looks like a better day weather wise so hopefully a full days play and the umpires remove their dark sunglasses before arriving at the ground.
On the official site i was intrigued to see the following comment re Tickets for the match
"SPECIAL OFFER - If you pay £20 on admission you will be given a voucher to collect a replica Yorkshire 2009 shirt - effectively getting that shirt for just £5.
The match starts at 10.30am on each of the four days and tickets will be available on the gate priced at £15 adults and £10 concessions. Children under the age of 12 are admitted free. "
So if you are a fully paid up loyal YCCC member you would appear to be unable to get the 2009 shirt for a fiver but those just passing by on the odd occasion can?!
Also I like the clever marketing ploy of allowing under 12s in for free - epsecially when I would expect most under 12s to be safely tucked up in a school classroom somewhere for most of the day
Frankly, given that we're going to need a new kit supplier for next year following the collapse of Canterbury, we might as well give all of the current stock away. We certainly won't be able to sell it to anyone...
I wonder if the Club would be prepared to donate it to the Afghanistan Cricket Association - or any of the other developing countries where cricket is still in it's infancy? I hope it doesn't just get trashed.
which reminds me - how much of the headingley turf did they manage to sell last year and for those of you who bought a 'sod' how is it doing in your gardens? What happened to the turf that was not sold? Did a local club benefit from it at all?
Have you decided to install a new drainage system in your garden this winter under the new turf?
So next year we have a new kit supplier with no doubt a new design and colour scheme and whats the odds on yet another one day name change from Carnegie?
i had planned to go to the first 2 days but after yesterdays performance i am going to whitby with the wife for a relaxing day out. it was the worst advert for cricket i can remember. umpires being stupid over the light. a dead pitch. no fire in the cricket and even the fish shop was closed due to no gas. at least i will get my fish and chips in whitby.
apologies - I had forgotten how biased the bonus points system was to batting sides these days and you get the 1st point at the paltry 200 runs and not 250 as i thought.
I am going to risk the comment that the only way we can make a mess of this is if we have to follow on. Neither side needs to go for the win and the only way either could be relegated is if they lose this game so why would they risk any chance of that?
If we pass the follow on mark then we are unlikely to declare our innings and I cannot see how Hampshire would declare their second innings and risk losing the game if we knock them off as a draw suits them as well. It may make for very boring cricket for the next 2 days but needs must.
But you have to get the bonus points within the specified period of overs. If we bat at the rate Sayers is going currently, the team as a whole would reach about 40 by the 120th over. Not to get to 300 in the current circumstances would be criminal.
And now Sayers has had a season to resurrect his career, I feel he has to bat properly next year or it's never going to be possible to get far enough ahead in a championship match to press for the win.
---- I don't believe it!
Joe's job (in my mind) is to stay there and let the rest bat around him. If he's 75 not out at 120 overs we should have achieved 300.
When we were crying out for an opener (or two) all last season surely Joe has done a pretty good job this year.
How is Sayers going to get to 75 at 120 overs if he's scoring at 6 runs per hundred balls? We are one of the few counties who heap extra pressure on ourselves when situations are already tense.
so the alternative scenario is that he tries to rattle along at 3 an over and as a result gets out and exposes our middle order to the new ball whilst its still shiny. And before you know it we are 105-6 again and up the creek without the paddle.
Opening the batting is a specialist role and its a partnership. We are 49 off 21 overs without losing a wicket - who cares how many Joe has got as opposed to Rudolph?
The new ball needs seeing off by the openers and not the frail Mags in the middle order.
Anyway, you can ease up on the criticism as he is now 15 not out of 61 balls at tea.
so at this rate we will be 280 after 120 overs. Somehow I think we can sneak an extra 20 runs in along the way to get the 3rd batting point
Surely the point of playing any game is to win the bloody thing! It's all about intent and initiative - I'm with Dews- when we start off so slowly we simply heap pressure on the later batsmen. Perhaps one reason why Mags has had such a poor season is the fact that every time he gets to the crease he feels the need to give our innings a bit of momentum more or less from the start. I'm sorry but we aren't facing Lillee and Thompson at Sydney - we know Joe can bat more aggresively than this and he looks a far better player when he does..
sorry but on this occasion trying to win the game is secondary to making sure we do not lose it. All that matters is division 1 survival.
