Junior cricket can also be a minefield - one club locally has their u11's in the B division this season. At the weekend, they started a game with two Kent players, five district players and obviously smashed the oppo. Their excuse was that the Kent and District players wouldn't be available all season, so they wouldn't be strong enough some weeks to play in the A division. The losing team felt disheartened completely, and as a result some of them may not want to play again. For the winning team, only half got a game, so those not in the representative sides may not want to play again. Crazy!
I assume you mean U15 @Pedro45 and not U11? The Club's participation in the B Division was raised at the NKJL AGM and the same excuse was forthcoming then.
If clubs are willing to do anything to win you are never going to be able to stop that . It comes down to the integrity of the people in charge who pick the teams. Seen this happen time and time again . If the kids are that good put them in the U17s when they are available or play them in the Sunday dev side to challenge them . The same club were called out over playing 3x 1st team players in their 2nd xi a few weeks ago when the 1s didn't have a game...……...
One of those players was a particularly blatant example - he's played 25 Saturday 1s games and just 3 Saturday 2s matches and the previous two occasions were friendlies. All of those 2s games were when the 1s didn't have a match and of course he returned on each occasion to the 1s the week after.
Junior cricket can also be a minefield - one club locally has their u11's in the B division this season. At the weekend, they started a game with two Kent players, five district players and obviously smashed the oppo. Their excuse was that the Kent and District players wouldn't be available all season, so they wouldn't be strong enough some weeks to play in the A division. The losing team felt disheartened completely, and as a result some of them may not want to play again. For the winning team, only half got a game, so those not in the representative sides may not want to play again. Crazy!
I assume you mean U15 @Pedro45 and not U11? The Club's participation in the B Division was raised at the NKJL AGM and the same excuse was forthcoming then.
If clubs are willing to do anything to win you are never going to be able to stop that . It comes down to the integrity of the people in charge who pick the teams. Seen this happen time and time again . If the kids are that good put them in the U17s when they are available or play them in the Sunday dev side to challenge them . The same club were called out over playing 3x 1st team players in their 2nd xi a few weeks ago when the 1s didn't have a game...……...
One of those players was a particularly blatant example - he's played 25 Saturday 1s games and just 3 Saturday 2s matches and the previous two occasions were friendlies. All of those 2s games were when the 1s didn't have a match and of course he returned on each occasion to the 1s the week after.
Junior cricket can also be a minefield - one club locally has their u11's in the B division this season. At the weekend, they started a game with two Kent players, five district players and obviously smashed the oppo. Their excuse was that the Kent and District players wouldn't be available all season, so they wouldn't be strong enough some weeks to play in the A division. The losing team felt disheartened completely, and as a result some of them may not want to play again. For the winning team, only half got a game, so those not in the representative sides may not want to play again. Crazy!
I assume you mean U15 @Pedro45 and not U11? The Club's participation in the B Division was raised at the NKJL AGM and the same excuse was forthcoming then.
If clubs are willing to do anything to win you are never going to be able to stop that . It comes down to the integrity of the people in charge who pick the teams. Seen this happen time and time again . If the kids are that good put them in the U17s when they are available or play them in the Sunday dev side to challenge them . The same club were called out over playing 3x 1st team players in their 2nd xi a few weeks ago when the 1s didn't have a game...……...
One of those players was a particularly blatant example - he's played 25 Saturday 1s games and just 3 Saturday 2s matches and the previous two occasions were friendlies. All of those 2s games were when the 1s didn't have a match and of course he returned on each occasion to the 1s the week after.
I didn't think "loading" was allowed!
It's not - but easier to prove at the end of the season than the beginning
Junior cricket can also be a minefield - one club locally has their u11's in the B division this season. At the weekend, they started a game with two Kent players, five district players and obviously smashed the oppo. Their excuse was that the Kent and District players wouldn't be available all season, so they wouldn't be strong enough some weeks to play in the A division. The losing team felt disheartened completely, and as a result some of them may not want to play again. For the winning team, only half got a game, so those not in the representative sides may not want to play again. Crazy!
I assume you mean U15 @Pedro45 and not U11? The Club's participation in the B Division was raised at the NKJL AGM and the same excuse was forthcoming then.
If clubs are willing to do anything to win you are never going to be able to stop that . It comes down to the integrity of the people in charge who pick the teams. Seen this happen time and time again . If the kids are that good put them in the U17s when they are available or play them in the Sunday dev side to challenge them . The same club were called out over playing 3x 1st team players in their 2nd xi a few weeks ago when the 1s didn't have a game...……...
One of those players was a particularly blatant example - he's played 25 Saturday 1s games and just 3 Saturday 2s matches and the previous two occasions were friendlies. All of those 2s games were when the 1s didn't have a match and of course he returned on each occasion to the 1s the week after.
I didn't think "loading" was allowed!
It's not - but easier to prove at the end of the season than the beginning
All comes back to the Clubs integrity. If they have to win at all costs then so be it . Wonder how the boys that usually play in the U15s and were replaced by the Rep players the 3 x guys they dropped from the 2nd XI felt when they were told they were being left out ??
