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

batsman

September 20 2016, 4:11 PM 

He new that he had touched the ball but he did not walk shows what kind of batsman Gubbins is .

 
 
Leg Glance
(Login legglance)

Re: batsman

September 20 2016, 4:14 PM 

I'm not condoning his actions but I don't know many (any) that would have walked.


    
This message has been edited by legglance on Sep 20, 2016 4:15 PM


 
 
Martin
(Login Martinh00)

Re: batsman

September 20 2016, 4:15 PM 

.. Like 99% of other first class batsmen in my experience! Very few walk these days

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 4:18 PM 

well how would you decide whether it was gifted or just poor bowling.

anyway, just a thought.

 
 
Guest
(Login Fozzie1973)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 4:23 PM 

If we were 300 for 5 off 90 overs surely we would take our chance of getting 90 in 20 overs ourself not get involved in any contrived finish

Be happy to be 300 for 5 in 90 overs not been that score very often this season

Looks like we are going to need the full 24, last week's debacle looks like it's going to cost us

 
 
Guest
(Login Fozzie1973)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 4:25 PM 

I meant 100 in 20 overs not 90 I work in accounts my maths is not that bad!

 
 
menston yccc
(Login menstonyccc)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 4:26 PM 

I would be surprised if we get 200 never mind 400 with the line up out


 
 
Martin
(Login Martinh00)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 4:32 PM 

Finally a wicket at Taunton!

New ball does the job.

Let's hope ours does too.


    
This message has been edited by Martinh00 on Sep 20, 2016 4:33 PM


 
 
Loiner
(Login TheLoiner)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 4:37 PM 

It's all becoming academic now because I can't see how we're getting to 400. It would need an immense batting performance

 
 
Martin
(Login Martinh00)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 4:44 PM 

Somerset four down now.

Cricinfo is stuck but BBC website working OK!


    
This message has been edited by Martinh00 on Sep 20, 2016 4:44 PM


 
 
Guest
(Login Fozzie1973)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 4:48 PM 

yes but they are going to get maximum batting points & given that they have packed their team with spinners obviously expecting big turn over the next few days, are Notts going to ofer much fight

 
 
Guest
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 4:54 PM 

never say never.

the pitch and weather conditions tomorrow are conducive with getting 400.

but it won't do us much good if we cannot get these wickets soon

 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 4:55 PM 

Three dropped catches, a caught behind turned down, Somerset guaranteed a win with maximum points, a frail Yorkshire batting order.

Listening to you lot I may as well not bother going tomorrow!

Plenty of twists and turns yet.

Notts resistance, good Yorkshire batting, a Somerset collapse, weather interventions....

 
 
Egham Tyke
(Login Davetyke)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 4:55 PM 

Fair play to Hildreth getting a ton despite his bash when he was on 7


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CszuI7uWcAA3Mwl.jpg

 
 

Alex
(Premier Login AlexRoberts)
Owner

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 4:59 PM 

There is also the not-so-small matter of getting 4 more Middlesex wickets in 34 overs to earn a third (9-10 wickets) bowling bonus point. If we fail to do that we would not be able to catch Somerset if they earn a 24-point win. REcall Somerset have one less loss, so a tie on points is all they need to top out Yorkshire.

 
 
Guest
(Login LondonExile)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 5:03 PM 

It feels worth mentioning that while Somerset could rack up a load of batting points for the first time in ages at Taunton, if it is a road down there they might struggle to bowl Notts out for bonus points (and, indeed, twice for the win).

In other circumstances, the scorecard down there looks like a game heading for a draw

 
 
Stu
(Login StuartRA)
Assistant Moderator

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 5:08 PM 

Not a great day for us. 3 dropped catches and a very poor umpiring decision has cost us 4 wickets. They should have been all out by now, as Gubbins out on 22 would have meant 4 or 5 down by lunch, then a knock-on affect of all out by tea.

Coupled with that, Somerset appear well on course for 24 points.



    
This message has been edited by StuartRA on Sep 20, 2016 5:30 PM


 
 
Egham Tyke
(Login Davetyke)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 5:08 PM 

Bad light stopped play anyway

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 5:11 PM 

somerset 5 down now, still needing 78 in 17 overs for maximum batting points.....certainly no gimme.

 
 
Guest
(Login LondonExile)

Re: Possible Collusion

September 20 2016, 5:15 PM 

6 down now - maybe they won't get to 350 wink.gif

 
 
 
< Previous Page 13 4 5 6 7 Next >
  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