Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
England Cricket 2024
Comments
-
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2024/08/01/delhi-capitals-owners-agree-deal-buy-shares-hampshire-ipl/
Hampshire to be sold to the owners of the Delhi Capitals IPL franchise. Includes 49% of the Southern Brave too.0 -
Northants and Durham are the other non member owned counties. As they don’t have a 100 franchise or Test cricket I assume that they won’t be as attractive.MarcusH26 said:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2024/08/01/delhi-capitals-owners-agree-deal-buy-shares-hampshire-ipl/
Hampshire to be sold to the owners of the Delhi Capitals IPL franchise. Includes 49% of the Southern Brave too.The interesting part will be if a member owned county gets to a point where financially they can’t make it work. If it’s the right one then you could see more overseas investment0 -
Durham soon to have a 100 team though right?billysboots said:
Northants and Durham are the other non member owned counties. As they don’t have a 100 franchise or Test cricket I assume that they won’t be as attractive.MarcusH26 said:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2024/08/01/delhi-capitals-owners-agree-deal-buy-shares-hampshire-ipl/
Hampshire to be sold to the owners of the Delhi Capitals IPL franchise. Includes 49% of the Southern Brave too.The interesting part will be if a member owned county gets to a point where financially they can’t make it work. If it’s the right one then you could see more overseas investment0 -
I think technically they have part of the Northern Superchargers? But I'd expect a West Country (either Taunton or Bristol based) and Durham based franchise to be the natural expansion of the competition if it happens.
Going back to the county side of things, I do expect the Hampshire deal to not be a one off. There's been talk of the Rajasthan Royals ownership wanting to do a deal with Yorkshire but I think that's probably a rather complicated deal.0 -
He's leaving Northants with Warwickshire and Durham challenging for his signature.Addick Addict said:
He is, admittedly, playing in Div 2 but Emilio Gay (who went to Bedford School, the same as Alastair Cook) is perhaps one and has been in great form - 860 runs at an average of 61.42. Last season, in Div 1, he scored 589 runs at 34.64 but would have only been aged 23 at that timeblackpool72 said:
Unfortunately there are no opening batsmen at the moment putting pressure on to be selectedsillav nitram said:Bloody Crawley, it’s always him first out. FFS.0 -
Durham have a test ground thoughbillysboots said:
Northants and Durham are the other non member owned counties. As they don’t have a 100 franchise or Test cricket I assume that they won’t be as attractive.MarcusH26 said:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2024/08/01/delhi-capitals-owners-agree-deal-buy-shares-hampshire-ipl/
Hampshire to be sold to the owners of the Delhi Capitals IPL franchise. Includes 49% of the Southern Brave too.The interesting part will be if a member owned county gets to a point where financially they can’t make it work. If it’s the right one then you could see more overseas investment0 -
Durham Indians ?lolwray said:
Durham have a test ground thoughbillysboots said:
Northants and Durham are the other non member owned counties. As they don’t have a 100 franchise or Test cricket I assume that they won’t be as attractive.MarcusH26 said:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2024/08/01/delhi-capitals-owners-agree-deal-buy-shares-hampshire-ipl/
Hampshire to be sold to the owners of the Delhi Capitals IPL franchise. Includes 49% of the Southern Brave too.The interesting part will be if a member owned county gets to a point where financially they can’t make it work. If it’s the right one then you could see more overseas investment1 -
https://www.ecb.co.uk/news/4075462
Jordan Cox and Ollie Stone into the squad for the Sri Lanka series replacing the injured Crawley and Pennington0 -
Very early to be announcing a Test squad. The 1st Test isn't for another 2.5 weeks.0
-
RIP Thorpey1
- Sponsored links:
-
Oh man thats proper shit news this morning. I knew he'd been ill but still a shock nonetheless. RIP Graham. 55 is no age FFS.0
-
Ben Stokes with a bad injury while playing in the Hundred… will he be available for England next week? I suspect bowling is out of the question at the very least.0
-
That injury is down to the ECB and their insistence that their centrally contracted superstars play in their Mickey Mouse competition. Played 3 games, scored 4 runs and hasn't taken a wicket. He opted out of the World Cup to get fit, hasn't played in the Vitality Blast for over three years and wouldn't be playing in this if it wasn't for them. Somehow they are successfully managing to undermine the game both on and off the pitch. That's quite an achievement.4
-
It's ridiculous that a player is forced to play in an ECB match. There's the risk that he might get injured. It's totally the ECB's fault when a player playing in one of their matches gets injured. Totally. They should feel ashamed of themselves.