Junior cricket can also be a minefield - one club locally has their u11's in the B division this season. At the weekend, they started a game with two Kent players, five district players and obviously smashed the oppo. Their excuse was that the Kent and District players wouldn't be available all season, so they wouldn't be strong enough some weeks to play in the A division. The losing team felt disheartened completely, and as a result some of them may not want to play again. For the winning team, only half got a game, so those not in the representative sides may not want to play again. Crazy!
I assume you mean U15 @Pedro45 and not U11? The Club's participation in the B Division was raised at the NKJL AGM and the same excuse was forthcoming then.
If clubs are willing to do anything to win you are never going to be able to stop that . It comes down to the integrity of the people in charge who pick the teams. Seen this happen time and time again . If the kids are that good put them in the U17s when they are available or play them in the Sunday dev side to challenge them . The same club were called out over playing 3x 1st team players in their 2nd xi a few weeks ago when the 1s didn't have a game...……...
One of those players was a particularly blatant example - he's played 25 Saturday 1s games and just 3 Saturday 2s matches and the previous two occasions were friendlies. All of those 2s games were when the 1s didn't have a match and of course he returned on each occasion to the 1s the week after.
I didn't think "loading" was allowed!
It's not - but easier to prove at the end of the season than the beginning
Quite.
It must be said that I had a couple of 3rd XI players for me this weekend - I think I've already mentioned it on the thread. Two of them combined for bowling figures of 12-2-20-5 but I had no-one else available, as a lot of my players had marked out these two weeks where OCs only had three games as "holiday" weekends.
Equally, the previous week I had a talented bat ton up for me, but he won't play more than one or two Saturday games a season, because he prefers the Sunday banter with Waggoners.
I take no pleasure in stacking a team, because I'd rather win properly with the lads I know want to play for me for as much of the season as possible. But on every occasion when it so happens I have an accidental "ringer", it's out of necessity and good fortune.
When it's stacking the team because you want the win and there's no need to do so... That's not on.
Recognise the name of a certain no.6 for Bromley who opened the bowling...?!
The number 7 is currently opening the batting for Beckenham 1s - his sister plays for Kent Women and his dad used to play for Blackheath, Sidcup, Wickham Park and Hayes as well as Kent Over 50s.
James Treadwell was one of the umpires at our game at T Wells today.
Not looking good for Blackheath 1s or 2s is it? Unless something drastically changes, HSBC are down already in the 1st XI PL but, given that they usually have a poor second half to the season, Blackheath 1s will do well to survive too.
Great story for one of the lads in the Bexley 1s - three players including Ollie Robinson and Adam Ball were missing but one of those who was destined to be "dropped" responded in exactly the right way with his first ever ton.
That said, there are already 7 or 8 established first teamers in the 2s including two former 1st team captains. We had a great game against TW last week when winning by just 3 runs but that sandwiched two other victories against sides who mustered just 110 and 130 respectively.
And that is the problem with the 2s PL - it is made up of a number of sides that aren't competitive and the best sides have nowhere to go. Which is why we do need a re-organisation of the KCL. Our 3s are more than holding their own in Div 5 of the 1st XI League and I'm sure our 2s would do the same in say Div 2.
Agree with this and this year Bexley are in a pretty good position with this embarrassment of riches.Is not the bigger question how the other sides raise standards ? A big problem at that level is the distance travelled for players that are not necessarily interested in playing 1st team cricket - a trip from the coast to the Kent Met for a 12 o’clock start and vice versa doesn’t sound great especially if your team is struggling.
@Addick Addict - I've noticed that George Haley (couple years below me at Eltham) blasted a quick 65 at the weekend but I assume he's probably going to be unlucky to be dropped?!
Also, Freddie Foster - what's he doing with you? I'd heard Bromley Common were pretty angry at him leaving.
You're really lucky with your setup, but I don't know if a re-structure is necessarily the best thing. I'd think there would be a "cream rises to the top" situation. With teams such as yourselves already having a very strong 2nd and 3rd XI (the latter being in Div 5!!), clubs like OCs - respectable enough - just won't ever have the punch to get much further than even where we are now.
But then what do you do about cricketers fighting for a Prem spot? It's a tricky issue.
And as @billysboots says above, travel is an issue. I remember Broadstairs sending eight men to our place for a final-day encounter, half of whom were colts, in a nothing to play for 2nd XI fixture.
The 1st X1 still have a couple missing I believe so I don't think George's position in the side will be changed. But it does serve to demonstrate the issue.
Freddie has done very well this season and effectively replaced Jas Bassan who chose to move to Hornchurch CC. No club likes to lose a decent player and any more than we didn't want to lose Jas I understand why BC would not have wanted Freddie to leave. But Freddie has moved to a Club where he already had good friends such as George and is playing in the KPL.
As I have said above to get further up the tree a Club has to have a really good colts set up - would I be right in saying that many of the young players at Colfes School join the colts sections of clubs such as Bromley and Blackheath which is why they aren't coming through at OCs?
Yes, that’s basically correct and was actively encouraged by the former master in charge of cricket over a 25 year period after a falling out with the OCs. To some extent it had always happened with the stars anyway (Humm, Caswall, Rodgers, to go back to my era). The Greenwich Juniors cooperation works up to a point but arguably benefits other clubs more, so we are now trying to build interest in colts cricket from the bottom again (via the All Stars programme, better cooperation with the school etc.). But this is a long term project as it needs to reverse a generation or so of decline and in any case some leakage is inevitable - for all the reasons mentioned.