How on earth can Mags feel he has to 'push the innings along' when on 5 occasions he has come in after a Rudy duck and he has to presumably see off the new ball (which he has not done too well at)?
We seem to want to put pressure on the team ourselves if this is how we think. we have a reliable opener who can do the job of the opener and now we criticise him for scoring too slowly in a game where speed of scoring is not important.
Well said. The anti Boycott brigade never really understood what opening an innings requires. First and foremost the job is to play the new ball, on merit, and to prepare the ground for strokeplayers. What impresses me about Sayers is that he plays himself in and his range of strokeplay is developing.
That is one reason why we have been wasting Rudolph's talent as a prolific strokeplayer- thankfully he has survived today (helped by favourable conditions after lunch). If we get 350 in 120 overs and then build a big first innings score, we could finish up in the top half of the table - amazing!!
But I've seen a lot of Joe bat over the last two or three years - and quite simply he's a much better and more successful player when he has the confidence to play one or two shots. Since tea he seems to have relaxed and the whole shape of the game has changed. By playing nothing but defensively you hand the initiative to the bowlers who start to believe they are world beaters..
Since tea, the entire momentum of this match has altered - now we're playing as if we think can actually win it....
Anti-Boycott brigade? Was there ever such a thing...?
the problem before tea was that Sayers was 'batting with a stick of rhubarb' and having trouble playing the balls that were 'in the corridor of uncertainty'.
After tea when he had eaten the rhubarb he came out and 'helped him self to some buffet bowling' 'that even his granny could have scored runs off'.
he has now caught up with Rudolph so whats the problem? I think the lad needs to slow down and make sure he does not get too many runs off the change bowlers or he will knock them out of the attack. Just get 3 or 4 an over and they will keep them on for longer was my tactic.
Why can't you go slowly at the start against the new ball and then punish the dross served up by the likes of Ervine? Why risk losing your wicket to let the middle order feed themselves to the runs from Hampshires change bowlers?
This is a bit out of date now. I've only just got back in from a spot of shopping and the tactics obviously changed at tea, but let me make a couple of comments:
I was a massive Boycott fan, but Boycott rarely played on tracks like the current one at Headingley. In my view, he generally scored at an appropriate rate for a solid opener. Reports of his slowness were often exaggerated.
Sayers' ultra-defensiveness was an obvious error. And it clearly induced him (as so often it does) to play a couple of rash shots, though fortunately Dawson, who dropped him, is no great slip fielder.
The whole team need to think about momentum and initiative before next season. Yorkshire seem to have lost any sense of how to get it and keep it.
Thanks to the batting collapse at Sussex, they had two chances to secure first division cricket in this innings: either by getting to 300 within 120 overs or getting a draw (which has generally been managed with ease this season). Why would you reduce your chances by 50%?
a fine opening partnership of 160 plus with joe sayers finishing on 74 not out. and rudolph 68 out just before the close. a healthy run rate as well, over 3 an over. we were dying for opening partnerships like that last season. sayers is really maturing now and i feel he will grow in confidence and really play the shots i know he has got.
Yes i saw him play.
No I'm not a member of the Anti-Boycott brigade.
Yes i read McKinstry's book. And two of his own books. And Don Mosey's book which I thought was a disgraceful piece of journalism.
I'm not sure he'd like the fact you've referred to him in the past tense....
It never ceases to amaze me how the merest mention of his name - or the slightest ireverent reference - brings an almost immediate and frankly paranoid response. He's just an ex-cricketer - people never behave so aggressively if you mention Graham Gooch or David Gower - or Arnie Sidebottom - why does he still inspire such ferociously protective loyalty?
And i'm not wanting to get into a massive argument - today of all days - but it does genuinely mystify me!
Perhaps we should save this for the dark days of Winter - it might occupy the whole of November...
We are safe whatever happens now win draw or lose. We have two ways now of winning the match. Do we declare behind and then chase a target on the final day or do we bat on and on and on and perhaps win by an innings.
