's ICC's damn job to make them win no matter what happens!! Don't you know this already? Why did you even waste your time to ask this question? Honestly this was THE WORST world cup I've ever witnessed in my whole life!
2007-04-29 06:15:26 · answer #6 · answered by labyrinth 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
they shouldnt hv playd.it
it was a drama match...
1st it rains...then 38 over per side...
then rain stops play....they come bk nd ball is changd ndovers reducd 2 36 overs..
then at end of 33 overs match stppd --bad lite..
aus nd evry1 think aus hve won ..
celebration starts.....
suddenly likr hindi movie....Aleem Dar walks in--says play not over yet...
3 overs wl b playd after gud lite coms..
or if no gud lite coms then 3 overs next day..
and at laaaaaast Aus won..
whew.....that was dramatic,...
could hve won the oscars,..
ideally the finals shud hve bin a 50 over match.....
the spirut lost...but i njoyd tha match....
looong ans...rite...im tird
cya then
2007-04-29 07:11:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The umpires should have done it the next day.........it was soooo dark from the stumpcam
2007-04-29 06:13:24 · answer #8 · answered by bombers_5393 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