<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Dwight_Schrute
(Login Dwight_Schrute)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Yorkshire vs Durham at Leeds (Day 2)

September 7 2016, 11:45 AM 

Ironically Patterson now out trying to leave one.

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Yorkshire vs Durham at Leeds (Day 2)

September 7 2016, 11:46 AM 

Sigh, no i won't do that. But needing just 8 off 11 balls and then batting out 10 dot balls and a wicket leaves me wondering what might have been.

These lost points could really be signficant if we get to lords 2 or 3 points behind middlesex needing to win and hope the late september weather holds.

Off course middlesex might still draw or lose and we will still go to lords ahead...but that relies on middx slipping up.

As for declaring, i would agree with others that any declaration should be at the earliest just before tea, of course with only 3 wickets left we are unlikely to get there.

As for middle/lower order underperforming, isn't that always the case when we have plenty of runs, they are quite capable of getting us to 300 from 50-6 but hopeless at getting us from 350 to 500.

 
 
Alibor2
(Login Alibor2)

alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 11:46 AM 

Rafiq did his best but rather inept leadership has cost us a point and we will see how important it will be at end of season. We left too much to do this morning against fresh and good quality bowlers 😟 We are unlikely to get many over 400 anyway.


    
This message has been edited by Alibor2 on Sep 7, 2016 11:49 AM


 
 
Seadog73
(Login Seadog73)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 11:49 AM 

Inept leadership? What do you mean?

 
 
Guest
(Login EastYorkshireTyke)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 11:50 AM 

"inept leadership"

our leadership is so inept it's won us the last 2 championships and we're only 4 points off top spot with 3 games to go this year!! SACK EM ALL!!!!!!!

 
 
Seadog73
(Login Seadog73)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 11:53 AM 

Quite! Let's hope our new coach is a bit less inept. We also need a new captain who isn't weighed down by the baggage of winning championships.

 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 11:54 AM 

Not inept but perhaps there is a case for suggesting leadership should have sent in Brooks who is a biffer ahead of Patto in view of what was needed.

 
 
Tyke1950
(Login Tyke1950)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 11:58 AM 

I respect many of Alibor's comments; he is knowledgable about the game and dedicated to Yorkshire cricket.
I've never really quite understood, though, why he is so unremittingly hostile to Andrew Gale. I'd be interested to gain an insight into his thinking.

 
 
Fraisse10
(Login Fraisse10)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 11:59 AM 

Six fours in the last three overs. Five by Brooks. Patto came in ahead of him. Discuss.


    
This message has been edited by Fraisse10 on Sep 7, 2016 12:00 PM


 
 
Tom
(Login whiterosetom)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 12:00 PM 

Should we be starting a debate about Brooks' place in the batting order?

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 12:05 PM 

well it is frustrating that they safely negotiated 2 overs for 2 runs so as not to get the extra bonus point and now that is out of the way we score 17 in 1 over!

sorry but I cannot for the life of me see the logic in that....and yes i know the bowling has something to do with it .... but really? when needing 8 off 1 over for a bonus point they bat out a maiden, and then a couple of overs later manage 17 in one over.

nevertheless it is a good score and should set us on the way to dominating and thus winning this match.

 
 
Ed
(Login EdLondon)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 12:10 PM 

Actually it's extremely simple. Durham have 2 good bowlers, who bowled until 112th over.

 
 
Martin
(Login Martinh00)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 12:18 PM 

I really give up! Those who are at the ground can correct me if I am wrong but I assume that we were actually trying for the fifth point. The fact that we didnt get it is disappointing but the other side are allowed to bowl well!

 
 
Dwight_Schrute
(Login Dwight_Schrute)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 12:29 PM 

Bar the missed BP, a good mornings work. Sooner have got to 460 at that rate than grinded up to 500.

 
 
garywilson
(Login garywilson2)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 12:32 PM 

I too am following on cricinfo but the fact Hodd skied a catch tells me he tried a big shot going for the runs we needed . Crossing left Patto on strike ... not easy to get 8 off Onions when you have just come in . I suppose there was a case for sending Brooks in before Patto .

