Cricket

[Busaholic]

He was injured in his second comeback match on 4th August after injury. If the present programme continues he might be useful in the One Day Cup for a team which loses several players to the Hundred.
I suppose the signing of Evison was an indication that the writing was on the wall, he didn't sign to play in the Seconds and the notification on the website hasn't been put together in a hurry. There have been some heart-felt messages from former colleagues who clearly appreciated his contributions.

From what's been quoted on the BBC he'd like a final four day game, preferably at home. With Kent's position in the championship, I don't see good reason for refusal.

 

[Typhoon]

From what's been quoted on the BBC he'd like a final four day game, preferably at home.With Kent's position in the championship, I don't see good reason for refusal.

Unfortunately, rather too close to relegation! (Still if there is anyone who can turn in a match winning performance, it is Steevo!). Last match of the season is home to Somerset, starting on 26th Sept. previous one (next championship match), home to Essex on 5th Sept. Kent are quite sympathetic to retiring players or players who they are letting go - usually.

Interestingly (and nonsensically) tomorrows One Day cup match is the county's last weekend fixture for any of their teams between now and the end of the season. (Second XI I can understand with the call of club cricket but not the firsts or the women?)

 

[Busaholic]

Unfortunately, rather too close to relegation! (Still if there is anyone who can turn in a match winning performance, it is Steevo!). Last match of the season is home to Somerset, starting on 26th Sept. previous one (next championship match), home to Essex on 5th Sept. Kent are quite sympathetic to retiring players or players who they are letting go - usually.

Interestingly (and nonsensically) tomorrows One Day cup match is the county's last weekend fixture for any of their teams between now and the end of the season. (Second XI I can understand with the call of club cricket but not the firsts or the women?)

Kent weren't always simpatico. In the Mike Denness days I remember Asif Iqbal and one or two others we weren't allowed to show appreciation for before they went, but there was much going on behind the scenes then.

Your second paragraph is grist to the mill for those of us who want more control by the counties.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The result of the first Test Match against South Africa certainly has pricked the bubble of media xenophobic euphoria.

 

[Busaholic]

The result of the first Test Match against South Africa certainly has pricked the bubble of media xenophobic euphoria.

Not a bad thing. The test match results up to now this summer weren't a fair reflection of the balance between the two sides. Beginner's luck was definitely on McCullum's and Stokes's side, aided of course by superb performances from Bairstow and Root in particular. It was always going to be interesting what would happen when England batted first. This is only the second time South Africa have beaten England at Lords when the latter batted first!

 

[Lost property]

Not a bad thing. The test match results up to now this summer weren't a fair reflection of the balance between the two sides. Beginner's luck was definitely on McCullum's and Stokes's side, aided of course by superb performances from Bairstow and Root in particular. It was always going to be interesting what would happen when England batted first. This is only the second time South Africa have beaten England at Lords when the latter batted first!

To be fair, I think "beginners luck " isn't really the best term. We saw a distinct change in attitude and approach by England under this new regime and that is, I hope, unlikely to change.

I was annoying to listen to BBC commentators almost openly discussing Crawley's future...their job is to commentate on the play, not the future of those playing.

And yet again, the darling child, Broady, kindly demonstrated his batting "technique "....as in, take a swing, hope it connects. Clarse, as they say..... depending on how your pronounce the word of course

 

[Busaholic]

To be fair, I think "beginners luck " isn't really the best term. We saw a distinct change in attitude and approach by England under this new regime and that is, I hope, unlikely to change.

I was annoying to listen to BBC commentators almost openly discussing Crawley's future...their job is to commentate on the play, not the future of those playing.

And yet again, the darling child, Broady, kindly demonstrated his batting "technique "....as in, take a swing, hope it connects. Clarse, as they say..... depending on how your pronounce the word of course

We certainly saw a change in attitude and approach which, I agree, was refreshing and worked very well for those first four tests. Fortune/luck/whatever plays a big part in cricket, though less so since the Decision Review System, and there are tests where luck has definitely favoured one team above the other and. just as in gambling, it can go in streaks. By the way, where DRS is concerned the pedantry sometimes involved in whether a bowler has overstepped is ridiculous, and any doubt always goes to the batsman. Has there ever been a case where an on-field umpire has called a no-ball and a batsman gets bowled, and it's proven it wasn't in fact a no-ball? No, of course not, because the batsman could be said to have been distracted by the umpire's call, even though with a fast bowler it's unlikely he'd have had no time to alter his stroke or position at the crease.