I've only just twigged who you were talking about. My memory of him goes back almost 50 years when I first came into contact with him - he threatened as a 6th former to put this then 11 year old in detention for being cheeky.
He went onto to gain a reputation as being a gritty opening bat in county cricket and one who knew numerous nurses of the accident and emergency units around the country on first name terms such was the frequency of his visits as a result of being hit on the fingers.
I also understand that his reputation of being a miserable so and so was somewhat harsh. Well that's what I'm told anyway!
I assumed you would! Legend has it that he holds the unwanted record of being hospitalised, from injuries sustained while playing cricket, in each of the 18 first class counties. Not sure how true this is, but it’s a great story.
Paddy has the other bits right, I’m sure - my own account is full of holes as I missed 17 of these years when living abroad.
Recognise the name of a certain no.6 for Bromley who opened the bowling...?!
The number 7 is currently opening the batting for Beckenham 1s - his sister plays for Kent Women and his dad used to play for Blackheath, Sidcup, Wickham Park and Hayes as well as Kent Over 50s.
@Addick Addict the man ruined the Colfes-Colfeians relationship in favour of founding the Roebucks in 2005, and eventually ensured our own Colts section was so unsustainable that it led to its winding down in 2012 and subsuming by the GJCA. This now benefits every other club except ours.
Ash - I'd disagree that the Greenwich thing has worked for us. Other than your son and Fraser, there are zero colts and any U18s who do play for us come via friends of OCCC members.
I think his reputation is certainly justified.
He nabbed all the School's players and stopped them from attending OCs eventually. Hell, look at the Roebucks website - it actually says the club was formed so youngsters could continue to play cricket after school!
Ultimately, we have a long old rebuild to undergo and we're attempting to ensure this happens sustainably.
Are there many OC’s at Roebucks now ? I was led to believe it was a “guns for hire” club
@Addick Addict the man ruined the Colfes-Colfeians relationship in favour of founding the Roebucks in 2005, and eventually ensured our own Colts section was so unsustainable that it led to its winding down in 2012 and subsuming by the GJCA. This now benefits every other club except ours.
Ash - I'd disagree that the Greenwich thing has worked for us. Other than your son and Fraser, there are zero colts and any U18s who do play for us come via friends of OCCC members.
I think his reputation is certainly justified.
He nabbed all the School's players and stopped them from attending OCs eventually. Hell, look at the Roebucks website - it actually says the club was formed so youngsters could continue to play cricket after school!
Ultimately, we have a long old rebuild to undergo and we're attempting to ensure this happens sustainably.
Are there many OC’s at Roebucks now ? I was led to believe it was a “guns for hire” club
Good question - and as a former Elthamian(!) I don't actually know.
However, I know that a few OCCC players were poached and paid a few years back, and of course Chris Lewis is skippering. Their rise has been facilitated by financial backing in many parts I believe.
@Addick Addict the man ruined the Colfes-Colfeians relationship in favour of founding the Roebucks in 2005, and eventually ensured our own Colts section was so unsustainable that it led to its winding down in 2012 and subsuming by the GJCA. This now benefits every other club except ours.
Ash - I'd disagree that the Greenwich thing has worked for us. Other than your son and Fraser, there are zero colts and any U18s who do play for us come via friends of OCCC members.
I think his reputation is certainly justified.
He nabbed all the School's players and stopped them from attending OCs eventually. Hell, look at the Roebucks website - it actually says the club was formed so youngsters could continue to play cricket after school!
Ultimately, we have a long old rebuild to undergo and we're attempting to ensure this happens sustainably.
Are there many OC’s at Roebucks now ? I was led to believe it was a “guns for hire” club
Good question - and as a former Elthamian(!) I don't actually know.
However, I know that a few OCCC players were poached and paid a few years back, and of course Chris Lewis is skippering. Their rise has been facilitated by financial backing in many parts I believe.
There are still 3 or 4 by the looks of it but not regular 1s players
Had some bloke from the West Indies who was recently playing Middlesex prem bowling 75mph+ round my ears on a pitch doing all sorts. Got absolutely peppered for my 6 lol.
This is the league below div 5 i believe. In any case, it's a joke he was playing at that standard.
That sort of financial muscle is absolutely against the spirit of cricket.
This isn't professional football, it's amateur cricket where most have to pay to play. To start giving players a wedge at that level is shocking IMO.
Had some bloke from the West Indies who was recently playing Middlesex prem bowling 75mph+ round my ears on a pitch doing all sorts. Got absolutely peppered for my 6 lol.
This is the league below div 5 i believe. In any case, it's a joke he was playing at that standard.
That sort of financial muscle is absolutely against the spirit of cricket.
This isn't professional football, it's amateur cricket where most have to pay to play. To start giving players a wedge at that level is shocking IMO.
Found the scorecard and the bowler in question. He must be getting paid a tidy three-figure sum per game; there's no other explanation.
Roebucks and Minster are inevitably going to collapse in a big way once the money runs out - just look at Hartley et al as cautionary tales.
If I'd have somehow ended up playing against Chris Lewis and them lot - hell, I might even end up doing so if there's a freak 1s appearance for me next year or something (nearly the case on Saturday!) - I'd be celebrating and raving every single block and every single minute I survived out there.
