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

westoelad wrote:

captaincolly wrote:

Arthur Crabtree wrote:

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Might be tense if Yorks can take a wicket.

There's a wicket, but it's still not tense.

Yeah. Snookers required now!
Also looks as if Sussex have survived a dodgy start and should secure a draw.
Notts seem to be in disarray. A dreadful set of results.

?Still a day to go in the Sussex game.

Ah right. I assumed it was the last day! In that case they've got a lot of work to do!

Warks win but not without a scare.Logan's figures suggest has he been kept on after his initial spell York's would have won.

westoelad wrote:Warks win but not without a scare.Logan's figures suggest has he been kept on after his initial spell York's would have won.

Patterson probably put Logan when Warwickshire were on the ascendancy.

Since 2010, Yorkshire do not utilise spinners as genuine bowling options. I remember the days when Darren Gough and Anthony McGrath would stick Rashid or Wainwright bowl long spells at one end while the seamers bowl in bursts, that is proper captaincy.

Alviro Patterson wrote:

westoelad wrote:Warks win but not without a scare.Logan's figures suggest has he been kept on after his initial spell York's would have won.

Patterson probably put Logan when Warwickshire were on the ascendancy.

Since 2010, Yorkshire do not utilise spinners as genuine bowling options. I remember the days when Darren Gough and Anthony McGrath would stick Rashid or Wainwright bowl long spells at one end while the seamers bowl in bursts, that is proper captaincy.

Traditional role for SLA throughout their history-Verity, Wardle, Wilson etc and very effective. If it ain't broken, you don't fix it...unless, of course, your name is Andrew Gale.

hereinafter to be known as Genial Andrew Gale

have Sussex missed a trick?

instead of letting the last pair add nearly 100 runs, could they not have declared? Worcs are not going to take on an 8 an over run chase, they are going to shut up shop. give them 250 in 50 overs and they'll have a go, I'd have thought

maybe Sussex fancy themselves to bowl them out regardless?

Durhamfootman wrote:have Sussex missed a trick?

instead of letting the last pair add nearly 100 runs, could they not have declared? Worcs are not going to take on an 8 an over run chase, they are going to shut up shop. give them 250 in 50 overs and they'll have a go, I'd have thought

maybe Sussex fancy themselves to bowl them out regardless?

Yep, seems an overly cautious approach. Time will tell.

Clarke and K-C charged by ECB.
Should have been sacked by their counties imo.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/48720661

westoelad wrote:Clarke and K-C charged by ECB.
Should have been sacked by their counties imo.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/48720661

Given what has been reported, it reads like Clarke and Kohler-Cadmore are being summoned by the ECB for their messages on an internal Whatsapp group chat. Since Whatsapp is a private and encrypted method of communication, any action taken by the Cricket Disciplinary Commission is bordering on breaches of privacy.

The only way the CDC can justify issuing a punishment is if Clarke and Kohler-Cadmore were found sexually harassing females, but both players have been cleared of any wrongdoing by relevant authorities. If the CDC issue a punishments based on messages sent within the group chat, it becomes a moral issue and borders on defamation of character.

"Clarke and Kohler-Cadmore have been charged with a breach of ECB directive 3.3, which states: "No participant may conduct themself in a manner or do any act or omission at any time which may be prejudicial to the interests of cricket or which may bring the ECB, the game of cricket or any cricketer or group of cricketers into disrepute."
They've been charged,as above, by ECB's disciplinary committee the chairman,of whom, is a lawyer.That committee wouldn't have called the players to appear before them , and certainly wouldn't have put the matter into the public domain,if they didn't feel that there was a case to answer to.
Remember Rhodes was sacked simply for not disclosing to his employees that he knew about the original charge.
Personally, I'd feel pretty sick if it had been a player from the club I support had been involved.

Aaron Beard has 4-23 at Chelmsford as Somserset collapse to 90-6

Yorkies have signed SLA Keshav Maharaj for a few games. Canny for Lancs last year - 17 wkts at 16 in 3 games.

Not a bad short-term acquisition, win all three game during Maharaj's stint and Yorkshire are in title contention.

It is annoying to see the powers that be are finding short term overseas players for the County Championship, but not for the One Day Cup when a bowling all-rounder was desperately needed from the off.

Alviro Patterson wrote:It is annoying to see the powers that be are finding short term overseas players for the County Championship, but not for the One Day Cup when a bowling all-rounder was desperately needed from the off.

good practice for next year

Maharaj set to make debut. Squad:

Lyth/Fraine/Brook/Ballance/Cadmore/Leaning/Tattersall/Willey/Maharaj/Thompson/Coad/Olivier/Patterson.

Logan is left out, Tim is injured.