chrisobee Posted 15 September, 2009 Posted 15 September, 2009 Typically we lost the toss and Durham are batting. Team without Dimi is: Lumb, Dawson, Adams, Vince, Ervine, Benham, Pothas, Cork, Tahir, Griffiths, Briggs Cannot see us winning this v a Durham team full of confidence and who have no worries at all. Hope I'm wrong though !
Hatch Posted 15 September, 2009 Posted 15 September, 2009 Hopefully the Durham players will be already on 'holiday'
chrisobee Posted 15 September, 2009 Author Posted 15 September, 2009 Hopefully the Durham players will be already on 'holiday' Said yesterday they were all out to win their last 2 games.
bungle Posted 15 September, 2009 Posted 15 September, 2009 Said yesterday they were all out to win their last 2 games. They are certainly committed to getting through the season unbeaten. I see we have 2 spinners in the team. A slow, turning wicket would suit us over them, I assume!
chrisobee Posted 15 September, 2009 Author Posted 15 September, 2009 They are certainly committed to getting through the season unbeaten. I see we have 2 spinners in the team. A slow, turning wicket would suit us over them, I assume! Yes, Briggs is on already, 33/0 off 10 but winning the toss would have helped I suggest. If you include Dawson we actually have 3 spinners plus Griffiths, Cork and dare I say Ervine ( which might explain why Briggs is on 1st change!)
Leicestersaint Posted 15 September, 2009 Posted 15 September, 2009 This is a big match - time for a wicket please.
stevegrant Posted 15 September, 2009 Posted 15 September, 2009 Yes, Briggs is on already, 33/0 off 10 but winning the toss would have helped I suggest. If you include Dawson we actually have 3 spinners plus Griffiths, Cork and dare I say Ervine ( which might explain why Briggs is on 1st change!) Don't forget Adams as a spin option as well
chrisobee Posted 15 September, 2009 Author Posted 15 September, 2009 At this stage of the season all games should start the same day but in CC1 only the Hants game starting today, the rest tomorrow I think.
chrisobee Posted 15 September, 2009 Author Posted 15 September, 2009 Don't forget Adams as a spin option as well Well if Adams bowls we are in trouble but still worse if Ervine bowls as he will at some point no doubt.
Lets B Avenue Posted 15 September, 2009 Posted 15 September, 2009 Don't forget Adams as a spin option as well Left arm medium pacer. not a spinner.
chrisobee Posted 15 September, 2009 Author Posted 15 September, 2009 Rain! Good ! They forecast showers today and tomorrow. Just need enough time to get bonus points and then draw the match, would do us nicely especially as they are already 58/0 off 16 overs. Briggs 5 overs for 10 which is encouragingly economical and suggests he may not be easy to score against. Interesting how Tahir is usually brought on relatively late in the innings.
chrisobee Posted 15 September, 2009 Author Posted 15 September, 2009 Left arm medium pacer. not a spinner. I'm sure I have seen him bowl spin :smt102
Lets B Avenue Posted 15 September, 2009 Posted 15 September, 2009 Not this season for Hants, or when I've played against him at St. Cross.
chrisobee Posted 15 September, 2009 Author Posted 15 September, 2009 Play resumed, 80/1. Koetzer out to Briggs who now has an impressive 1/15 off 7. Ervine 3 overs..........17 runs. Not worth bowling him IMO.
chrisobee Posted 15 September, 2009 Author Posted 15 September, 2009 (edited) Raining again ! 95/1. Close of play. Edited 15 September, 2009 by chrisobee Update
Leicestersaint Posted 15 September, 2009 Posted 15 September, 2009 All a bit disappointing. The sun has been shining here. :cool:
Dark Munster Posted 15 September, 2009 Posted 15 September, 2009 Good ! They forecast showers today and tomorrow. Just need enough time to get bonus points and then draw the match, would do us nicely especially as they are already 58/0 off 16 overs. Briggs 5 overs for 10 which is encouragingly economical and suggests he may not be easy to score against. Interesting how Tahir is usually brought on relatively late in the innings. Beijing Olympic Cheerleaders: Rain Dance
Weston Saint Posted 15 September, 2009 Posted 15 September, 2009 First, this is the wicket England & Australia played on Wednesday. Secondly it was the pitch chosen by Hants coaching staff. Thirdly, Durham have a good seam attach so to go for a wicket that will take spin it a good decision. Tremlett & Tomlinson are fit but not able to get into the side. Griffiths tells me he has agreed contract terms with Hampshire despite interest from Middlesex & Yorkshire. Club are looking to strengthen with quality players. No announcement yet and as always it may depend on staying in this division but I suspect they are still eying up Kabir Ali of Worcestershire. I also suspect that Simon Jones will not be coming. Shame about the bad light & rain
Lets B Avenue Posted 16 September, 2009 Posted 16 September, 2009 Prompt start. Also see Yorks are 1-1 v Sussex with Rudolph out for 0. Dont need Sussex winning that one.
