Australian great Ian Chappell came out with a suggestion on how should the World Cup Final outcome be decided when a Super Over end in a tie, saying the teams should be declared the winners considering the status of the league phase.

There have been a lot of debate over England controversially adjudging the winners of the Cricket World Cup 2019 on the basis of their superior boundary count against New Zealand after both epic final and the Super Over ended in a tie last Sunday at Lord’s.

Chappell’s comment came after the result was criticized by many including Rohit Sharma, Gautam Gambhir, and Yuvraj Singh, though, the Aussie great said England would prove to be the winner even if ICC adheres to his suggestion in the just-concluded final at Lord’s.

In his column in ESPNcricinfo, Chappell wrote: “The ideal way to unravel a tied final is to consider the position of the two competing teams on the table at the end of the preliminary rounds. This provides a definitive answer as the teams are placed in that order either by virtue of the number of wins or by a net run-rate tie-breaker.”

He continued, “If the Super Over doesn't provide an outright winner then this is the least controversial way to decide a winner. England would still have won under this system, and they also comfortably defeated New Zealand in their round match.”

Meanwhile, the Decision Review System (DRS) was also criticized a lot following a number of wrong decisions during the World Cup, and Chappell has called for some change in the system.

Chappell signed off by saying, “A thorough overhaul of the DRS should place it in the hands of the umpires and not the players. And if the ICC was really serious about fairness in the decision-making process, they, and not than the television company that's providing the coverage, would be in total charge of the technology.”

(With ESPNcricinfo Inputs)