Thank god for the Gilchrist century otherwise it could of turned out to be a shit match. It was pretty shit anyway only 38 overs. ... AT least the Final has to be 50 oversbrogan77 said:Errr nah, the Australian innings was brilliant to watch. <3 gilly.
Also, gg threadstarter. YR PREDICTIVE CAPABILITIES ARE AMAZINGGGGG.
fukken lolbos1234 said:damn aus were lucky once again,,,,,,,,,,,
sl were on their way to achieve the target EASILY until the rain intervened..
stupid aus cheating and running down the middle of the pitch
we'll be back
bigger and better
at exactly which point did sri lanka had any chance of savaging the game?? sri lanka were on the back foot from the first over and never looked like getting into even terms with the aussies.bos1234 said:damn aus were lucky once again,,,,,,,,,,,
sl were on their way to achieve the target EASILY until the rain intervened..
stupid aus cheating and running down the middle of the pitch
we'll be back
bigger and better
To be honest - Australia didnt dominate the lankans. more like Gilchrist did. Hayden and Ponting both struggled and got out in the thirties - I mean normally that takes some effort especially when Hayden is in form.Exphate said:Your reasoning rediculous. And as for the "running on the pitch" bullshit you are kidding yourself with, Ponting did it once, when Clarke was hit with a dead ball, what is he meant to do? Jump off the side of the pitch? Aleem Da and Steve Bucknor had a rediculously bad night last night. I mean, who offers the light and then demands they come back on!!!
In what facset? THe fact that Jawardine didnt wanna come back tomorrow? Or the fact that Australia dominated the Lankans without any shadow of a doubt.
did you even watch the game??wuddie said:at exactly which point did sri lanka had any chance of savaging the game?? sri lanka were on the back foot from the first over and never looked like getting into even terms with the aussies.
once aust were 0-149 it was all but over. put into perspective that none other aust batsmen made any real contribution, when we expect everyone else to blast away like gilly did, esp hayden and symonds, the situation could have got a lot worse for sri lanka.
aust raped every team in every game right through the tournament, it is only justice that they win the world cup. three in a row baby!
bos1234 said:did you even watch the game??
it was clsoer than what everybody thinks.. dont jsut look at the final score and judge the game
at about the 16-17th over sl and aus were evenly matched. Aus hadnt lsot any wickets and sl had lost 1..
The toss was very very crucial.
mednerd said:yeah i agree with hotshot, it was a close game until jay and sangkarra got out....batting first was a huge advantage...icoz there was no spin, swing, seam, wen lanka bowled, and wen they batted it was poor lighting, some swing and spin for the bowlers, rain and the D and L to worry about, wet ground to slow the ball in the outfield, momentum stops due to rain
the pitch was relli unfair to those batting 2nd
t was basicallly 50:50 game...whoevea won the toss would win the game (aka bat first)...but u cant take the game awya from gilchris who made the best innings after some poor form, the 4 best team went into the semi finals, best 2 teams into the final and the best team won.
it would have been great to have a final without rain and 50 overs, it would have been a much closer game...congratz aussies
and wuddie, yea it would have been relli bad if symonds, clark, ponting and hayden started, but they didnt because the lankans bowled better to them than they did to gilchris
doesnt matter, he and hotshot got most of it rite and icc orgnisers realise itI disagree with nearly everythign you said then.
Ok ill back down.funnybunny said:doesnt matter, he and hotshot got most of it rite and icc orgnisers realise it
on a side note...finally the icc looks at shortening the cup.