September 23-26 Yorkshire vs Hampshire
Headingley Carnegie
Start time: 10:30
PREVIEW: It's all very simple: Yorkshire require six points to guarantee their staying in the first division in the County Championship. The Yorkshire lineup basically picks itself from the usual suspects and two from Rafiq, Kruis, and Bairstow.
Yorkshire: Jacques RUDOLPH, Joe SAYERS, Anthony McGRATH (cap), Andrew GALE, Jonathan BAIRSTOW, Gerard BROPHY, Ajmal SHAHZAD, Matthew HOGGARD, Deon KRUIS, Ajmal RAFIQ, David WAINWRIGHT, Adam LYTH
Hampshire: TBA
Headingley Carnegie ground guide:Link Weather:Link Yorkshire CC form guide (Most recent last) W D D D W
David Wainwright is the only 'regular' Yorkshire bowler with an average under 30 per wicket
Live league table: Link Live Yorkshire averages: Link BBC Radio: Link Hampshire website: Link Yorkshire's all-time CC record vs Hampshire: P 159 Won 72 Tied 0 Lost 19 Drawn 68
Stats & Trivia: Yorkshire's lowest innings total is 23 versus Hampshire at Middlesbrough, Acklam Park in 1965
Next Match : September 27 | PRO40: Yorkshire vs. Essex at Headingley Carnegie
don't worry, the longer the delays, then the greater chances of a draw and a one innings game where we just need to get a handful of bonus points.
It is also worth remembering that its nearly late September and we are up north so its the schedulers fault that its dark this time of the year not the players!
Kruis selection seems sensible looking at the weather - also the potential for a stop start day tends to favour the bowlers more than the batters so a good decision to bowl on winning the toss.
I work 10 minutes drive from Headingley, and it's easily bright enough to play. It is now much brighter than it was at 10.30. Why are they not playing? I'll be there for the start of the afternoon session, so maybe they're waiting for me.
Mr Lees, last week's commentator at Hove, gave us the low down on Ajmal Rafiq, together with Amjal Shahzad, Ajmal Shahzeer, Azzam Rafiq and a number of others with similar names. Apparently, they're all very promising cricketers, probably of Asian extraction, though none is quite so good as Anil [sic] Rashid, who played at Hove last year.
Looking at the live webcam the cloud formation hasn't changed by the slightest in the last hour,so I'll presume it isn't working.If it is then no wonder there's been no play - it's bloody dark.
so I take it we did not cap Shahzad or Wainwright at the start of play as speculated?
Apparently the Committee are meeting today to discuss Hoggy and Shahzad contracts. I hope they are in an office with a view of the ground so they can see them both trying to bowl out Hampshire.
I also hope the committee members can tell them apart...
time for dog-walking, grass-cutting, going to the toilet or drinks machine or whatever else you need to do to buy us a wicket guys. If we can agree a timetable so we don't all do it at once then we may be able to get a few wickets by the close of play.
Perhaps the Headingley cloud cover is a dated myth after all and we should have batted when we won the toss but on this occasion I don't think we can blame Mags for bowling
Good ideas, but I've long since passed out with stress and anxiety.
I wondering, with more points on offer for batting than for bowling, and having to bat 4th, why McGrath would put Hants in and effectively give control to the opposition? I'd much rather be 109-1 as Hants are at present than be bowling.
Yes, he and Sidebottom are two fine players who we should never have let go. I believe ML would make an excellent captain, but it is unlikely we could attract him away from his new found home county.
I was disappointed we departed from two spinners plan and waited so long today to bowl Wainwright.
Let us hope for good weather for next two days and that Rudolph can survive the new ball spell.
Whatever happens, the end of season in CC has provided lots of interest in both the divisions!
I'm intrigued as to why Michael Lumb might make a good captain. I've seen quite a bit of him over the last few seasons and I've often felt he has lots of raw ability as a batsman but lacks tactical astuteness. In fact, he's associated in my memory with a number of rash dismissals.
And how would he fit into the general development plan? With the emergence of Bairstow, Lyth, Ballance and Root, is another batsman a priority?
Hoggie is struggling mightily in what might be his last match for Yorkshire. A disappointing performance among many disappointing performances for the Hoggster in the later half of the season.
Come to think of it, all three of today's strike bowlers (at least two, anyway) will likely not be with the club next season. I wonder what incentive they have in bowling their hearts out help to keep Yorkshire from crashing into division two, when they are either retiring or moving on.
