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

hopeforthebest wrote:You can circle around this subject as much as you like but you'll never get away from the fact that the captain of the team batting in the 3rd innings deciding off his bat to declare the innings closed is entirely different to both captains getting together and agreeing a contrived way forward.

Which has happened numerous times before. It's not new.

Making_Splinters wrote:

hopeforthebest wrote:You can circle around this subject as much as you like but you'll never get away from the fact that the captain of the team batting in the 3rd innings deciding off his bat to declare the innings closed is entirely different to both captains getting together and agreeing a contrived way forward.

Which has happened numerous times before. It's not new.

So anything that's been going on before should be acceptable.

hopeforthebest wrote:

Making_Splinters wrote:

hopeforthebest wrote:You can circle around this subject as much as you like but you'll never get away from the fact that the captain of the team batting in the 3rd innings deciding off his bat to declare the innings closed is entirely different to both captains getting together and agreeing a contrived way forward.

Which has happened numerous times before. It's not new.

So anything that's been going on before should be acceptable.

Well that's a matter for personal opinion really, but I am simply pointing out that the attitude of some that what happened during the final game is a sudden aberration in cricket is badly misplaced. As I've said above, I have no real problem with what went on, and I very much doubt that if anyone's side had been involved in the same situation they'd have an issue with it either.

I would have an issue with it if the title race had solely been between Middlesex or Yorkshire and Somerset, but I think it is deeply unrealistic to state that the Middle and Tykes should have let the game peter out and hamstring themselves. Somerset wouldn't have done it if they had been in the same situation, they've past history of complaining that sides wouldn't agree to give them a chase a few years back.

I wonder if Warks had found themselves needing a win to stay up and the game with us was heading to a draw if you'd have been happy for the Bears to relegate themselves on a matter of principle? I certainly wouldn't if Lancashire had been in that boat given how hard it is going to be to get back up to Division 1 after this year.

I don't understand the problem with the events at Lords. Both teams needed to win, therefore decided to make it so. To not do it would have been ludicrous considering what was at stake.

Gingerfinch wrote:I don't understand the problem with the events at Lords. Both teams needed to win, therefore decided to make it so. To not do it would have been ludicrous considering what was at stake.

Until the arrangement between the two captains the Middlesex batsmen were just concentrating on avoiding defeat, they were not swinging the bat trying to set up a chase for Yorkshire so winning was not their first priority. If winning was a priority the batsmen should have been taking risks not jogging along as they were.

We do live on an amoral world where virtually anything goes so your acceptance of this is in keeping with that.

Maybe add an 'amoral chancer' category to the end of year poster vote?

hopeforthebest wrote:

Gingerfinch wrote:I don't understand the problem with the events at Lords. Both teams needed to win, therefore decided to make it so. To not do it would have been ludicrous considering what was at stake.

Until the arrangement between the two captains the Middlesex batsmen were just concentrating on avoiding defeat, they were not swinging the bat trying to set up a chase for Yorkshire so winning was not their first priority. If winning was a priority the batsmen should have been taking risks not jogging along as they were.

We do live on an amoral world where virtually anything goes so your acceptance of this is in keeping with that.

Of course Middlesex were trying to avoid defeat when Yorkshire were favourites after stumps on Day 3. They knew losing wickets on the morning of Day 4 meant Yorkshire's hand was strengthened, but still scored over 100 runs in the morning session to set up a slog regardless of how it was approached.

Brad Hodge tipped to be Yorkies head coach according to Mail on Sunday.

westoelad wrote:Brad Hodge tipped to be Yorkies head coach according to Mail on Sunday.

That'd be an interesting appointment. I guess he has finally retired from playing the T20 tournaments.

Would be his first coaching job i believe? Quite a big first job in terms of county cricket..

cricketfan90 wrote:Would be his first coaching job i believe? Quite a big first job in terms of county cricket..

Recently assisted Jason Gillespie as coach of the Adelaide Strikers, Head Coach of IPL side Gujarat Lions and just appointed as Cricket Australia XI Head Coach for the BBQ Cup.

Brad Hodge's white ball experience will be invaluable for Yorkshire, who knows he might still retain his playing registration in case of England call-ups.

Not keen on a Yorkshireman getting the role of Head Coach (except Steve Rhodes or Mark Robinson)

Just noticed a mirror article on the subject of a slightly new form of central contract. Apparently only 11 players will have their salaries payed for by the ECB (referred to as 'test contracts') like on the old central contract, and another 11 on what are referred to as 'ODI contracts' will be payed £190,000 in addition to their county contracts. May not be good news for Durham in terms of Mark Wood given he may struggle to get in the 'Test contracts' 11?

Edit : Come to think of it, given our lack of established test batsman at the moment he may get 1 of the 11.

Hampshire wrote:Just noticed a mirror article on the subject of a slightly new form of central contract. Apparently only 11 players will have their salaries payed for by the ECB (referred to as 'test contracts') like on the old central contract, and another 11 on what are referred to as 'ODI contracts' will be payed £190,000 in addition to their county contracts. May not be good news for Durham in terms of Mark Wood given he may struggle to get in the 'Test contracts' 11?

Edit : Come to think of it, given our lack of established test batsman at the moment he may get 1 of the 11.

There are only 11 central contracts at present and 8 Incremental contracts. Bell, Morgan and Finn are centrally contracted and would be more vulnerable than Wood. Woakes and Bairstow would be likely to progress to central. Would Anderson's intended reduced workload justify a full contract?

Wood will get a contract according to Ali Martin from The Guardian.

Interesting to read about the new ECB contracts, though counties whose players are on ODI contracts should be compensated to the equivalent of their salary. For example it's unfair that Yorkshire have to pay salaries for David Willey, Adil Rashid and Liam Plunkett when they are likely to miss half a season, whereas Lancashire and Essex get Jimmy Anderson/Alastair Cook for free.