Had some bloke from the West Indies who was recently playing Middlesex prem bowling 75mph+ round my ears on a pitch doing all sorts. Got absolutely peppered for my 6 lol.
This is the league below div 5 i believe. In any case, it's a joke he was playing at that standard.
That sort of financial muscle is absolutely against the spirit of cricket.
This isn't professional football, it's amateur cricket where most have to pay to play. To start giving players a wedge at that level is shocking IMO.
Found the scorecard and the bowler in question. He must be getting paid a tidy three-figure sum per game; there's no other explanation.
Roebucks and Minster are inevitably going to collapse in a big way once the money runs out - just look at Hartley et al as cautionary tales.
If I'd have somehow ended up playing against Chris Lewis and them lot - hell, I might even end up doing so if there's a freak 1s appearance for me next year or something (nearly the case on Saturday!) - I'd be celebrating and raving every single block and every single minute I survived out there.
I believe he caught me that game.
Pinged one to him at mid-off off the bowler at the other end who I was trying to score against while trying to survive against the West Indian haha.
Had some bloke from the West Indies who was recently playing Middlesex prem bowling 75mph+ round my ears on a pitch doing all sorts. Got absolutely peppered for my 6 lol.
This is the league below div 5 i believe. In any case, it's a joke he was playing at that standard.
That sort of financial muscle is absolutely against the spirit of cricket.
This isn't professional football, it's amateur cricket where most have to pay to play. To start giving players a wedge at that level is shocking IMO.
Found the scorecard and the bowler in question. He must be getting paid a tidy three-figure sum per game; there's no other explanation.
Roebucks and Minster are inevitably going to collapse in a big way once the money runs out - just look at Hartley et al as cautionary tales.
If I'd have somehow ended up playing against Chris Lewis and them lot - hell, I might even end up doing so if there's a freak 1s appearance for me next year or something (nearly the case on Saturday!) - I'd be celebrating and raving every single block and every single minute I survived out there.
I think Roebucks may struggle to get promoted from div 5 this year. The Littlebourne Gould's should see them up, and Bromley Town have a good Kiwi playing for them this year. Bexley are very strong as we know from above and Dan Haley may get a thousand this year unless he loses form. Of the rest, Faversham, Chisles, and Offham can be dangerous on their day but are in survival mode, while Rodmersham and Betteshangar have the same players that have struggled over recent times.
For context we were playing at sydenham girls school near County Ground in Beckenham.
If anyone knows it then they will know that the pitch is not suitable to that sort of bowling (75 is probably a tad conservative as an estimate) against opposition that are of the same standard, let alone against clearly weaker opposition who you plan to blow out of the water.
Pretty outrageous looking back at it.
Still, we got relegated and have been having a really enjoyable season this time around.
We've won 4 from 4. However, one was a 1 wicket win and one was a 2 wicket win. Both of which we were destined to lose but dug deep and pulled it back. I.e close games of cricket that I'm sure tehy were gutted to lose, but they woild say "great game of cricket".
It's what we all play for. No one wants to get rolled for sub 75 or chase leather for 45 overs just so some blokes can put money in their pocket.
Had some bloke from the West Indies who was recently playing Middlesex prem bowling 75mph+ round my ears on a pitch doing all sorts. Got absolutely peppered for my 6 lol.
This is the league below div 5 i believe. In any case, it's a joke he was playing at that standard.
That sort of financial muscle is absolutely against the spirit of cricket.
This isn't professional football, it's amateur cricket where most have to pay to play. To start giving players a wedge at that level is shocking IMO.
Found the scorecard and the bowler in question. He must be getting paid a tidy three-figure sum per game; there's no other explanation.
Roebucks and Minster are inevitably going to collapse in a big way once the money runs out - just look at Hartley et al as cautionary tales.
If I'd have somehow ended up playing against Chris Lewis and them lot - hell, I might even end up doing so if there's a freak 1s appearance for me next year or something (nearly the case on Saturday!) - I'd be celebrating and raving every single block and every single minute I survived out there.
I think Roebucks may struggle to get promoted from div 5 this year. The Littlebourne Gould's should see them up, and Bromley Town have a good Kiwi playing for them this year. Bexley are very strong as we know from above and Dan Haley may get a thousand this year unless he loses form. Of the rest, Faversham, Chisles, and Offham can be dangerous on their day but are in survival mode, while Rodmersham and Betteshangar have the same players that have struggled over recent times.
Bexley 3s are playing the Goulds this week. The 1s and 2s are playing Sandwich with the former without, for varying reasons, Messrs MacLeod, Robinson and Ball. Whereas I suspect that Sandwich will have Grant Stewart and Fred Klaassen opening the bowling. That will be a real test.
For context we were playing at sydenham girls school near County Ground in Beckenham.
If anyone knows it then they will know that the pitch is not suitable to that sort of bowling (75 is probably a tad conservative as an estimate) against opposition that are of the same standard, let alone against clearly weaker opposition who you plan to blow out of the water.
Pretty outrageous looking back at it.
Still, we got relegated and have been having a really enjoyable season this time around.
We've won 4 from 4. However, one was a 1 wicket win and one was a 2 wicket win. Both of which we were destined to lose but dug deep and pulled it back. I.e close games of cricket that I'm sure tehy were gutted to lose, but they woild say "great game of cricket".