I mean, why would they ask a cricketer to play cricket? Can't they see how dangerous and risky it is?
We're now having to go into a Test series with Sri Lanka with a player missing, because he got injured playing cricket. Let's hope his injury heals in time for this winter's tours. Because broken fingers can take a long to to fix properly.0 -
Yep a broken finger playing for England taking a catch is so much worse than the England Test captain playing, in a Mickey Mouse competition, pull a hamstring or, even worse, injure the same knee that has so adversely affected his career. I hope that those that went to those three games that Stokes played in thoroughly enjoyed his four runs and zero wickets because those fans paying top dollar to watch him do what he does best in Test cricket will be denied that chance. I'm sure, though, you loved watching Stokes do that and no doubt take great satisfaction that he gave his all to the cause of the ECB's vanity project.Chizz said:It's ridiculous that a player is forced to play in an ECB match. There's the risk that he might get injured. It's totally the ECB's fault when a player playing in one of their matches gets injured. Totally. They should feel ashamed of themselves.
I mean, why would they ask a cricketer to play cricket? Can't they see how dangerous and risky it is?
We're now having to go into a Test series with Sri Lanka with a player missing, because he got injured playing cricket. Let's hope his injury heals in time for this winter's tours. Because broken fingers can take a long to to fix properly.2 -
Two cricketers got injured playing cricket. It happens.Addick Addict said:
Yep a broken finger playing for England taking a catch is so much worse than the England Test captain playing, in a Mickey Mouse competition, pull a hamstring or, even worse, injure the same knee that has so adversely affected his career. I hope that those that went to those three games that Stokes played in thoroughly enjoyed his four runs and zero wickets because those fans paying top dollar to watch him do what he does best in Test cricket will be denied that chance. I'm sure, though, you loved watching Stokes do that and no doubt take great satisfaction that he gave his all to the cause of the ECB's vanity project.Chizz said:It's ridiculous that a player is forced to play in an ECB match. There's the risk that he might get injured. It's totally the ECB's fault when a player playing in one of their matches gets injured. Totally. They should feel ashamed of themselves.
I mean, why would they ask a cricketer to play cricket? Can't they see how dangerous and risky it is?
We're now having to go into a Test series with Sri Lanka with a player missing, because he got injured playing cricket. Let's hope his injury heals in time for this winter's tours. Because broken fingers can take a long to to fix properly.
Why does *everything* have to be the ECB's fault with you?2 -
Perhaps because I look at the bigger picture so far as cricket is concerned. Why do you feel the need to stalk those that don't agree with your somewhat shallow view of cricket as a whole and make sarky posts in order to make a "point"? Is it for you own self-gratification? I'm not sure too many people find it funny that the England captain ends up doing nothing but injure himself because he's contractually obliged to play in such a meaningless competition. But you crack on with your Hundred orgasms. Or however many you have watching it.Chizz said:
Two cricketers got injured playing cricket. It happens.Addick Addict said:
Yep a broken finger playing for England taking a catch is so much worse than the England Test captain playing, in a Mickey Mouse competition, pull a hamstring or, even worse, injure the same knee that has so adversely affected his career. I hope that those that went to those three games that Stokes played in thoroughly enjoyed his four runs and zero wickets because those fans paying top dollar to watch him do what he does best in Test cricket will be denied that chance. I'm sure, though, you loved watching Stokes do that and no doubt take great satisfaction that he gave his all to the cause of the ECB's vanity project.Chizz said:It's ridiculous that a player is forced to play in an ECB match. There's the risk that he might get injured. It's totally the ECB's fault when a player playing in one of their matches gets injured. Totally. They should feel ashamed of themselves.
I mean, why would they ask a cricketer to play cricket? Can't they see how dangerous and risky it is?
We're now having to go into a Test series with Sri Lanka with a player missing, because he got injured playing cricket. Let's hope his injury heals in time for this winter's tours. Because broken fingers can take a long to to fix properly.
