How sporting is that?

What a weekend it has been. The longest Wimbledon final and a Super Over cliffhanger of a finish at Lord’s, all in a day’s play. The winner takes it all is the norm, but was there a loser? (‘England win Cricket World Cup after Super Over drama,’ July 15, Gulf Today).

It was a cathartic moment for English cricket and historic for Eoin’s Morgan’s side to lift the prized trophy. The team ended their 44-year wait for a maiden title by beating gutsy Kiwis on boundaries after a tied Super Over amidst heart-stopping drama. I enjoyed the final like no other and as highlighted it is the greatest final in the history of the Cup.

Two dramatic run-outs in the final over of England’s innings and with the scores tied on 241 the game was pushed into a Super Over. The Super Over also ended in a tie. And yet we were not satisfied. Both the teams were evenly matched and should have been declared joint winners. But no, there has to be a winner. So we cross the ‘boundary’ and we finally have a winner.

Let’s move over to tennis and there too, a similar fate. After a 4-hour and 57 minute marathon session, the winner Novak Djokovic was decided by a final set tiebreak. By doing so Djokovic became the first man in 71 years to win the title from match points down. Did Federer lose? Not to me. Pointless competiveness has no winner.

Ved Rodrigues
By email