bungle Posted 15 April, 2009 Posted 15 April, 2009 Just started at 1.15. 79 overs to be bowled today. Worcs into bat and 0/0 at the mo! Hants: Tomlinson, DJ Balcombe, N Pothas, SM Ervine, MA Carberry, JP Crawley, MJ Lumb, JHK Adams, LA Dawson, DG Cork, CT Tremlett (Cricinfo annoyingly doesn't list it in batting order!)
Hatch Posted 15 April, 2009 Posted 15 April, 2009 Has it been raining? It is gloriously sunny where I am.
bungle Posted 15 April, 2009 Author Posted 15 April, 2009 Has it been raining? It is gloriously sunny where I am. Must have been. It's been raining out west, so I am sure you will get it soon.
fish fingers Posted 15 April, 2009 Posted 15 April, 2009 No rain as yet in Bournemouth. Confirmed. Should have played down here.
manji Posted 15 April, 2009 Posted 15 April, 2009 Just got back. No rain just a wet outfield from last nights rain. Bloody windy there though....
Window Cleaner Posted 15 April, 2009 Posted 15 April, 2009 Looks like we're off to a decent start with the ball though. Worcs 120-6, did we actually have any warm up games?
Saint Charlie Posted 15 April, 2009 Posted 15 April, 2009 When is North available from? Good start from hants, Cork took 3 wickets in 4 balls, all LBW.
bungle Posted 15 April, 2009 Author Posted 15 April, 2009 Worcs 132 all out. Good performance, surprised Worcs put themselves into bat considering it must have been damp. Now we need 300+ on the board.
saintwarwick Posted 15 April, 2009 Posted 15 April, 2009 Looks like we're off to a decent start with the ball though. Worcs 120-6, did we actually have any warm up games? Played Glamorgan in two one day games with each team winning one, then we played Middlesex in a two day game winning quite comfortably in a rain affected match. The one day game against Middlesex was washed out.
Window Cleaner Posted 15 April, 2009 Posted 15 April, 2009 (edited) go on corky! easy easy easy Don,'t start, we haven"'t batted yet. remember our abysmal start with the bat to last season?.got better of course but in April and May we were,in the main, woeful with the willow. See 7/1 already. Told ya 7/2 Edited 15 April, 2009 by Window Cleaner
Saint Charlie Posted 15 April, 2009 Posted 15 April, 2009 If we had just one really decent reliable batsmen then we would be in with a title shout IMO.
manji Posted 15 April, 2009 Posted 15 April, 2009 Excuse my ignorance, but where is Brown? Joined Surrey.
Gully Posted 15 April, 2009 Posted 15 April, 2009 Joined Surrey. I heard the rumour at the end of last season, gutted that it's true.
stevegrant Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 216 all out in the end, Dawson top scoring with 66. Worcestershire 39/4 in reply at tea - odds on us winning but being deducted points for a crap pitch, anyone?
Berkshire Saint Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Already been cleared by pitch inspector apparently. First game of the season...both sides are stronger bowling sides than batting...nothing too shocking IMO!
Summers Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 52-6, Davies and Batty gone, Solanki still there on 16
Window Cleaner Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Already been cleared by pitch inspector apparently. First game of the season...both sides are stronger bowling sides than batting...nothing too shocking IMO! Plus there tend to be some shocking batting totals early in the season, few players get 1000 runs by the end of May nowadays.Must be because all the test batsmen are still on international breaks or something.
bungle Posted 17 April, 2009 Author Posted 17 April, 2009 The rain has stopped play. Hopefully enough time in between showers to get 40 runs today or tomorrow!
Window Cleaner Posted 17 April, 2009 Posted 17 April, 2009 Playing again, moving along towards an opening game win 72/1 with a day in hand.
John B Posted 17 April, 2009 Posted 17 April, 2009 (edited) Playing again, moving along towards an opening game win 72/1 with a day in hand. 107 for 3 a win Lumb got a pair twice out seven balls faced Edited 17 April, 2009 by John B
Window Cleaner Posted 17 April, 2009 Posted 17 April, 2009 107 for 3 a win Lumb got a pair twice out seven balls faced And a very handy 18 points on the board already. It's what we were missing last season, don't think we had a great start.
Lets B Avenue Posted 17 April, 2009 Posted 17 April, 2009 Went 1st day. Nothing wrong with the pitch. Ball swung all day but there was regular bounce and good carry. Most of the wickets were LBW with a debutant umpire (David Millns) very quick to get the finger up. But then he was an opening bowler himself.
John B Posted 17 April, 2009 Posted 17 April, 2009 Yes good start with no Overseas Player and Dimi away
Neil Posted 17 April, 2009 Posted 17 April, 2009 Yes good start with no Overseas Player and Dimi away Great start, and the other Div One game hopefully heading for a draw. Nice to ditch the traditional Hants (Saints) slow start to the season!
Window Cleaner Posted 19 April, 2009 Posted 19 April, 2009 Why does the BBC league table show us with a 3 point deduction?? Did we get one already.
66East Posted 19 April, 2009 Posted 19 April, 2009 Why does the BBC league table show us with a 3 point deduction?? Did we get one already. I was wondering that as well. cricinfo has got us on 18pts, so hopefully it's just a **** up. http://content.cricinfo.com/countycricket2009/engine/series/382410.html?view=pointstable
Weston Saint Posted 20 April, 2009 Posted 20 April, 2009 Hampshire were deducted 3 points because of their over rate. It does not matter that the game was over in 3 days. The laws state that 16 overs need to be bowled an hour and the calculation is then applied over the whole game. Hampshire used their fast/seamers all the match. Pothas and the team would have been aware of the fact as the main score board showed they were -3 overs for much of the game. They could have used Dawson and Carberry to try to speed it up (that is what normally happens) but it was a low scoring pitch and weather threats. More important to get the win than worry about the over rate. All delays and loss of wickets are taken into account. In fairness to the team, they did run to the other end after each over.
saintwarwick Posted 20 April, 2009 Posted 20 April, 2009 Hampshire were deducted 3 points because of their over rate. It does not matter that the game was over in 3 days. The laws state that 16 overs need to be bowled an hour and the calculation is then applied over the whole game. Hampshire used their fast/seamers all the match. Pothas and the team would have been aware of the fact as the main score board showed they were -3 overs for much of the game. They could have used Dawson and Carberry to try to speed it up (that is what normally happens) but it was a low scoring pitch and weather threats. More important to get the win than worry about the over rate. All delays and loss of wickets are taken into account. In fairness to the team, they did run to the other end after each over. Is that a new law or has it always been there?
Weston Saint Posted 20 April, 2009 Posted 20 April, 2009 (edited) Is that a new law or has it always been there?It has been in place for many years. More severe on points deduction in the last 2 seasons though. Used to be something like 0.5 per over before I seem to remember The scorers take into account delays on the field, wickets (about 2 minutes per wicket) and then negotiate with the umpires at the end of the game so that a fair assessment is taken. Hants had no excuses. Pothas will need to learn to manage this better in future. Edited 20 April, 2009 by Weston Saint
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