What should have been the result of this match?

[chainsmoker1985]

Just watched this thrilling video on youtube, thanks to Robelinda.... This is a match between Australia and WI. And IMO, whatever outside interruptions they had in the match, but WI won this match quite clearly.. But some dumb referee decides- the result of the match as 'TIE'. Watch this vid and decide yourself. IMO, West Indies should have been the winners. [ame=

CROWD 5th ODI West Indies v Australia 1999 - crazy scenes - YouTube[/ame] Here's the scorecard of this match http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64622.html

[Crookbond]

Add "Abandoned" to your poll list.

[chainsmoker1985]

Add "Abandoned" to your poll list.

Yea, I agree, that option could have been there but Can't change the poll options now.. Its impossible for me. Only mods can do that

[Crookbond]

If there's anything THIS is the match where the result needs to be reversed. I am sorry Raman Subba Row - wrong decision.

[GautiMaan]

The decision was made on a technicality,Arthurton did'nt uproot the stumps thus the run-out was incomplete,but looks like both captains were consulted.imo west indies should have won. On another note credit to steve waugh for not giving up,one of our players might have left it after the first run.

[chainsmoker1985]

If there's anything THIS is the match where the result needs to be reversed. I am sorry Raman Subba Row - wrong decision.

If it was India who suffered, there'd have been big Row..... But WI accepted it gracefully :hatsoff:

[chainsmoker1985]

The decision was made on a technicality,Arthurton did'nt uproot the stumps thus the run-out was incomplete,but looks like both captains were consulted.imo west indies should have won. On another note credit to steve waugh for not giving up,one of our players might have left it after the first run.

Why was there a need for Arthurton to uproot the stumps? He dislodged the bails which was more than enough... You r right about Steve Waugh, actually in that era, all the players from all the countries used to show a lot of fighting spirit unlike modern players who acts like cotton dolls

[Crookbond]

If it was India who suffered' date=' there'd have been big Row..... [b']But WI accepted it gracefully :hatsoff:

More than once in this series Australians were threatened by the local police to withdraw cover if they didn't get what they wanted (Lara called back, Sherwin Campbell called back etc.). I am sure that must have played a part.

[PriyankaSR]

Aussie possie

[GautiMaan]

Why was there a need for Arthurton to uproot the stumps? He dislodged the bails which was more than enough... You r right about Steve Waugh, actually in that era, all the players from all the countries used to show a lot of fighting spirit unlike modern players who acts like cotton dolls

When Arthurton takes the bails off, Warne had made his ground, therefore waugh is not run out. For Waugh to be run out, he would have had to uproot atleast one of the stumps with the ball in his hands(this is the law if the bails are already off).This is why you see Arthurton running back to the pitch after initially celebrating. But all the stumps were removed by that time.

[adi B]

crap security, mad fans, wtf was that, i would rather award the match to australia :--D

[Ultimate_Game]

I would have awarded the match to Aus. Sorry, but if you can't control your fans it should be awarded to your opponents and the home team has ot to be penalized when such a scenario occurs. If you "abandon" the game or call it a "tie" it only sends the message to fans that they can barge in and disrupt the game whenever their team is not doing well.

[yoda]

I would have awarded the match to Aus. Sorry' date=' but if you can't control your fans it should be awarded to your opponents and the home team has ot to be penalized when such a scenario occurs. If you "abandon" the game or call it a "tie" it only sends the message to fans that they can barge in and disrupt the game whenever their team is not doing well.[/quote'] ++

[chainsmoker1985]

More than once in this series Australians were threatened by the local police to withdraw cover if they didn't get what they wanted (Lara called back' date=' Sherwin Campbell called back etc.). I am sure that must have played a part.[/quote'] Well then hatsoff to Australia for showing the spirit to continue playing despite being treated so badly by the hosts But honestly this was one of those crappiest behaviors of spectators that I have ever seen. There was an incident in a football match in middle east or Turkey recently, where hundreds of people were died. Although this can't be compared to that football match incident but yet this was one of the dumbest crowd ever.

[chainsmoker1985]

When Arthurton takes the bails off, Warne had made his ground, therefore waugh is not run out. For Waugh to be run out, he would have had to uproot atleast one of the stumps with the ball in his hands(this is the law if the bails are already off).This is why you see Arthurton running back to the pitch after initially celebrating. But all the stumps were removed by that time.

Ok I'd like to bring in a different perspective here. If you see closely, Arthurton got complete control of the ball and dislodged the bails, although Shane Warne was in. But match was technically over at that point only. And even Shane Warne wasn't even running for the 3rd run coz he knew that Arthurton had control of the ball so there was no point taking the 3rd run. Steve Waugh was running but by that point game was technically and practically over. So what I mean to say is- game was technically over at the point where Arthurton got the control of the ball and only 2 runs were completed at that point and there was no possiblity in the world for the 3rd run. And even Shane Warne thought game was over.

[chainsmoker1985]

I would have awarded the match to Aus. Sorry' date=' but if you can't control your fans it should be awarded to your opponents and the home team has ot to be penalized when such a scenario occurs. If you "abandon" the game or call it a "tie" it only sends the message to fans that they can barge in and disrupt the game whenever their team is not doing well.[/quote'] But thats not the fault of the players if fans are interrupting. Going by your logic, even that SL vs Pakistan game where terrorists attacked SL players, that game should have been awarded to SL where host board could not give full-proof security to the visiting team. So Pakistan don't deserve to win

[Crookbond]

I would have awarded the match to Aus. Sorry' date=' but if you can't control your fans it should be awarded to your opponents and the home team has ot to be penalized when such a scenario occurs. If you "abandon" the game or call it a "tie" it only sends the message to fans that they can barge in and disrupt the game whenever their team is not doing well.[/quote'] U_G, I have a different perspective. Controlling of crowds, fans etc. are a duty of the law & order of the country. To put their frailties on a cricket team is unfair towards the cricketers. I understand where you come from but this is what the ICC and the cricket boards should ensure. I wouldn't take away victory from a cricket team because its fans are ill-mannered.

[chainsmoker1985]

U_G' date=' I have a different perspective. Controlling of crowds, fans etc. are a duty of the law & order of the country. To put their frailties on a cricket team is unfair towards the cricketers. I understand where you come from but this is what the ICC and the cricket boards should ensure. I wouldn't take away victory from a cricket team because its fans are ill-mannered.[/quote'] ++ Exactly...

[Stuge]

Thats a sad ending to a thrilling contest .

[chainsmoker1985]

Thats a sad ending to a thrilling contest .

I actually loved to see the frustration in the eyes of Steve Waugh there at the end when he couldn't buy only 6 runs off the whole over. That was indeed a thrilling contest