I've not listened to TMS really in recent years, even decades, as so many of their regular contributors annoy me one way or another, but I think it's inevitable that discussion about individual players comes up during the many hours of play.

I'm not a huge fan of Broad, but he scored a few more runs than many of those employed to do the job!

 

[HST43257]

I think Crawley needs a century and another decent score in the next couple of matches to have a proper place in the side. In the short term I wonder about bringing in someone hopefully stable like Adam Lyth, then looking towards someone like Tom Haines in a couple years time, unless Crawley seems ready to come back. He needs to find form in County Cricket before looking towards tests once again, which he struggled with this spring. He has a lot of years ahead of him and there’s plenty of time to improve.

I certainly wasn’t a fan of the TMS talk of Harry Brook opening, which he hasn’t done much with Yorkshire. I do, however, think Brook deserves a place in the middle order. He’d fit in very well I feel, since he’s shown he can produce big scores when the top order fail at Yorkshire this season. My feeling is that Ben Foakes is an outstanding Wicket Keeper, but Bairstow can’t be much worse, and Foakes hasn’t shown us many good performances with the bat. I’m not sure what order I’d put Brook, Bairstow and Stokes but i think that’s a middle order with much potential.

 

[philjo]

I was at Lords on Thursday. England had some unusual fielding positions. Including 5 slips plus gulley with other parts of the field uncovered so it was easy for SA to score runs.
Then when they did get a wicket there no slips for the new batsman !
Though good to see Leach getting some turn on the pitch before the ball was changed.

 

[High Dyke]

One-Day Cup: Nottinghamshire thrash Leicestershire as Hutton takes seven wickets

Brett Hutton takes a Nottinghamshire one-day record seven wickets as they thrash Leicestershire by 105 runs in the One-Day Cup.

www.bbc.co.uk

Brett Hutton took a Nottinghamshire one-day record seven wickets as they thrashed Leicestershire by 105 runs to boost their hopes of progressing beyond the One-Day Cup group stage.

Hutton took 7-26 from 8.1 overs and was destructive from the beginning.

 

[Busaholic]

I think Crawley needs a century and another decent score in the next couple of matches to have a proper place in the side. In the short term I wonder about bringing in someone hopefully stable like Adam Lyth, then looking towards someone like Tom Haines in a couple years time, unless Crawley seems ready to come back. He needs to find form in County Cricket before looking towards tests once again, which he struggled with this spring. He has a lot of years ahead of him and there’s plenty of time to improve.

I certainly wasn’t a fan of the TMS talk of Harry Brook opening, which he hasn’t done much with Yorkshire. I do, however, think Brook deserves a place in the middle order. He’d fit in very well I feel, since he’s shown he can produce big scores when the top order fail at Yorkshire this season. My feeling is that Ben Foakes is an outstanding Wicket Keeper, but Bairstow can’t be much worse, and Foakes hasn’t shown us many good performances with the bat. I’m not sure what order I’d put Brook, Bairstow and Stokes but i think that’s a middle order with much potential.

Steve James has become a very welcome regular addition to the Times's cricket section over recent months, and has been quite astute about Crawley's problems over that time. After the test last week, he wrote that a batsman needs to be remembered for his innings, not for an eye-catching shot that appears to promise so much more. Crawley now has the lowest average of any England test opener with comparable number of innings since the start of the twentieth century! Crawley was, of course, never an opener until England put him there, and that double century was made from number 3. Seeing the way in which Crawley walked off without reviewing that LBW decision in the second innings showed to me he no longer wished to be out there, so it's for his long-term future that he should be left out of the side for the second test imo. Brook could be asked to play there for the one test, before a reassessment of the whole situation.

Regarding a short/medium term replacement opener (or openers) Lyth is smashing sixes in the Hundred, but meantime Sibley with a totally recast stance has been making runs in all formats at a much higher rate than before all summer, as have Hameed of Notts and Robson of Middlesex. Ben Compton, the 'other' Kent opener, is the most difficult English batsman in the country to get out, but I fear his cautious approach will not find favour with the powers-that-now-be. I can't grasp why Tom Haines is mentioned so much by Rob Key etc as he's been out of action for weeks, and the runs he made in two or three early county matches were made on featherbed pitches against poor attacks like Leicestershire having to use a rubbishy batch of cricket balls. In any case, many other batsmen also made hay, including Pujara of Sussex!