It's what we all play for. No one wants to get rolled for sub 75 or chase leather for 45 overs just so some blokes can put money in their pocket.
There can’t be any future in it For Roebucks i would have thought. For all of the flack that Minster are receiving they are trying to build a colts section as well as buying their way into the prem within a couple of years.
A few years back I came out of retirement for a couple of seasons and played for a 'dad's and lads' side.
On Tuesday, one of the 'lads' hit an unbeaten 156 against the MCC.
he opens for Sidcup 1s now and obviously took on board all I was teaching him back when we were opening partners, then dismissed it all.
I’ll have to ask if the lad I played with has any Gould blood in him.
He was at it again yesterday scoring 154 not out in a 20/20 game on the first day of sidcups cricket week.
Not sure of the strength of the opposition yesterday but this season he has now had 14 innings scoring 5 x 50s and 4 tons and is averaging 115 at a strike rate of 184.
Sam Lockwood has certainly been in fantastic form this season but has only really been consistently successful in the last couple of years. He could, admittedly, possibly be accused of bullying the opposition on occasions but hasn't quite reached the "heights" of Byron Gould who has been doing so for the last seven or eight years.
Sam has been at it again. 3 tons in last 3 innings. an unbeaten 44 ball 100 in a friendly, 115 in 71 balls yesterday in the league and 139 in 80 balls last week in the league.
Bexley 1s beat Sandwich yesterday and if they win their match in hand they will go top. I wrote HSBC off last week but they won yesterday albeit against struggling Blackheath.
The 2s met at 9.15am at the Club, won the toss and scrambled to 187-7 either side of a two and a half hour rain break. Sandwich were on 108-6 off 26 overs when proceedings were called to a halt at 8.00pm. So no result and no Duckworth Lewis either.
We got back to the Club at just after 9.30pm. That's a bloody long day for an incomplete game. But there again, we only have to make that particular journey once. Sandwich have to make a similar trip virtually every away game!
Bexley 1s beat Sandwich yesterday and if they win their match in hand they will go top. I wrote HSBC off last week but they won yesterday albeit against struggling Blackheath.
The 2s met at 9.15am at the Club, won the toss and scrambled to 187-7 either side of a two and a half hour rain break. Sandwich were on 108-6 off 26 overs when proceedings were called to a halt at 8.00pm. So no result and no Duckworth Lewis either.
We got back to the Club at just after 9.30pm. That's a bloody long day for an incomplete game. But there again, we only have to make that particular journey once. Sandwich have to make a similar trip virtually every away game!
Bexley looking good this year! It's another Blackheath shocker, and will shut up all those saying HSBC wouldn't win a game this season. Great hundred by Matt Abbett (a player I never feel safe umpiring as he hits the ball very hard and straight!) by the look of it.
And you didn't get any extra points playing an incomplete rather than an abandoned game either...something the umpires may have considered when going out after a 150 minute rain break?
Bexley 1s beat Sandwich yesterday and if they win their match in hand they will go top. I wrote HSBC off last week but they won yesterday albeit against struggling Blackheath.
The 2s met at 9.15am at the Club, won the toss and scrambled to 187-7 either side of a two and a half hour rain break. Sandwich were on 108-6 off 26 overs when proceedings were called to a halt at 8.00pm. So no result and no Duckworth Lewis either.
We got back to the Club at just after 9.30pm. That's a bloody long day for an incomplete game. But there again, we only have to make that particular journey once. Sandwich have to make a similar trip virtually every away game!
Bexley looking good this year! It's another Blackheath shocker, and will shut up all those saying HSBC wouldn't win a game this season. Great hundred by Matt Abbett (a player I never feel safe umpiring as he hits the ball very hard and straight!) by the look of it.
And you didn't get any extra points playing an incomplete rather than an abandoned game either...something the umpires may have considered when going out after a 150 minute rain break?
We did get 4 extra points so we got 10 and Sandwich 9 (as opposed to 8 each for an abandoned game) - but if DL was available we could have had a result
Bexley 1s beat Sandwich yesterday and if they win their match in hand they will go top. I wrote HSBC off last week but they won yesterday albeit against struggling Blackheath.
The 2s met at 9.15am at the Club, won the toss and scrambled to 187-7 either side of a two and a half hour rain break. Sandwich were on 108-6 off 26 overs when proceedings were called to a halt at 8.00pm. So no result and no Duckworth Lewis either.
We got back to the Club at just after 9.30pm. That's a bloody long day for an incomplete game. But there again, we only have to make that particular journey once. Sandwich have to make a similar trip virtually every away game!
Bexley looking good this year! It's another Blackheath shocker, and will shut up all those saying HSBC wouldn't win a game this season. Great hundred by Matt Abbett (a player I never feel safe umpiring as he hits the ball very hard and straight!) by the look of it.
And you didn't get any extra points playing an incomplete rather than an abandoned game either...something the umpires may have considered when going out after a 150 minute rain break?
We did get 4 extra points so we got 10 and Sandwich 9 (as opposed to 8 each for an abandoned game) - but if DL was available we could have had a result
If you can’t reduce overs once in play could the captains agree to reduce overs once in play ? Say Bexley had declared after 40 overs - and sandwich them had 40 overs to get the runs - if they didn’t make it at 40 they would declare as well ?
