Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

Now that's what you call a run chase

st_brendy wrote:Heck of a chase so far for Kent. And yet they still need ten an over.

Century for Denly has won it for them - assuming they get 2 from last 4 balls!

dan08 wrote:Now that's what you call a run chase

Especially as Borthwick wasn't bowling!

neither of the mercenaries are in the team.

Weird tie between Yorks and Lancs at OT.

Durhamfootman wrote:neither of the mercenaries are in the team.

I think Stoneman must be injured because he wasn't playing last night either (when Surrey had a very fragile looking batting lineup with Roy out injured )although he was on drinks /bat changing duty!
Borthwick did play last night - didn't bowl, dropped a simple catch and was batting down the order again & made 16* from 12 balls! So he must have been dropped for Roy in tonight's game.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Weird tie between Yorks and Lancs at OT.

I was watching on TV. Heavy rain during most of Yorks innings and then coincidentally (?!) the umpires went off during an over when the scores were tied!

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Weird tie between Yorks and Lancs at OT.

not sure I've ever come across a D/L tie before

Durhamfootman wrote:

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Weird tie between Yorks and Lancs at OT.

not sure I've ever come across a D/L tie before

2003 World Cup match, when SA thought they had reached the DL winning score and didn't seek a further run, only to discover they had only reached the DL tie score.

st_brendy wrote:

Durhamfootman wrote:

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Weird tie between Yorks and Lancs at OT.

not sure I've ever come across a D/L tie before

2003 World Cup match, when SA thought they had reached the DL winning score and didn't seek a further run, only to discover they had only reached the DL tie score.

That was one of the all time great c..k ups! I suppose though in the pressure of the moment and with the scoreboard showing the DL par score it was just about understandable how they forgot you need one above par to win!
Bad luck I guess for it to be the first time ( presumably) that scenario arose in a crucial game.

st_brendy wrote:

Durhamfootman wrote:

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Weird tie between Yorks and Lancs at OT.

not sure I've ever come across a D/L tie before

2003 World Cup match, when SA thought they had reached the DL winning score and didn't seek a further run, only to discover they had only reached the DL tie score.

of course

Dyson

although now I think about it...that was the WIndies and they lost

Durhamfootman wrote:although now I think about it...that was the WIndies and they lost

Think that was when the umpires offered the batsmen the chance to go off for bad light and he mistakenly thought they were ahead of the DL score and signalled for them to accept the offer!
SA one was where it was raining and they were fairly sure they'd be off at the end of the over so once they reached the DL par score they carefully blocked the remaining balls!

Off the back of the Lancashire v Yorkshire game I can't help but think that this tournament doesn't need a lot of tinkering to be world class.

Huge crowd.

Top batting.

Great bowling.

Drama.

The Professor wrote:Off the back of the Lancashire v Yorkshire game I can't help but think that this tournament doesn't need a lot of tinkering to be world class.

Huge crowd.

Top batting.

Great bowling.

Drama.

It's always going to be like that for a derby game though. You'll find the complete opposite at places like Cardiff.