The Cricket Thread. - Page 545

**DB83** · June 18th, 2018, 07:04 PM

This is both a question and an observation so pls be gentle with me.

The observation: I caught a bit of the Royal London SF today between Hampshire and Yorkshire. Yet it struck me that the Yorkshire team was badly depleted with several players representing England in the ODIs. So is it really fair to have these tournaments running concurrently ?

The question: Had the players been free, could they have played or does ECB central contracts take precedent ie do they required permission from the ECB to play ?

**judy84** · June 18th, 2018, 08:30 PM

Not sure about the answers to that, but I have another question concerning the same competition.

Given that this is a major tournament for all counties,there were 4 officials on duty, we saw examples of lbw reviews, snicko and runouts....why was there no DRS available to teams?

In this match Hants vs Yorks, there was 2 umpiring howlers. First when Northeast was given not out to Lyth's bowling. Then when Lyth was given out lbw when the ball was missing the stumps.

**DB83** · June 18th, 2018, 08:53 PM

Good Q.

This is probably not the right answer but here goes.

Doesn't DRS rely, in part, on television technology ? And since not all games were televised it would be somewhat uneven to have it as and when.

**DB83** · June 19th, 2018, 09:09 PM

Maybe this criticism is out of place but a grumpy old git is always a grumpy old git.

A record-breaking ODI score on a somewhat favourite ground against some pretty average bowling. Batsmen on good form and a golden opportunity to take the score to another level. One that might never present itself for a long time. If ever. I write of the magic 500. And whilst they were, at the end, less than 20 runs short of that they really should have nailed it.

Grump over.

**victor meldrew** · June 19th, 2018, 10:11 PM

A day for runs as India - A scored 458-4, third highest one days score, while thrashing Leicester, ahead of the tri series against Windies & England A.

Elsewhere Sri Lanka Captain Chandimal has been given a one match ban for ball tampering against the Windies.

randomname08 · June 19th, 2018, 11:21 PM

Right pitch, right opposition, a 500+ score really can't be far off. I thought England were heading for 520 today. Had Hales or Morgan stayed in...

I do wonder about the balance between bat and ball in the short forms of the game, though. T20 and this new 100 ball competition are very much batsman-centric. It's about hitting sixes and fours. The bowlers are learning new bowling tricks, yes, but taking wickets isn't the focus. Going at under sevens is. In a quick game wickets count less than runs. I love watching T20 but occasionally I do wonder about what it does to the technique of both bowlers and batsmen. Certainly in the last 10 years batsmen have become increasingly unable to avoid going for shots in GLY's 'corridor of uncertainty' when playing red ball cricket. But I also love limited over and T20, so I'm a hypocrite. I worry about the problem but I love what's causing the problem.

**judy84** · June 20th, 2018, 06:56 AM

Excuse my ignorance but what is GLY please? Tried googling...

I too like watching the shorter forms of the game. However I don't like seeing batsmen getting away with false shots or miss-hits going for six. I think it is fairer to have 80 yard boundaries rather than 60 yard boundaries.

With longer boundaries we also get to see fielding in the outfield rather than the ball sailing over fielders' heads.

In the game yesterday, Australia didn't have their best bowlers...Stark, Hazelwood, Cummings, Lyon. It is more like an Australia "A" side. Are Aust correct in using an experimental team, or are they being disrespectful to the England side and viewing public? What are Langer's thoughts?

**Roger Allott** · June 20th, 2018, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judy84

In the game yesterday, Australia didn't have their best bowlers...Stark, Hazelwood, Cummings, Lyon. It is more like an Australia "A" side. Are Aust correct in using an experimental team, or are they being disrespectful to the England side and viewing public? What are Langer's thoughts?

Stark, Hazelwood and Cummings are injured. Nathan Lyon hasn't been part of Australia's ODI set up for almost two years.

.

randomname08 · June 20th, 2018, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judy84

Excuse my ignorance but what is GLY please? Tried googling...

GLY - nickname for Geoff Boycott... Greatest Living Yorkshireman. Sorry about that. I should have been clearer. I was typing when rather tired.

**buttsie** · June 20th, 2018, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judy84

In the game yesterday, Australia didn't have their best bowlers...Stark, Hazelwood, Cummings, Lyon. It is more like an Australia "A" side. Are Aust correct in using an experimental team, or are they being disrespectful to the England side and viewing public? What are Langer's thoughts?