Bexley 1s beat Sandwich yesterday and if they win their match in hand they will go top. I wrote HSBC off last week but they won yesterday albeit against struggling Blackheath.
The 2s met at 9.15am at the Club, won the toss and scrambled to 187-7 either side of a two and a half hour rain break. Sandwich were on 108-6 off 26 overs when proceedings were called to a halt at 8.00pm. So no result and no Duckworth Lewis either.
We got back to the Club at just after 9.30pm. That's a bloody long day for an incomplete game. But there again, we only have to make that particular journey once. Sandwich have to make a similar trip virtually every away game!
Bexley looking good this year! It's another Blackheath shocker, and will shut up all those saying HSBC wouldn't win a game this season. Great hundred by Matt Abbett (a player I never feel safe umpiring as he hits the ball very hard and straight!) by the look of it.
And you didn't get any extra points playing an incomplete rather than an abandoned game either...something the umpires may have considered when going out after a 150 minute rain break?
We did get 4 extra points so we got 10 and Sandwich 9 (as opposed to 8 each for an abandoned game) - but if DL was available we could have had a result
If you can’t reduce overs once in play could the captains agree to reduce overs once in play ? Say Bexley had declared after 40 overs - and sandwich them had 40 overs to get the runs - if they didn’t make it at 40 they would declare as well ?
The Umpires wouldn't allow that to happen because the Rules don't allow it. For your suggestion to happen Bexley would, effectively, have to be all out in exactly 40 overs. And the Umpires would then insist that Sandwich batted for their 50 overs so, again, Sandwich would either have to get the runs inside 40 overs or very soon after be all out if they didn't have a chance of getting them for the "arrangement" to work.
And both sides would then, quite rightly, be reported to the KCL for improper conduct because all other teams would have played their games within the rules (and spirit of them).
Bexley 1s beat Sandwich yesterday and if they win their match in hand they will go top. I wrote HSBC off last week but they won yesterday albeit against struggling Blackheath.
The 2s met at 9.15am at the Club, won the toss and scrambled to 187-7 either side of a two and a half hour rain break. Sandwich were on 108-6 off 26 overs when proceedings were called to a halt at 8.00pm. So no result and no Duckworth Lewis either.
We got back to the Club at just after 9.30pm. That's a bloody long day for an incomplete game. But there again, we only have to make that particular journey once. Sandwich have to make a similar trip virtually every away game!
Bexley looking good this year! It's another Blackheath shocker, and will shut up all those saying HSBC wouldn't win a game this season. Great hundred by Matt Abbett (a player I never feel safe umpiring as he hits the ball very hard and straight!) by the look of it.
And you didn't get any extra points playing an incomplete rather than an abandoned game either...something the umpires may have considered when going out after a 150 minute rain break?
We did get 4 extra points so we got 10 and Sandwich 9 (as opposed to 8 each for an abandoned game) - but if DL was available we could have had a result
If you can’t reduce overs once in play could the captains agree to reduce overs once in play ? Say Bexley had declared after 40 overs - and sandwich them had 40 overs to get the runs - if they didn’t make it at 40 they would declare as well ?
The Umpires wouldn't allow that to happen because the Rules don't allow it. For your suggestion to happen Bexley would, effectively, have to be all out in exactly 40 overs. And the Umpires would then insist that Sandwich batted for their 50 overs so, again, Sandwich would either have to get the runs inside 40 overs or very soon after be all out if they didn't have a chance of getting them for the "arrangement" to work.
And both sides would then, quite rightly, be reported to the KCL for improper conduct because all other teams would have played their games within the rules (and spirit of them).
No, that's not right. You could have declared at, say, 45 overs (maybe 160 runs), and knowing that you only had 16 overs from 7pm would have known that Sandwich would have had c31 overs to get the runs or for you to bowl them out. They would never have had the full 50 overs as there wasn't time for that to be bowled. If no result was reached then it would have been incomplete anyway.
Bexley 1s beat Sandwich yesterday and if they win their match in hand they will go top. I wrote HSBC off last week but they won yesterday albeit against struggling Blackheath.
The 2s met at 9.15am at the Club, won the toss and scrambled to 187-7 either side of a two and a half hour rain break. Sandwich were on 108-6 off 26 overs when proceedings were called to a halt at 8.00pm. So no result and no Duckworth Lewis either.
We got back to the Club at just after 9.30pm. That's a bloody long day for an incomplete game. But there again, we only have to make that particular journey once. Sandwich have to make a similar trip virtually every away game!
Bexley looking good this year! It's another Blackheath shocker, and will shut up all those saying HSBC wouldn't win a game this season. Great hundred by Matt Abbett (a player I never feel safe umpiring as he hits the ball very hard and straight!) by the look of it.
And you didn't get any extra points playing an incomplete rather than an abandoned game either...something the umpires may have considered when going out after a 150 minute rain break?
We did get 4 extra points so we got 10 and Sandwich 9 (as opposed to 8 each for an abandoned game) - but if DL was available we could have had a result
If you can’t reduce overs once in play could the captains agree to reduce overs once in play ? Say Bexley had declared after 40 overs - and sandwich them had 40 overs to get the runs - if they didn’t make it at 40 they would declare as well ?