 

[Trackman]

Was listening to TMS today they mentioned the green bails during a drinks break as it's difficult to see if the bails are removed. Thought not much of it.
Now back home and just seen the last Jimmy Anderson wicket (bowled) on TV, they said he was out - was confused thinking why. It's what TMS was saying, the bails are the same colour of the grass.

 

[philjo]

Day 1 of the Oval test match washed out following heavy rain. A statement on the Oval website says there will be no play on Friday following the Queen’s death. Arrangements regarding the rest of the match will be announced in due course.

Surrey County Cricket Club are deeply saddened to learn about the passing of Queen Elizabeth II.
As a mark of respect to Her Majesty, there will be no play in the Test Match between England and South Africa Men on Friday 9 September.
A further announcement about the continuation of the Test match will be made in due course.
Ticket holders for tomorrow will be issued a full refund automatically.
Ticket holders for days 3, 4 and 5 will be contacted in due course once we can confirm more details.

 

[SteveHFC]

I was one of the several thousand unfortunates who spent much of the day milling around at The Oval. Was noticeable that when the rain returned as the umpires inspected at 4pm many (including me) decided to make my way home.

I was supposed to have been there again today. Entirely the right decision not to go ahead in my opinion (I'm aware others may disagree).

 

[DelW]

I was one of the several thousand unfortunates who spent much of the day milling around at The Oval. Was noticeable that when the rain returned as the umpires inspected at 4pm many (including me) decided to make my way home.

I was supposed to have been there again today. Entirely the right decision not to go ahead in my opinion (I'm aware others may disagree).

Judging by the weather in my part of Surrey, there might well not have been much play today anyway. Tomorrow and Sunday look better, so I hope that Tuesday could be added if it's needed.

 

[jfollows]

Test match will resume tomorrow, Saturday.
No word on whether or not it will be extended to Tuesday yet.

EDIT South Africa team will fly back home Tuesday and the match will not be extended, so effectively it's a three-day Test match starting tomorrow.

 

[philjo]

the follow on threshold will be 150 instead of 200 for this match.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Are there any unknown significant "devils" in the wicket which would explain the fact that no less than seventeen wickets fell in this Test Match in its first day of play?

 

[scarby]

Are there any unknown significant "devils" in the wicket which would explain the fact that no less than seventeen wickets fell in this Test Match in its first day of play?

No, but the ball was definitely nipping around, particularly early on. That, and some brainless batting by England.

 

[Lost property]

No, but the ball was definitely nipping around, particularly early on. That, and some brainless batting by England.

With the honourable exclusion of Pope... and Root who acknowledged he was out to a tremendous catch...however, Stokes needs to be reminded, that despite his well established capacity for competitive aggression, there are times when it's prudent to be constrained.

The Anointed Child and media adored darling, along with, it seems, being a failed graduate from RADA with his theatrical "performances ", kindly showed why his now "give it a big swing and swipe....and hope this works " technique has one glaringly obvious weakness..well to everybody apart from him of course.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Well, it took no time at all for Rabada and Jansen to dismiss Robinson, Leach and Foakes for the addition of only seven more runs at start of play leaving England 158 all out in their first innings.

 

[Lost property]

Well well, who would have thought 40 could yet prove to be a useful second innings total to win the match.....this assumes the S A tail end doesn't embark on a run spree..which they are capable of and, more significantly, England don't go balls out for a win and take their time to score the runs needed...

 

[philjo]

Alex Lees dropped by Jansen on the first ball of the England second innings, and they run 3.

 

[Busaholic]

So England need 130 runs to win the match and, with it, the series. A gentle reminder - Australia needed the same number of runs to beat England at Headingley and failed to do so, being bowled out for 'Nelson' i.e. 111, leaving England victors by 18 runs. Can Stokes, in this remarkable Summer of tests, do a Botham and lead his team over the line, or will Rabada do a Willis and bowl them out? Bob 'Dylan' Willis was a Surrey boy, by the way.

