Of most interest to Yorkshire would be the Hampshire vs Somerset match, which started today. Hants, of course, were one point behind Yorkshire in 8th place before this round.
Hants are off to a useful start with Dawson and Adams taking them to 61-0.
Hants 84-0 now, and remember this match started today, so there has been no loss of play, unlike Yorkshire who've already lost the best part of a day's play.
A win by Hants or Warwicks and a draw or a loss by the Tykes, would be hugely damaging to our chances of staying up, especially since we'd have also played an extra match compared to Sussex - another demotion candidate.
Lunch - Somerset trail by 11 runs with 7 wickets remaining
It looks like Somerset have saved the match and that it will be drawn, so Yorkshire still have everything to play for with three matches left. Although without Bressy, Rashid, or an overseas player and considering the appalling form of Rudolph and McGrath, I still say we are the favourites to go down.
Probable standings after this round
5.Warwicks 129 from 13
6. Hampshire 128 from 13
7. Yorkshire 127 from 13
8. Sussex 120 from 12
The Hants vs Somerset was drawn due to bad light .....a positive for the new rules where the umpires make the decision about the light ... in the past Hants could have batted on as they needed the win
The umpires are now the Arbitars of badlight. I can understand Hants beeing miffed that the umps went of and denied them a possible 10 extra points. The light was very bad at Scarborough yesterday, if the umpires had adopted exactly the same procedures and rules we should have gone of for bad light and won. Lets have consistency please.
Yes it was dark & the rules are different for one day games ... but you are right that there's inconsistency .... some umpires want to play whilst others use any excuse possible to get off the field...... most of us prefer the former
Durham looking good again today having Somerset 156-6.
We would let them wriggle off the hook from here and get to 350-400 but I suspect durham will skittle Somerset for about 220 as their pace attack fights to get hold of the ball and get some tail end wickets
correct me if i am wrong but were a few posters going on about Key not being someone we should sign in view of his size and fitness levels?
Remind me - what does Blackwell look like again?
Please note that cricketers come in all shapes and sizes from the tall Steve Finn to the small Taylor at Leicts (or for you oldies Harry Pilling to Joel Garner).
Similarly they can range from Colin Milburn to stick thin like Jonathan Agnew.
Ability, application and attitude count - not how many pies or cream bins you eat.
Let's hear it for all the fatties out there....
Let's be honest, exceptional players can be successful in spite of their lack of physical fitness. For most players - like Blackwell/Mags/Key - they can just about hold their own. But imagine how good they could be (or would have been) if they'd been more professional and dedicated in their approach?
There has to be some connection between Flintoff's perrennial knee problems and the excess weight he's been carrying.
It's a question of commitment - if they're really serious about their chosen career they should take resposnibillity for their diet and fitness...
On the other thread I mentioned Key's inability to run between the wickets, which is not in any way related to Blackwell's ability to walk up to the wicket and bowl.