The Umpires wouldn't allow that to happen because the Rules don't allow it. For your suggestion to happen Bexley would, effectively, have to be all out in exactly 40 overs. And the Umpires would then insist that Sandwich batted for their 50 overs so, again, Sandwich would either have to get the runs inside 40 overs or very soon after be all out if they didn't have a chance of getting them for the "arrangement" to work.
And both sides would then, quite rightly, be reported to the KCL for improper conduct because all other teams would have played their games within the rules (and spirit of them).
No, that's not right. You could have declared at, say, 45 overs (maybe 160 runs), and knowing that you only had 16 overs from 7pm would have known that Sandwich would have had c31 overs to get the runs or for you to bowl them out. They would never have had the full 50 overs as there wasn't time for that to be bowled. If no result was reached then it would have been incomplete anyway.
I stand corrected so far as the rules are concerned.
A declaration was unlikely to happen given that, using the example of 45 overs, Bexley were 151-6. If Sandwich had got off to a flyer in the Power Play (say 50-1 off 6) then they would have been in the driving seat and if they had lost a couple of wickets for not very many in that time then they could just have shut up shop. Not many sides at this level are bowled out inside 31 overs especially one like Sandwich who are unbeaten this season.
Bexley 1s beat Sandwich yesterday and if they win their match in hand they will go top. I wrote HSBC off last week but they won yesterday albeit against struggling Blackheath.
The 2s met at 9.15am at the Club, won the toss and scrambled to 187-7 either side of a two and a half hour rain break. Sandwich were on 108-6 off 26 overs when proceedings were called to a halt at 8.00pm. So no result and no Duckworth Lewis either.
We got back to the Club at just after 9.30pm. That's a bloody long day for an incomplete game. But there again, we only have to make that particular journey once. Sandwich have to make a similar trip virtually every away game!
Bexley looking good this year! It's another Blackheath shocker, and will shut up all those saying HSBC wouldn't win a game this season. Great hundred by Matt Abbett (a player I never feel safe umpiring as he hits the ball very hard and straight!) by the look of it.
And you didn't get any extra points playing an incomplete rather than an abandoned game either...something the umpires may have considered when going out after a 150 minute rain break?
We did get 4 extra points so we got 10 and Sandwich 9 (as opposed to 8 each for an abandoned game) - but if DL was available we could have had a result
If you can’t reduce overs once in play could the captains agree to reduce overs once in play ? Say Bexley had declared after 40 overs - and sandwich them had 40 overs to get the runs - if they didn’t make it at 40 they would declare as well ?
The Umpires wouldn't allow that to happen because the Rules don't allow it. For your suggestion to happen Bexley would, effectively, have to be all out in exactly 40 overs. And the Umpires would then insist that Sandwich batted for their 50 overs so, again, Sandwich would either have to get the runs inside 40 overs or very soon after be all out if they didn't have a chance of getting them for the "arrangement" to work.
And both sides would then, quite rightly, be reported to the KCL for improper conduct because all other teams would have played their games within the rules (and spirit of them).
No, that's not right. You could have declared at, say, 45 overs (maybe 160 runs), and knowing that you only had 16 overs from 7pm would have known that Sandwich would have had c31 overs to get the runs or for you to bowl them out. They would never have had the full 50 overs as there wasn't time for that to be bowled. If no result was reached then it would have been incomplete anyway.
I stand corrected so far as the rules are concerned.
A declaration was unlikely to happen given that, using the example of 45 overs, Bexley were 151-6. If Sandwich had got off to a flyer in the Power Play (say 50-1 off 6) then they would have been in the driving seat and if they had lost a couple of wickets for not very many in that time then they could just have shut up shop. Not many sides at this level are bowled out inside 31 overs especially one like Sandwich who are unbeaten this season.
Bexley 1s beat Sandwich yesterday and if they win their match in hand they will go top. I wrote HSBC off last week but they won yesterday albeit against struggling Blackheath.
The 2s met at 9.15am at the Club, won the toss and scrambled to 187-7 either side of a two and a half hour rain break. Sandwich were on 108-6 off 26 overs when proceedings were called to a halt at 8.00pm. So no result and no Duckworth Lewis either.
We got back to the Club at just after 9.30pm. That's a bloody long day for an incomplete game. But there again, we only have to make that particular journey once. Sandwich have to make a similar trip virtually every away game!
Bexley looking good this year! It's another Blackheath shocker, and will shut up all those saying HSBC wouldn't win a game this season. Great hundred by Matt Abbett (a player I never feel safe umpiring as he hits the ball very hard and straight!) by the look of it.
And you didn't get any extra points playing an incomplete rather than an abandoned game either...something the umpires may have considered when going out after a 150 minute rain break?
We did get 4 extra points so we got 10 and Sandwich 9 (as opposed to 8 each for an abandoned game) - but if DL was available we could have had a result
If you can’t reduce overs once in play could the captains agree to reduce overs once in play ? Say Bexley had declared after 40 overs - and sandwich them had 40 overs to get the runs - if they didn’t make it at 40 they would declare as well ?