stevegrant Posted 16 September, 2009 Posted 16 September, 2009 Kabir Ali has agreed a three-year deal according to the BBC - compensation to Worcestershire is likely to be around the £60k mark. This could pave the way for more transfer fees in cricket, with players tied to longer contracts, which I'd say isn't necessarily a bad thing as it gives both player and club more security.
Lets B Avenue Posted 16 September, 2009 Posted 16 September, 2009 110-3 de Venito lbw Cork 62 Chanderpaul b Briggs 4. Better get down there.
saintsdan Posted 16 September, 2009 Posted 16 September, 2009 Early wickets for Cork and Briggs, Di Venuto and Chanderpaul both gone. 110-3
chrisobee Posted 16 September, 2009 Author Posted 16 September, 2009 Early wickets for Cork and Briggs, Di Venuto and Chanderpaul both gone. 110-3 Chanderpaul is a big wicket always of course but Di Venuto always seems to score stacks of runs. Strange though how when I check cricinfo invariably nothing has happened ( for us!), come on here and lo and behold 2 wickets gone !
chrisobee Posted 16 September, 2009 Author Posted 16 September, 2009 A bit odd that Briggs has bowled 17 overs, Tahir none. We seem to like to keep him to bowl at the lower order, any thoughts ?
chrisobee Posted 16 September, 2009 Author Posted 16 September, 2009 Kabir Ali has agreed a three-year deal according to the BBC - compensation to Worcestershire is likely to be around the £60k mark. This could pave the way for more transfer fees in cricket, with players tied to longer contracts, which I'd say isn't necessarily a bad thing as it gives both player and club more security. Agreed as long as clubs don't over stretch themselves financially I see no problem.
chrisobee Posted 16 September, 2009 Author Posted 16 September, 2009 Just realised the Champions Trophy follows on from the ODI's v Australia. We'll lose Dimi for our final game v Yorks if Wright is ruled out though Yorks will lose Bresnan and Rashid for sure. Is there no end to OD International cricket ? It gets boring.
chrisobee Posted 16 September, 2009 Author Posted 16 September, 2009 313/6. 3 for Briggs, 2 for Tahir.
chrisobee Posted 16 September, 2009 Author Posted 16 September, 2009 But Yorks struggling though a mini recovery from 104/5 to 156/5.
Lets B Avenue Posted 16 September, 2009 Posted 16 September, 2009 Just back after shivering my nads off up to tea. Durham have batted pretty well, with Smith untroubled. mainly bowled pace downwind and spin from pavilion end and as Briggs bowled well, Tahir didn't get on until the 50th over. No catches dropped or contentious lbw's. Just hard graft waiting for a wicket to fall.
Leicestersaint Posted 16 September, 2009 Posted 16 September, 2009 No dropped catches is something but we will do well to get a draw here.
chrisobee Posted 16 September, 2009 Author Posted 16 September, 2009 434/9 does suggest a draw is our best hope. At least Yorks recovered well to 274/7 ( were 209/7) and the Hove pitch has been spinner friendly in recent times so 300+ might be a good score. In all likelihood a defeat for Sussex would all but relegate them.
corsacar saint Posted 16 September, 2009 Posted 16 September, 2009 Good batting wicket, we have to dig in for two days.[ Shame we only got 2 bowling points].
chrisobee Posted 16 September, 2009 Author Posted 16 September, 2009 Just back after shivering my nads off up to tea. Durham have batted pretty well, with Smith untroubled. mainly bowled pace downwind and spin from pavilion end and as Briggs bowled well, Tahir didn't get on until the 50th over. No catches dropped or contentious lbw's. Just hard graft waiting for a wicket to fall. Smith was out eventually for 150 just before the close. We have a decent enough batting line up with Pothas at 7 so just need to hope they'll apply themselves. Tahir still finished with 4 wickets so still a bit surprised he did not bowl earlier regardless of how well Briggs bowled.
