Nah ICC have already said in that article that the rules are interpreted by on field umpires and they don’t comment on any of their decisions
Taufel (the umpire quoted)also said 'the act' could be when it's hits Stokes bat, by which time they had completed two runs, meaning six was the right call.
The rules say the act must be the wilful act of a fielder so doesn't cover the ball hitting Stokes' bat. Unless of course the fielder deliberately aimed for it.
This one is a bit like whether a player was offside or not, the ref gives the goal and when it is looked at later he was offside, but the ref decision at the time stands.
Still on cloud 9 after Sunday, what a match. Was brilliant to see all the Yorkies and ex Yorkies involved throughout the tournament too. Was only last September I was stood with Plunkett as he was giving interviews at Headingley for his final appearance. I won't lie either, I thought he was past his best at that time, then he puts in those great bowling performances. Legends all of them
The only bad thing about Sunday was that we weren't playing Australia. Imagine beating them via a controversial run and a super over. How sweet would that have been!
That would have been sweet, it was a shame we had to beat such a good set of lads like NZ in the end. Still cheating despite everything as Roys dismissal proved, contrast that to Guptill who instantly signalled for a six when his mate touched the line!
Absolutely. We were searching a long time for a bowler who'd pick up wickets in the middle overs when the balls doing nothing. Never believed it would be him, or 'his type'. It seems a lot of teams just triy to fill the middle overs using up their weakest bowlers. Plunkett made this a specialism with his cross seam