The first option would make for more exciting cricket, the second option guarantees against a loss. As it really does not matter I would go for the first option.
Yorkshire did well today without quite ramming home the advantage fully.
The bowling was generally good though Hoggard proved expensive. Pothas drove him several times when he pitched the ball up; he seemed to be lacking a bit of vim. Kruis was economical and often threatening. He bowled with energy and resource, thoroughly deserving his wickets. The pick of the bowlers, as so often this season, was Shahzad. He is becoming really hostile and seems to me, to have put on a yard of pace over the season, without losing much control. He will be a vital component in the 2010 side.
Another large opening partnership from Sayers and Rudolph. Before tea it made for difficult watching. Sayers, in particular, was strokeless and it did look as if the tactics were deliberately negative. After tea however was a rather different story. Assisted by a dreadful spell from Ervine, both players batted with more purpose and much more fluency. Some of Sayer's driving was the equal of Rudolph. In fact, after tea I think Joe was the more fluent of the two and outscored him. Cork decided on a short- pitched approach,which failed. He began to look quite grumpy, which is always a comfort. Mascarenhas bowled dibbly-dobbly stuff well outside the off stump. The slow left armer, Briggs, bowled well but the other seamers were rather plain. It was a pity that the openers decided to play for stumps about half an hour too soon. A more positive approach might have kept Hampshire on the back foot. By the end of play they seemed to be pressing again. Rudolph's dismissal was silly. A soft lob into mid off's belly just a couple of overs from the end - deserved really.
Tomorrow will be fascinating. Now that we are safe from relegation I would hope that we (and Hampshire!) will play with freedom. I would hope we would try to bat all day, securing maxiumum bonus points in the process, and then declare about 120-150 ahead sometime quite early on Saturday morning. Our best bet would be to apply pressure on a fourth day pitch, which so far is playing benignly.
We need to look at livening up the Headingley square for next year.
Thanks, Tyke 1950, for your report, which was excellent as ever. And I don't say this just because you confirmed something I was thinking out loud on here earlier in the day (which nearly sparked a renewed Boycott War); I really have appreciated your reports all season.
There's been a lot of comment in recent months calling for brighter cricket and better pitches to make it possible. I know no one's ever going to call for duller cricket on deader pitches, but I do think it really is time for the authorities to take notice right now. For one thing, at Yorkshire we have supporters who want to watch county championship cricket and will turn up in large numbers to do so. This is a fantastic asset and it ought to be possible to turn it to advantage on the field, because the club with most supporters should, logically, have the biggest assets to draw on. But we will only retain those supporters - and replace them - if the on-field approach is more positive and imaginative.
We've got out of jail this year because Sussex contrived a couple of fairly catastrophic collapses, but I can't help feeling there's something fearful about the overall approach of the first team that really needs clearing out of the system.
I also saw Boycott play ... & wasn't exactly a fan ... I'd advise anyone who wants to get a good idea about Geoof to read McKinstrey's book .. basically because the author has gone to the extreme to try & be fair. The Mosey book is one of the most nasty books I've ever read ... I used to say the the only reason Mosey only didn't blaim Boys for World War 2 was that he wasn't born .... BUT this was improved by a poster on here who said the Don would have blaimed Boycott for the Irish famine if he'd seen Geoff with a potato.
As for today ... a decent day at the cricket. We bowled well in parts .... Shahzad was very rapid & Kruis rolled back the years ... & Mags took 2 excelent slip catches ... the low one to get Lumb amazed everyone as we didn't think he could move as fast & the high one to dismiss Mascarenhas was also rather fine.
As has said we started slowly .... but helped by some sloppy bowling (look at the number of extras) speeded up ... near the end Rudolph got deceived into playing a sloppy shot by Biggs .... Wainwright came out as night watchman .... hopefuilly this will give Aunty time to show us how good he rreally is
If Wainwright was in the runs again tomorrow, I think it would be a good move for McGrath to drop himself down to Wainwright's place in the order at 8 or 9 and let the younger boys carry on. But perhaps I think like a club cricketer...
and for his fielding judging by the catches he took yesterday - maybe a late contender for fielder of the year after all and I think he even had a run out earlier in the season?