 
 
Guest
(Login Alibor2)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Yorkshire vs Durham at Leeds (Day 2)

September 7 2016, 12:34 PM 

Thanks Tyke1950 for your kind comment. Suffice to say that I believe good leadership involves strategy and I firmly believe that we should have achieved a 5th batting point. We batted too slowly in the last 10 overs yesterday and again this morning. We did still lose wickets but Rafiq made a valiant effort to get there. However, when Hodd was out, the batting order could have been changed as Jack Brooks played very well and aggressively at Scarborough. Regarding Gale's captaincy, I will express my reasoning when I have more time to chose my words carefully to be fair and objective. I have no personal "axe to grind" 😀 However, we reached a pretty good total thanks to excellent contributions again from Rafiq and then Brooks in the final overs.


    
This message has been edited by Alibor2 on Sep 7, 2016 12:43 PM


 
 
WR_Metcalfe
(Login WR_Metcalfe)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Yorkshire vs Durham at Leeds (Day 2)

September 7 2016, 12:37 PM 

Richardson appears to be keeping wicket again, stumping Rafiq, If his finger is well enough to keep I would imagine he will be well enough to bat.

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 12:39 PM 

I really give up! Those who are at the ground can correct me if I am wrong but I assume that we were actually trying for the fifth point. The fact that we didnt get it is disappointing but the other side are allowed to bowl well!

were we martin? I am not at the ground so cannot say for certain but cricinfo data would suggest not

108.2
McCarthy to Hodd, no run
108.3
McCarthy to Hodd, no run
108.4
McCarthy to Hodd, no run
108.5
McCarthy to Hodd, no run
108.6
McCarthy to Hodd, OUT
AJ Hodd c Collingwood b McCarthy 31 (106m 70b 5x4 0x6) SR: 44.28
End of over 109 (2 runs) Yorkshire 392/7

Azeem Rafiq25 (29b 5x4)
BJ McCarthy17-1-72-2
G Onions32-7-100-2
109.1
Onions to Patterson, no run
109.2
Onions to Patterson, no run
109.3
Onions to Patterson, no run
109.4
Onions to Patterson, no run
109.5
Onions to Patterson, no run
109.6
Onions to Patterson, no run
End of over 110 (maiden) Yorkshire 392/7

I suppose its only 1 point and i don't feel very much like dwelling on it, but it could be significant by the time we get to lords....we could be saying if only we had 1 or 2 more points.....

 
 
East Coast Type
(Login EastCoastType)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 12:47 PM 

Listening to the radio, it was clear that we were going for the 5th point. Rafiq was throwing the bat to good effect and he and Hodd were taking quick singles. Hodd was finding it tough though and in the 109th over he kept thrashing it straight to the infield. In frustration, he got out slogging. Patterson then couldn't lay much of a bat on the last over, the mistake being that Rafiq and Hodd crossed when Hodd was caught on the last ball of over 109. As for the run blitz after 110 overs, Durham seemed to ease off when no more bonus points were available. That said, Brooks should probably have come out at 9.

Good, big first innings total though, with proper top order contributions - augers well for last two games. Suggestion that the wicket might give our bowlers some joy too. Middlesex not out of the Notts game by any means, but currently 60-odd for 4 and going at 1 an over. Promising scenario.

 
 
Seadog73
(Login Seadog73)

Re: alanpb3750

September 7 2016, 12:47 PM 

Cricinfo doesn't tell you how good the bowling is, or how the field is set; nor does it tell you what shot was attempted by the batsman. You're relying on guesswork.

 
 
 
  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
 Copyright © 1999-2017 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  
All IP addresses are recorded. We reserve the right to remove personal attacks, sexist, racist, homophobic, defamatory or abusive comments, comments likely to incite religious hatred, those disposed to wind others up, and unapproved advertising.

Email us: Whiterosecricket@hotmail.co.uk