Cricketers, current and former, shared New Zealand’s pain on losing the World Cup title on boundary countback with tournament top-scorer Rohit Sharma asking for a “serious look” into the rule, which was slammed as “absurd” by several former players.
In a pulsating encounter on Sunday night at the Lord’s,England were adjudged the winners of the world Cup on the basis of theirsuperior boundary count – 22 fours and two sixes — to New Zealand’s 16 after the epic final, andalso the ensuing Super Over, ended in a tie.
“Some rules in cricket definitely needs (sic) a seriouslook in,” tweeted Rohit on Monday. Rohit amassed 648 runs in thetournament, including five hundreds, before India were knocked out in thesemifinal stage.
Former India opener Gautam Gambhir, who is now aparliamentarian, lambasted the ICC for the “ridiculous” rule.
“Don’t understand how the game of such proportions, the#CWC19Final, is finally decided on who scored the most boundaries. A ridiculousrule @ICC. Should have been a tie. I want to congratulate both @BLACKCAPS &@englandcricket on playing out a nail biting Final,” Gambhir wrote on histwitter handle.
Gambhir’s former teammate Yuvraj Singh also disagreed withthe rule.
“I don’t agree with that rule ! But rules are rulescongratulations to England on finally winning the World Cup, my heart goes outfor the kiwis they fought till the end. Great game an epic final !!!!#CWC19Final,” he wrote.
Former New Zealand all-rounder Scott Styris called the ICC ajoke.
“Nice work @ICC … You are a joke!!!,” he wrote.
Indian spin legend Bishan Singh Bedi was also scathing inhis criticism of the ICC rules.
“Grossly unimaginative ICC rules help #England winWorld Cup..Ideally it would have been better if both Eng & NZ were declaredjoint winners..& shared the Cup..As underdogs #NZ did more to create suchan amazing result..While #Eng were expected to win hands down..Think ICCthink!,” he tweeted.
“The DL system is actually based on runs and wicketslost… Yet the Final result is only based on Boundaries hit? Not fair in myopinion. Must have been great to watch!,” wrote former Australian batsmanDean Jones.
Opting to bat, New Zealand had put up a modest 241 foreight. In reply, England ended at the same score leading to the one-overeliminator.
In the Super Over, England batted first and the duo of BenStokes, who kept the hosts in the game with a brilliant 84 off 98 balls, andJos Buttler made 15, and New Zealand also ended at the same score but for theloss of one wicket, paving the way for an English victory on boundary count.
Former Australian pacer Brett Lee called for a change in therule.
“I’ve got to say that it’s a horrible way to decide thewinner. This rule has to change,” he tweeted.
Former New Zealand cricketers were also left hugelydisappointed by the ICC’s rule, describing it as “absurd” and”unfortunate”.
Former Black Caps all-rounder Dion Nash said he felt cheatedafter the finals.
“I feel really empty, and a bit cheated,” he wasquoted as saying in stuff.Co.Nz.
“Clearly, it’s ridiculous… Really absurd. It’s aboutas random as tossing a coin.”
Nash, however, said there was no point complaining as therules were laid down much before the tournament.
“But you also have to look at it from the (view of the)people setting the rules. I mean who thinks it’s going to be a draw, and thenyou draw in the Super Over? What are the chances?
“You can’t complain, it was done at the start of the tournament.But I think that’s probably indicative of where the game’s mindset’s at. Whynot credit the guys who took the most wickets?
“The real measure that was used for generations wasleast amount of wickets lost. So why have we changed that?”
Kyle Mills, who was part of the 2015 team which lost itsfirst-ever World Cup final to Australia, felt that the decision could have beenon the basis of wickets lost.
“I guess the game of cricket is about runs and wicketsand when the runs are tied, it’d be ideal then to take it back to how manywickets were lost,” he said.
“It’s just unfortunate. Those are the rules, we can’tcomplain.”