I get why people donāt like the artificial nature of it, but I really think more teams should arrange a competitive result rather than settle for a draw - even if you only won 1 in 3, itād still be better for you (although obviously giving up more points).
Youāve still got to bat and bowl yourself into a position where you can demand terms for the result setup
Iād rather see more results from interesting wickets than relying on contrivance. One of the reasons Somerset were in contention this year is because theyāve been quite aggressive with the wickets they prepared. Normally Taunton is a flat deck with tiny houndaries and is a very hard place to force a result. Giving bowlers more to work with is what every level of cricket needs to look at really.
But yes, despite being a Surrey member i can say that Middlesex deserved that. Congratulations!
Totally agree, but if the wicket is benign, i quite like the idea of pushing for a result rather than batting out a draw. I would cite that England SA game, but then thatās not the best example
But yeah, pitch quality is always the biggest issue to focus on imo
Durham docked points and Hants. saved from relgation once again!
Itās farcical of course to see a county as successful as Durham getting relegated like this, off the back of an investment programme that the ECB practically demanded, but itās probably fair as well within the absurd inequalities within the game. I just hope next years penalties arenāt too harsh. A salary cap that drives even more of Durhamās talent away seems fundamentally counter productive.
Woah. Always trust the ECB to manage to get a massive stink out of the feel-good feelings around the county game at the minute.
I HATE the way the internationals are all bid for by the various teams. Ensuring that the grounds are up to spec is one thing, but āallocatingā via bids to allow the less traditional counties to host games is rife for financial problems. IMO, if thereās 7 tests and (idk) 10 ODIs and 3 20/20, they should be split up into Lords (2/2/0), the traditional venues (4/5/2), and the newcomers (1/3/1).
I would agree with that absolutely, though I think it needs to be partnered with a more radical shake up of the impact of finance on the playing squads. I accept that there are always going to be big clubs and small clubs but at the moment the financial disparity combined with the obvious talent drain away from the second division is really affecting the game. Durham have been relegated with a salary cap imposed for next year. Even before that Surrey had poached two of their senior players. If Durham stay down next year what price would you give on Jennings, Wood, and Onions staying? And whilst that would put them in a weakened position, they will still be better off than Leicestershire, Derbyshire and Northants who havenāt had their debts erased.
Iām a Surrey supporter and in the last few years Iāve seen us sign half our squad from other counties. We took Davies and Batty from Worcestershire, and then Solanki a little bit later. Foakes came to us from Essex looking for playing time, which is fair enough but we werenāt exactly short of our keepers. We bought Mark Foottit from Derbyshire, and then signed Ravi Rampaul when he got injured, despite having a raft of young fast bowlers. I know weāre the worst example of this behaviour but itās common across the 1st division and I canāt help but think that a salary cap, as in Rugby, would help matters. Either that or they need to find a way to make sure the new T20 setup, whatever it turns out to be, directly contributes to the competitiveness of the smallest clubs, not just there future existence. Otherwise theyāll be doomed to simply make up the numbers and contribute the occasional player to Surrey or Yorkshire or Warwickshire or Notts every couple of years.
Yeah, similarly, Iām a Warks fan, and itās a bit dispiriting to see the leagues shake out how they have - I realise Surrey were down for a few years, but itās basically the test ground teams in the top division (plus somerset) and then the rest in the lower division.
Maybe itād be better to just say āthis is how it will beā, artificially ensure that the top teams always have the best players playing each other (to prepare for international level), a bit like Australia, and the second tier is more of a feeder level for those top teams. Maybe cricket just has to accept that thereās not a level of interest to sustain 16 āfullā counties, and it might produce better players this way. Standard contracts for all players at different levels, wage caps, support from central ECB to all counties to keep grounds and pitches at good levels. idk
In case you missed itā¦ Two Indian lads put on 594 for the third wicket in the Ranji trophy this week, just 30 behind the highest ever first class partnership, at which point their captain declared, not realising. Fortunately he was one of the batsmen and was 351no, so he canāt complain too much.
Pakistan continues to Pakistan - 579 for 3 declared in the first innings, followed by 123 all out second innings. Windies need (at time of writing) 243 with 7 wickets in hand on final day, so they should be fine, butā¦ blimey.
More than possible that they have a better chance to win due to the collapse tbf.
Just got proper confused - tv stream Iāve got on in the corner said theyād gone off for Tea, so I thought Iād messed up and missed a session. But then cricinfo was saying it was the end of the first sessionā¦ I assume the first break in a day-night game is now called āTeaā? Whatās the second on, āSupperā? āMidnight Feastā?
i remember when I was a kid I used to think that the ashes were called the ashes because the stumps had burned down after a really fast bowl in the old days.
I think this is beyond the Windies to win, and itāll be tough for a draw. Got a chance though.
Commentator said āAnd thatās it, last ball before supper. Off they go for the dinner breakā. Clearly, the dinner/lunch/tea/supper confusion is a worldwide issue.