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

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 5:46 PM 

An interesting declaration in the game at old Trafford in the race for 2nd....

 
 
Guest
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 5:48 PM 

extraordinary declaration by surrey

201-8 denying lancs a 3rd bowling point meaning lancs now have to score 400 or win to get runners up spot

could backfire if we win


 
 
JG
(Login _JG_)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 5:54 PM 

I'd be surprised if Somerset get docked points, purely on the basis that they made 240 on this pitch. You never know when it comes to the ECB and one of their favoured counties though- I wouldn't mind seeing Botham's reaction if they did dock Somerset points!

Don't think you could call Surrey's declaration extraordinary either, they just want to get a few overs at Lancs tonight don't they? Even if that's not the real motivation, I think they could easily argue that it was.

 
 
Stu
(Login StuartRA)
Assistant Moderator

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 6:00 PM 

If Middlesex declare now and lose (which they most certainly will), they will finish above Somerset by 1 point. Middlesex 146 now, Somerset maximum 145.

Will they dare do it? Will the umpires allow it? They got away with it two weeks ago, against us. They also could bat on until the 5th wicket falls, then declare.


    
This message has been edited by StuartRA on Sep 25, 2017 6:03 PM


 
 
Papag
(Login Papag1)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 6:10 PM 

These situation will be more evident over the next decade or so with the 8 team skrinking CC,when we used to dominate think we played 28 games over the season

 
 
WS55
(Login WibseySimon55)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 6:55 PM 

Surrey declaration blindingly obvious what the real motivation was -- but time of day gave perfect excuse of a few overs in the evening gloom, and of course Lancs can still win the match (or score 300), so the declaration doesn't completely determine the outcome in terms of relative positions in the Table.

Middlesex would have no such excuse, declaring five down, and it would be a mathematical certainty of them driving Somerset to relegation, avoiding it themselves.

So chalk and cheese in terms of umpires allowing/disallowing.

But really, what shenanigans we face these days, in this tiny division and truncated competition!

 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 7:10 PM 

I hope Middlesex do declare to force the issue.

Then we will see if the ecb care about the game and have the balls to do what's right to maintain the spirit of cricket being played within the laws.

I would then dock Surrey and Middlesex points so they were both relegated and start next season on -48.

Agree Surreys decision today was not driven by overs at Lancashire tonight which didn't actually work anyway. Purely calculated to deny lancashire a bowling point. I hope it backfires on them.

Middlesex must be tempted although they may need to avoid the follow on target first

 
 
Howden73
(Login howden73)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 7:30 PM 

As a Lancs fan, I find it a disgrace that any county is allowed to produce "Taunton-type" result wickets with spinners opening the bowling.

Somerset won quite a few matches last year doing this and look to have done the same in the last 2 matches (this one against Middlesex and the previous one against Lancs).

If the authorities do not act, what is to stop Somerset virtually guaranteeing themselves 133 points next season with SEVEN such pitches to suit Leach, Bess and Van der Merwe?


    
This message has been edited by howden73 on Sep 25, 2017 8:04 PM


 
 
Guest
(Login EastYorkshireTyke)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 7:54 PM 

With an attitude like that it's no wonder we get hammered on the sub continent every 2 years!
Why shouldn't a spinner open the bowling? Maybe if a few more counties produced those type of wickets wed produce players who can play spin!

 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 8:08 PM 

Agreed. I think as long as the track is fair to both teams then no problem. Notts used to produce green tops when they had Rice and Hadlee in their ranks and they win the title on the back of it.

It should mean county batsmen learn to play spin better so they may not be as green when touring the sub continent and counties would need to ensure they have spinners in their squad. If we were there this week would we have picked Carver, Rafiq and Logan?

I suspect not

 
 
Howden73
(Login howden73)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 8:09 PM 

Your argument is fine if you don't care if every match finishes in less than 2 days and no seamers required.

I remember Hadlee & Rice demolishing county batsmen - it never seemed a "fair" contest to me with three-day matches often finishing in less than two days.