Its the best Australian in form players from the T20 big bash league

Betting on 4 over bowlers & 20 over batsmen - worked for 1 match

Anyone who shows a bit of form will be in the mix for next year presumably

The reason they are using this is the rules around foreign players in the UK
being tightened possibly.I recall Chris Rogers saying it was only because of his Dutch passport he was able to play in the UK.

Trying to get as many players as possible exposed to UK conditions is the only aim

June 19th, 2018, 11:21 PM	#5446
randomname08 Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 144 Thanks: 875 Thanked 1,912 Times in 143 Posts	Right pitch, right opposition, a 500+ score really can't be far off. I thought England were heading for 520 today. Had Hales or Morgan stayed in... I do wonder about the balance between bat and ball in the short forms of the game, though. T20 and this new 100 ball competition are very much batsman-centric. It's about hitting sixes and fours. The bowlers are learning new bowling tricks, yes, but taking wickets isn't the focus. Going at under sevens is. In a quick game wickets count less than runs. I love watching T20 but occasionally I do wonder about what it does to the technique of both bowlers and batsmen. Certainly in the last 10 years batsmen have become increasingly unable to avoid going for shots in GLY's 'corridor of uncertainty' when playing red ball cricket. But I also love limited over and T20, so I'm a hypocrite. I worry about the problem but I love what's causing the problem. Last edited by randomname08; June 20th, 2018 at 08:21 AM..

June 18th, 2018, 07:04 PM	#5441
DB83 Vintage Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 1,472 Thanks: 1,948 Thanked 12,019 Times in 1,458 Posts	This is both a question and an observation so pls be gentle with me. The observation: I caught a bit of the Royal London SF today between Hampshire and Yorkshire. Yet it struck me that the Yorkshire team was badly depleted with several players representing England in the ODIs. So is it really fair to have these tournaments running concurrently ? The question: Had the players been free, could they have played or does ECB central contracts take precedent ie do they required permission from the ECB to play ?

June 18th, 2018, 08:30 PM	#5442
judy84 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Wilts Posts: 2,008 Thanks: 34,481 Thanked 21,442 Times in 2,021 Posts	Not sure about the answers to that, but I have another question concerning the same competition. Given that this is a major tournament for all counties,there were 4 officials on duty, we saw examples of lbw reviews, snicko and runouts....why was there no DRS available to teams? In this match Hants vs Yorks, there was 2 umpiring howlers. First when Northeast was given not out to Lyth's bowling. Then when Lyth was given out lbw when the ball was missing the stumps.

June 18th, 2018, 08:53 PM	#5443
DB83 Vintage Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 1,472 Thanks: 1,948 Thanked 12,019 Times in 1,458 Posts	Good Q. This is probably not the right answer but here goes. Doesn't DRS rely, in part, on television technology ? And since not all games were televised it would be somewhat uneven to have it as and when.

June 19th, 2018, 09:09 PM	#5444
DB83 Vintage Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 1,472 Thanks: 1,948 Thanked 12,019 Times in 1,458 Posts	Maybe this criticism is out of place but a grumpy old git is always a grumpy old git. A record-breaking ODI score on a somewhat favourite ground against some pretty average bowling. Batsmen on good form and a golden opportunity to take the score to another level. One that might never present itself for a long time. If ever. I write of the magic 500. And whilst they were, at the end, less than 20 runs short of that they really should have nailed it. Grump over.

June 19th, 2018, 10:11 PM	#5445
victor meldrew Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: At the bottom of an empty glass Posts: 15,778 Thanks: 531,920 Thanked 180,034 Times in 15,766 Posts	A day for runs as India - A scored 458-4, third highest one days score, while thrashing Leicester, ahead of the tri series against Windies & England A. Elsewhere Sri Lanka Captain Chandimal has been given a one match ban for ball tampering against the Windies.

June 20th, 2018, 06:56 AM	#5447
judy84 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Wilts Posts: 2,008 Thanks: 34,481 Thanked 21,442 Times in 2,021 Posts	Excuse my ignorance but what is GLY please? Tried googling... I too like watching the shorter forms of the game. However I don't like seeing batsmen getting away with false shots or miss-hits going for six. I think it is fairer to have 80 yard boundaries rather than 60 yard boundaries. With longer boundaries we also get to see fielding in the outfield rather than the ball sailing over fielders' heads. In the game yesterday, Australia didn't have their best bowlers...Stark, Hazelwood, Cummings, Lyon. It is more like an Australia "A" side. Are Aust correct in using an experimental team, or are they being disrespectful to the England side and viewing public? What are Langer's thoughts?