The Umpires wouldn't allow that to happen because the Rules don't allow it. For your suggestion to happen Bexley would, effectively, have to be all out in exactly 40 overs. And the Umpires would then insist that Sandwich batted for their 50 overs so, again, Sandwich would either have to get the runs inside 40 overs or very soon after be all out if they didn't have a chance of getting them for the "arrangement" to work.
And both sides would then, quite rightly, be reported to the KCL for improper conduct because all other teams would have played their games within the rules (and spirit of them).
No, that's not right. You could have declared at, say, 45 overs (maybe 160 runs), and knowing that you only had 16 overs from 7pm would have known that Sandwich would have had c31 overs to get the runs or for you to bowl them out. They would never have had the full 50 overs as there wasn't time for that to be bowled. If no result was reached then it would have been incomplete anyway.
I stand corrected so far as the rules are concerned.
A declaration was unlikely to happen given that, using the example of 45 overs, Bexley were 151-6. If Sandwich had got off to a flyer in the Power Play (say 50-1 off 6) then they would have been in the driving seat and if they had lost a couple of wickets for not very many in that time then they could just have shut up shop. Not many sides at this level are bowled out inside 31 overs especially one like Sandwich who are unbeaten this season.
So with a bit of creative thinking it is possible to manufacture the opportunity of a result rather than a no result? I suppose how you handle that as a captain depends on what you want out of the match ?
Comments
http://www.bdistrict.play-cricket.com/website/results/1083627
Recognise the name of a certain no.6 for Bromley who opened the bowling...?!
It must be said that I had a couple of 3rd XI players for me this weekend - I think I've already mentioned it on the thread. Two of them combined for bowling figures of 12-2-20-5 but I had no-one else available, as a lot of my players had marked out these two weeks where OCs only had three games as "holiday" weekends.
Equally, the previous week I had a talented bat ton up for me, but he won't play more than one or two Saturday games a season, because he prefers the Sunday banter with Waggoners.
I take no pleasure in stacking a team, because I'd rather win properly with the lads I know want to play for me for as much of the season as possible. But on every occasion when it so happens I have an accidental "ringer", it's out of necessity and good fortune.
When it's stacking the team because you want the win and there's no need to do so... That's not on.
Paddy has the other bits right, I’m sure - my own account is full of holes as I missed 17 of these years when living abroad.
However, I know that a few OCCC players were poached and paid a few years back, and of course Chris Lewis is skippering. Their rise has been facilitated by financial backing in many parts I believe.
Had some bloke from the West Indies who was recently playing Middlesex prem bowling 75mph+ round my ears on a pitch doing all sorts. Got absolutely peppered for my 6 lol.
This is the league below div 5 i believe. In any case, it's a joke he was playing at that standard.
That sort of financial muscle is absolutely against the spirit of cricket.
This isn't professional football, it's amateur cricket where most have to pay to play. To start giving players a wedge at that level is shocking IMO.
Roebucks and Minster are inevitably going to collapse in a big way once the money runs out - just look at Hartley et al as cautionary tales.
If I'd have somehow ended up playing against Chris Lewis and them lot - hell, I might even end up doing so if there's a freak 1s appearance for me next year or something (nearly the case on Saturday!) - I'd be celebrating and raving every single block and every single minute I survived out there.
Pinged one to him at mid-off off the bowler at the other end who I was trying to score against while trying to survive against the West Indian haha.
If anyone knows it then they will know that the pitch is not suitable to that sort of bowling (75 is probably a tad conservative as an estimate) against opposition that are of the same standard, let alone against clearly weaker opposition who you plan to blow out of the water.
Pretty outrageous looking back at it.
Still, we got relegated and have been having a really enjoyable season this time around.
We've won 4 from 4. However, one was a 1 wicket win and one was a 2 wicket win. Both of which we were destined to lose but dug deep and pulled it back. I.e close games of cricket that I'm sure tehy were gutted to lose, but they woild say "great game of cricket".
It's what we all play for. No one wants to get rolled for sub 75 or chase leather for 45 overs just so some blokes can put money in their pocket.
Bexley 3s are playing the Goulds this week. The 1s and 2s are playing Sandwich with the former without, for varying reasons, Messrs MacLeod, Robinson and Ball. Whereas I suspect that Sandwich will have Grant Stewart and Fred Klaassen opening the bowling. That will be a real test.
The 2s met at 9.15am at the Club, won the toss and scrambled to 187-7 either side of a two and a half hour rain break. Sandwich were on 108-6 off 26 overs when proceedings were called to a halt at 8.00pm. So no result and no Duckworth Lewis either.
We got back to the Club at just after 9.30pm. That's a bloody long day for an incomplete game. But there again, we only have to make that particular journey once. Sandwich have to make a similar trip virtually every away game!
And you didn't get any extra points playing an incomplete rather than an abandoned game either...something the umpires may have considered when going out after a 150 minute rain break?
And both sides would then, quite rightly, be reported to the KCL for improper conduct because all other teams would have played their games within the rules (and spirit of them).
A declaration was unlikely to happen given that, using the example of 45 overs, Bexley were 151-6. If Sandwich had got off to a flyer in the Power Play (say 50-1 off 6) then they would have been in the driving seat and if they had lost a couple of wickets for not very many in that time then they could just have shut up shop. Not many sides at this level are bowled out inside 31 overs especially one like Sandwich who are unbeaten this season.