    
This message has been edited by howden73 on Sep 25, 2017 8:16 PM


 
 
Guest
(Login EastYorkshireTyke)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 8:12 PM 

They wouldn't finish in 2 days and seamers would be required because players would learn to play spin better!
Your criticism of a county playing to their strengths is somewhat bizarre I must say.

 
 
Dwight_Schrute
(Login Dwight_Schrute)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 8:13 PM 

Think JG is right here with Surrey's motivations. Declaring at 200 hardly increases their chances of a draw. Which they still would need to finish above Lancs.

 
 
Seadog73
(Login Seadog73)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 8:19 PM 

I don't have any issue with a team exploiting home advantage. It's standard behaviour in international cricket so why would it be unacceptable in county cricket?

 
 
Howden73
(Login howden73)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 8:36 PM 

I'd agree with teams preparing pitches to suit their strengths as long as it not heavily-loaded in favour of a bowler (seam or spin) or heavily-loaded in favour of the batsman.

There was a ridiculous match at Old Trafford five years ago when Worcestershire beat Lancashire in little over two days.

Worcestershire 291 a/o & 139 a/o; Lancs 162 a/o & 63 a/o.

The then part-time spinner Moeen Ali had match figures of 12 for 96 and the little-known S Choudury 6-54. Even Steven Croft's part-time spin produced 9 for 104 (including 6 for 41) in Worcs' 2nd innings. What about Kerrigan you may ask? He bowled like a drain but still took 7 in match.

Lancs lost and received a SUSPENDED 12-point pitch penalty. I do not think it could have been a fair contest if Croft took NINE wickets....imagine Adam Lyth taking NINE wickets and finishing on the losing side at Headingley:)


    
This message has been edited by howden73 on Sep 25, 2017 8:42 PM


 
 
David in Morley
(Login DavidinMorley)

Hampshire

September 25 2017, 8:40 PM 

Our friends from Southampton don't seem to be getting much of a mention. They must be praying they don't get embroiled in a Chesterfield type situation. No play in their game against Warwickshire on day one, despite the game being at a Test ground!

With Middlesex having already picked up the bowling points, wouldn't this mean Hants were doomed? Of course, from a playing point of view they should have gone down last season.

A good chance though of Middlesex going down, the champion county of last season. Of course this has already happened to Yorks, Lancs and I think without looking it up, Notts; I suppose in an eight team league with 25% relegated it's likely to keep on happening.

 
 
littleoldme
(Login littleoldme.)

Middlesex decisions

September 25 2017, 8:43 PM 

I think Middlesex will want to know NOW from pitch inspector and umpires if Somerset are to face any penalties for the state of their wicket. If they don't think any action will be taken against them I can see them declaring 5 down "to suit themselves". That deny Somerset the required bonus points to overhaul Middlesex which would mean Somerset relegated even when they go on to win by plenty. I think there is a big storm brewing for The ECB if they don't act.
A Buchan

 
 
JG
(Login _JG_)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 8:44 PM 

My comment re: the Surrey declaration was partly tongue in cheek: I'm sure the bonus point situation was on their mind when they declared but as that wasn't the ONLY justification for their declaration I'm sure they'll be fine. Middlesex, on the other hand, really would be an extraordinary declaration with nothing else to gain, so I'm sure they wouldn't be allowed to declare.

Somerset is a tricky one, I do agree that counties should be allowed to prepare wickets that suit their attacks and it is to the benefit of county cricket and the preparation this provides for international cricket that this happens, but clearly this has to be within reason. They made 240 on that pitch today and there were 'only' 13 wickets in the day so I don't think they've gone too far.

 
 
David in Morley
(Login DavidinMorley)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 8:48 PM 

The days of Stuart's comments about Somerset "luring" Yorkshire into letting them chase 460 seem in the very distant past!

 
 
Guest
(Login EastYorkshireTyke)

Re: Other matches

September 25 2017, 8:50 PM 

13 wickets of which one was a batsman leaving the ball, one run out, 2 reverse sweeps and at least 3 slog sweeps.
If English batsmen could play spin there wouldn't be so many dismissals like this and the pitch would barely get a mention.


    
This message has been edited by EastYorkshireTyke on Sep 25, 2017 8:51 PM


 
 
 
< Previous Page 1 2 3 4 57 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