And props to South Africa for sticking with the quota system, even when it cost them a fair few talented players. Most painfully today, Grant Elliott. Doing the right thing sometimes comes with a price.
Lets see
Fielding errors including one farcical attempt by AB
Near 300 score to defend in a Semi Final under lights
12 off last over
They should have put them away. NZ played out of their skins but sans those RSA errors they would not have won. Its a choke.
Very prescient - props to you!
Am still waiting for my buttocks to unclench. 
I thought we’d lost.
And no nonsense about South Africa choking, it was a very even match and SA looked like winners for a long period.
One of those games which will live on in memory for both nations given our sporting ties.
So, has cricket ever been more popular in NZ after this tournament?
While I’m clearly not as knowledgeable in cricket as most of you, is there no bowling strategy to prevent a boundary over 2 balls? Perhaps a couple of head-high buncers impossible to hit, even if it means risking at least 1 wide ball?
Kohli before the semi - www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSqsuHu26i4
Even bouncers go for runs when batsman is in a flow. Its important to mix it. slow balls, bouncers, yorkers etc
what it means to them -
Every type of ball has risks. The best one is a yorker, but if its lenght even slightly off, it can become a full toss or a half volley and will be very easy to hit.
For a bouncer or a short ball generally, they can be hit as well as have the nightmare senario of a top edge which goes for four. And if you get your length and trajectory wrong it can disappear, as happened with Steyn today.
Balls that are ‘impossible to hit’ are generally called no-ball or wide in ODIs. It’s a batsman’s game, after all.
Underarm…
Thirty years ago a bowler with good pace (Steyn certainly would qualify) could get the short ball into the ribs of the batsman from just outside off. Batsmen found them hard to get away. Now there is so much innovation, premeditation and sheer power, that this wouldn’t necessarily work, even if perfectly executed.
Yes in the mid-1980s when Hadlee, Crowe, Cairns et al were playing. For a few years everyone had some interest in cricket.
Then it faded as former wooden spooners like Sri Lanka beat us and has only resurged recently because the Black Caps have a strong modest group of team players. They avoid the big egos.
Cricket is the major summer sport in NZ but nevertheless the number of actual players is small. I assume that per capita the game is much more popular in Australia, England etc. And India and Pakistan live and breath it.
I know that in a ODI, a bowler is only allowed to bowl 10 overs (60 balls). But does that mean he can only bowl in 10 overs? If not, then why don’t teams change bowlers during the over? For example, wouldn’t it be more advantageous if a right-armed fast bowler just bowls 1 or 2 balls, followed by a spinner for 2-3, followed by a left-armed bowler for the last 2-3 balls?
I read through the ODI rules, and it didn’t say that a bowler must bowl all 6 balls of the over, but maybe I missed it.
Here’s the contextfor that comment.
It’s implicit in Law 22.8that each over is to bowled by one bowler, unless that bowler is unable to do so through injury or suspension.
And here’s a brilliant articleon that last over, again putting things into context.
If India and Australia put on something half as exciting I’ll be more than happy.
The quinella
“M Dillon was replaced by CEL Stuart after 2 balls of his 3rd over due to abdominal pains. Stuart was withdrawn from the bowling crease for the remainder of the innings after bowling 2 high full-pitched deliveries (both called no-ball) in his first 3 balls. CH Gayle bowled the final 3 balls of the over.”
Innit.
McCullum’s blazing innings put NZ well in front of the asking rate. With 20 overs to go the required rate was approx 6.5 and from there the game was NZ’s to lose.
But SA kept the screws on and progressively ground their way back into the contest. With six to go I thought SA were almost in control but needed one wicket to consolidate.
Steyns was hurt before that start of the over and probably shouldn’t have bowled it. A Ferrari running on a flat tire. But there wasn’t an alternative.
If Steyn was unable to complete the over then the balance would have needed to be bowled by Duminy or de Villers.
The last over’s glory might go to Elliot but Vettori was absolutely faultless.
SA’s chances depended on keeping Vettori on strike. He faced three of the five deliveries. But he got off strike twice with byes and picked up a critical boundary.
Bowler must bowl in overs of 6 (legal) balls. If he gets injured between an over(or gets warnings for dangerous bowling) and has to leave the field, then the remaining part of the over will be completed by some other player.
Not quite sure why, since my final forecast was for SA to win a lowish-scoring game and actually NZ won a high-scoring one (chasing 298 off 43 is the equivalent of about 340 off the full 50). But thanks anyway.
Credit to both teams for giving the World Cup a game to remember. Would have loved to have been there, just for the atmosphere, never mind the drama.
Maybe NZ had the best of the D-L calculation - though for most of the last hour I was expecting them to end up with more than SA but less than the target and to call down mighty Maori curses on Professors Duckworth and Lewis.
And maybe we’ve become too inured to big hitting to appreciate just how well the batsmen on both sides did in scoring at 6+ an over against some very good bowling. And I still think bowlers get too little credit when batsmen get out - often enough it’s the pressure or the variation that produces the bad shot to a “harmless” ball.
Stats You Won’t Believe update: AB de Villiers and DA Miller added 55 for South Africa’s 5th wicket. De Villiers’ contribution was 4.
And a random thought - one day, McCullum is going to manage to stay in beyond the 10th over. And when that happens, a lot of records will be under threat.
Here’s hoping India - Australia is half as good
Here’s hoping to a double DQ in the SF! (:D)
One thing the Duckworth Lewis method does not take into account is how difficult it becomes to bat after a rain break. The conditions are now completely different and the wicket and outfield become challenging.