stevegrant Posted 17 September, 2009 Posted 17 September, 2009 As long as we can avoid the follow-on, that'll give us at least 2 batting bonus points and should ensure a draw. I'd take that at this stage...
bungle Posted 17 September, 2009 Posted 17 September, 2009 87/3 at lunch. Vince gone. After their dreadful performance vs Hants, Worcs are 525/6 vs Somerset, and opener Mitchell has hit 288* of them!
chrisobee Posted 17 September, 2009 Author Posted 17 September, 2009 187/4, Benham and Pothas put on 73 so far. Ervine not yet batted, was/ is he injured and therefore cannot bat above 7 ? Don't need another injury !
chrisobee Posted 17 September, 2009 Author Posted 17 September, 2009 As long as we can avoid the follow-on, that'll give us at least 2 batting bonus points and should ensure a draw. I'd take that at this stage... I'd have taken it at the start TBH ! We are definitely not going to win but if the batsmen dig in we should avoid the follow on and defeat. Yorks made 403 v Sussex ( who also only got 2 bowling points) who are 100/1 in reply. We need to match Sussex and that I think makes us all but safe ?
Give it to Ron Posted 17 September, 2009 Posted 17 September, 2009 Does anyone know what the follow on target is???
OldNick Posted 17 September, 2009 Posted 17 September, 2009 Does anyone know what the follow on target is??? is it 150 behind their score ie 289?
saintsdan Posted 17 September, 2009 Posted 17 September, 2009 is it 150 behind their score ie 289? Think the target is 290 (i.e. less than 150 behind) Should get there too at 266-4 First championship hundred for Chris Benham (I think) and 55 to Nic
Lets B Avenue Posted 17 September, 2009 Posted 17 September, 2009 Think the target is 290 (i.e. less than 150 behind) Should get there too at 266-4 First championship hundred for Chris Benham (I think) and 55 to Nic Correct. Just back after waiting over an hour whilst he was in the 90's and I left the minute he got it. I have called him the "Adam Lallana of Hampshire cricket, so it was probably inevitable he would break his duck this week. Now see he got out next over and Griffiths got out in the last. Oh well, at least I missed that. Pothas will hopefully, carry on tomorrow and get us another couple of batting points.
chrisobee Posted 17 September, 2009 Author Posted 17 September, 2009 Shame we lost 2 late wickets but at 267/6 with Pothas there and Ervine to come we ought to get past 290 and then 300+ which should be enough to secure the draw. Still not sure why Ervine has not batted. Anyone know if he is injured ?
chrisobee Posted 17 September, 2009 Author Posted 17 September, 2009 (edited) Think the target is 290 (i.e. less than 150 behind) Should get there too at 266-4 First championship hundred for Chris Benham (I think) and 55 to Nic Benham's highest 1st class score is 111 so obviously he has made at least one previous hundred though not sure who it was against. Edit: It was v Loughborough http://cricketarchive.com/Hampshire/Scorecards/204/204304.html Edited 17 September, 2009 by chrisobee
Weston Saint Posted 17 September, 2009 Posted 17 September, 2009 Shame we lost 2 late wickets but at 267/6 with Pothas there and Ervine to come we ought to get past 290 and then 300+ which should be enough to secure the draw. Still not sure why Ervine has not batted. Anyone know if he is injured ?Spoke to Trevor Jesty before the start today. He said there was a rough area which might trouble left handers. I suspect Hants have held Ervine back by playing the right handers after the loss of Lumb & Adams. Seems to have worked so far. Only explanation I can give. I have not heard he is injured.
chrisobee Posted 17 September, 2009 Author Posted 17 September, 2009 Spoke to Trevor Jesty before the start today. He said there was a rough area which might trouble left handers. I suspect Hants have held Ervine back by playing the right handers after the loss of Lumb & Adams. Seems to have worked so far. Only explanation I can give. I have not heard he is injured.[/quote Thanks, makes sense. Pothas is more than capable of course of batting at 6 and Griffiths as night watchman. Makes it even more imperative though if there's wear and tear we get up to and beyond 290.
John B Posted 18 September, 2009 Posted 18 September, 2009 (edited) Follow on saved and another bonus point Hampshire: 319-6 (106.0 overs) Delayed Bad light stopped play Edited 18 September, 2009 by John B
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now