 

[DelW]

Ludicrously, the umpires abandon play for the day due to bad light, with England needing just 33 runs to win and having all ten second innings wickets in hand. This on a ground with excellent floodlights, and on a day when it wasn't thought necessary to start play earlier than the standard 11am.

So cricket's high and mighty again demonstrate their contempt for paying customers, with a capacity crowd denied seeing a result tonight. Instead everyone has to wait and turn up for a largely pointless charade in the morning. It will likely be played out in front of almost empty stands.

Almost certainly both captains and both teams would have been happy to complete the match tonight. Why can't agreement to that be sought in cases like this? It's not the first time we've seen such idiocy and contempt for the paying public.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Fortunately, the weather forecast for the final days play there seems better than other areas of the country that have long spells of rain forecast.

It was a most unusual Test Match with 200 runs being unobtainable as an innings total in the three completed innings.

 

[Lost property]

It did seem a rather unwarranted decision...however, Jimmy was interviewed on the BBC, was asked the obvious question and his diplomatic reply was the umpires had set the precedent the day before and were now doing so again strictly in accordance with the laws...it was probably a wise move to interview Jimmy rather than Stokes.... given the expression on his face and body language shown when the camera panned to the dressing room.

Nice, very nice in fact, to watch Crawley showing what he's more than capable of.

 

[GS250]

Ludicrously, the umpires abandon play for the day due to bad light, with England needing just 33 runs to win and having all ten second innings wickets in hand. This on a ground with excellent floodlights, and on a day when it wasn't thought necessary to start play earlier than the standard 11am.

So cricket's high and mighty again demonstrate their contempt for paying customers, with a capacity crowd denied seeing a result tonight. Instead everyone has to wait and turn up for a largely pointless charade in the morning. It will likely be played out in front of almost empty stands.

Almost certainly both captains and both teams would have been happy to complete the match tonight. Why can't agreement to that be sought in cases like this? It's not the first time we've seen such idiocy and contempt for the paying public.

Agreed. Yes you need laws in place for the players safety, but we've already proven you can play test cricket safely under lights with a pink ball. The establishment have always gone down the route of believing early evening test cricket under lights is simply 'not in the spirit' of the game as there is obviously a big change in playing conditions. However, the huge irony is that test cricket was always sold on the potential for changing conditions throughout the game. Players having to adapt to various atmospheric conditions or a degrading wicket. Especially in the UK.

The whole thing just reeks of the establishment wanting to remind us who is in charge from time to time.

As for England though. Massive summer for the team. England had become a test shambles under the leadership of Silverwood and Root so the big changes were long overdue. The now laughable 'rotation' policy of the previous regime exposed badly. You play your best team and try to win every game. Building momentum is how you end up winning the bigger series ie the Ashes.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It only took 25 minutes for England to score the 33 required runs on the final day, albeit with the loss of Lees, and reach 130-1 in their second innings and win the Test Match by 9 wickets. England win the series 2-1.

 

[Lost property]

Agreed. Yes you need laws in place for the players safety, but we've already proven you can play test cricket safely under lights with a pink ball. The establishment have always gone down the route of believing early evening test cricket under lights is simply 'not in the spirit' of the game as there is obviously a big change in playing conditions. However, the huge irony is that test cricket was always sold on the potential for changing conditions throughout the game. Players having to adapt to various atmospheric conditions or a degrading wicket. Especially in the UK.

The whole thing just reeks of the establishment wanting to remind us who is in charge from time to time.

As for England though. Massive summer for the team. England had become a test shambles under the leadership of Silverwood and Root so the big changes were long overdue. The now laughable 'rotation' policy of the previous regime exposed badly. You play your best team and try to win every game. Building momentum is how you end up winning the bigger series ie the Ashes.

May I just mention the comment by Jimmy about the precedent having been set the day before when it comes to bad light...that, and you'll be aware if you've ever decided to use your body rather than the bat (as in missed !) that a ball even travelling at well below Test level delivery...hurts !

As for the radical change in England's performance, maybe something called leadership has emerged c/o a certain Kiwi along with players being actively encouraged to play their own game, rather than some restricted coaching version and something called " a positive mental attitude " has resulted. Silverwood was hardly a shrinking violet when he was playing, and Root's performances need no clarification...I get the impression the demise in England's performances was just a bit more complex than attributing blame to two very consummate professionals.