Hoggie is struggling mightily in what might be his last match for Yorkshire. A disappointing performance among many disappointing performances for the Hoggster in the later half of the season.
Come to think of it, all three of today's strike bowlers (at least two, anyway) will likely not be with the club next season. I wonder what incentive they have in bowling their hearts out help to keep Yorkshire from crashing into division two, when they are either retiring or moving on.
It's only a few seasons since everybody was taking it for granted that McGrath was departing for Lancashire. Don't underestimate the part played by agents in maintaining this sort of uncertainty.
Rose tinted spectacles are being retrieved here. While at Yorkshire he was a perrenial under achiever and i for one was pleased when he left and space was created for the likes of Gale. It's to his credit that the change of club has revived his game and I'm pleased to see him doing well - but he always struck me a diffident and aloof character - and the very worst candidate for captaincy I would have thought...
Micheal Lumb was an under acheiver in every season he was at Yorkshire and since moving to Hants he has remained a perennial under-acheiver. Just check his stats, his highest score is still only 147 and that was when he was at Yorkshire and he scores very few centuries per season if any (last season=1).
A poor day. A frustrating morning when alledged "bad light" in perfectably playable conditions forced the players off until 1pm. Followed by two poor sessions by us on a very good batting wicket. Then on the journey home no cricket scores of the other matches, as per usual, on Radio Football live. Not even 1 sentence or even 1 word about ANY other sport apart from football.
It would have been the correct decision to put them in, but the umpires decided to nullify any advantage we had by keeping the players off the field until the cloud cover had lifted and batting was a lot easier. No early morning dew on the pitch for use to utilise, no early morning cloud cover, and no advantage for us re slightly murky light. No, everything had to be perfect in the umpires eyes before Hants were allowed to bat. It`s no wonder CC is dying a death with umpires like these two in this match.
If the toss was made under cloudy conditions - which may be what persuaded Mags to bowl first - and the Umpires then delay the start of play (rightly or wrongly) until conditions have completely changed - wouldn't it be fair to make the toss again? Or even allow the previously victorious tosser to change his original decision?
That is my point. The toss should be made 30 mins before the commencement of play. If it rains for the whole of the first day the toss is made 30 mins before play commences on the second day. If the toss had been made at the correct time (ie 12.30 for a 1pm start), Mags would have batted first as starting an innings in sunlight at 1 pm is a completely different ball game to commencing at 10.30 with early morning dew and seam movement.
This message has been edited by stu789 on Sep 23, 2009 8:27 PM
Today showed why so many people don't go to cricket. Just before the scheduled start it was anounced that Yorks had won the toss & decided to bowl ,,, but the game wouldn't start due to bad light. All we then got was an anouncement on the scoreboard .... the umpires appeared to have decided that they wouldn't start until the light was excelent ... if so why did they allow the toss to be made? Nothing was said until around 12:18 we were told that lunch was to be taken at 12:20.
IF Yorkishre had realised what was going to happen I'm sureMags would have batted. The pitch played well ... although McGrath did get the odd ball to keep low. There was some variable bowling .... all had good spells & not so good spells.
I agree with others who state that had we tossed up JUST BEFORE play was due to begin then McGrath would have opted to bat........There is no doubt that at 10.30am it was gloomy but in my opinion from approx 11.00am it was fit to play......the umpires spent time in the middle from approx 11.15am but after a short period, Mr Cowley retired back to the stand leaving Mr Bodenham speaking to the groundstaff for what seemed an age........the lack of official communication beggard belief.....all the crowd got was a notice on the Scoreboard indicating 'Play will start when the light improves'.....it was pretty shambolic and only added to some of the belief that there is no consideration for paying audiences.
When play eventually started, Hampshire never really looked in any kind of trouble and our attack toiled on what looked to be a pretty docile track. Good efforts from Kruis,Shazad ( at times) and Wainwright but I felt that Hoggard was very ordinary and Lumb took a real liking to him.
Chris Waters in the YP slates into the umpires as well. One disgruntled spectator told Cowley he was rubbish as a player and no better as an umpire - thanks to whoever it was for ensuring we got no lbws during the course of the day.
Can we leave our criticisms of the umpires til after the game or our Div 1 survival is guaranteed and that seems to be a bit away at the moment.
Hopefully its a good omen Lumb doing well and the other son of a Yorkshire old boy will mark the occasion with his debut century to ensure our survival.