Why does *everything* have to be the ECB's fault with you?3 -
I don't think anyone finds it funny when an England player gets injured.Addick Addict said:
Perhaps because I look at the bigger picture so far as cricket is concerned. Why do you feel the need to stalk those that don't agree with your somewhat shallow view of cricket as a whole and make sarky posts in order to make a "point"? Is it for you own self-gratification? I'm not sure too many people find it funny that the England captain ends up doing nothing but injure himself because he's contractually obliged to play in such a meaningless competition. But you crack on with your Hundred orgasms. Or however many you have watching it.Chizz said:
Two cricketers got injured playing cricket. It happens.Addick Addict said:
Yep a broken finger playing for England taking a catch is so much worse than the England Test captain playing, in a Mickey Mouse competition, pull a hamstring or, even worse, injure the same knee that has so adversely affected his career. I hope that those that went to those three games that Stokes played in thoroughly enjoyed his four runs and zero wickets because those fans paying top dollar to watch him do what he does best in Test cricket will be denied that chance. I'm sure, though, you loved watching Stokes do that and no doubt take great satisfaction that he gave his all to the cause of the ECB's vanity project.Chizz said:It's ridiculous that a player is forced to play in an ECB match. There's the risk that he might get injured. It's totally the ECB's fault when a player playing in one of their matches gets injured. Totally. They should feel ashamed of themselves.
I mean, why would they ask a cricketer to play cricket? Can't they see how dangerous and risky it is?
We're now having to go into a Test series with Sri Lanka with a player missing, because he got injured playing cricket. Let's hope his injury heals in time for this winter's tours. Because broken fingers can take a long to to fix properly.
Why does *everything* have to be the ECB's fault with you?
But England players get injured. Especially playing, or training for, cricket.
I'd be more furious if he'd got injured punching someone outside a Bristol nightclub. Or injuring another player, while horsing about on a good course. But, a player getting injured playing cricket is something that simply happens.
I happen to disagree with your constant blaming of the ECB for whatever you consider to be something bad happening. I know you're desperately obsessed with it, and that's entirely your prerogative.. But you really shouldn't expect everyone to go along with you.
An experienced cricketer injured himself playing cricket. It happens. I'd prefer for it not to have, but it did. If necessary, someone will have to step in. Better that than it happens in the first session of the series, which sometimes happens when a player goes into a Test with insufficient playing time.
He'll recover. Cheer up.0 -
He was injured playing in a game he never should have been playing in and was only doing so at the behest of the ECB and the contract they awarded him. The fact that you refuse to recognise that because of your obsession and adulation of the Hundred is no surprise to the rest of us that would like to see him playing on the international stage. And I really don't need to "cheer up". I'm absolutely fine thanks. But perhaps you should see someone for that addiction of yours. I'm not just talking about the Hundred. I'm talking about the stalking.3
-
If you disagree with me that players sometimes get injured when they play cricket, that's fair enough. And if you disagree that players sometimes break down when they've played too few matches between Tests, that's fair enough too. You're perfectly entitled to those views. If you think I have "adulation" for the Hundred, that's perfectly fine as well. You're totally free to think those things, even though they're wrong.Addick Addict said:He was injured playing in a game he never should have been playing in and was only doing so at the behest of the ECB and the contract they awarded him. The fact that you refuse to recognise that because of your obsession and adulation of the Hundred is no surprise to the rest of us that would like to see him playing on the international stage. And I really don't need to "cheer up". I'm absolutely fine thanks. But perhaps you should see someone for that addiction of yours. I'm not just talking about the Hundred. I'm talking about the stalking.
But, can I suggest you resort to fewer personal insults?0 - Sponsored links:
-
There are many different ways of making "personal insults". Some more subtle than others. So can I suggest that stop stalking people and using that "modus operandi" of yours which is posting something so obviously sarky, narky (and probably in your head clever) and directed at individuals that have posted rather than actually arguing the point. It isn't funny and it really isn't clever. Oh and trying to turn the table on someone by accusing them of making "personal insults" and making yourself look like the bigger person doesn't have the effect you think it does either.Chizz said:
If you disagree with me that players sometimes get injured when they play cricket, that's fair enough. And if you disagree that players sometimes break down when they've played too few matches between Tests, that's fair enough too. You're perfectly entitled to those views. If you think I have "adulation" for the Hundred, that's perfectly fine as well. You're totally free to think those things, even though they're wrong.Addick Addict said:He was injured playing in a game he never should have been playing in and was only doing so at the behest of the ECB and the contract they awarded him. The fact that you refuse to recognise that because of your obsession and adulation of the Hundred is no surprise to the rest of us that would like to see him playing on the international stage. And I really don't need to "cheer up". I'm absolutely fine thanks. But perhaps you should see someone for that addiction of yours. I'm not just talking about the Hundred. I'm talking about the stalking.
But, can I suggest you resort to fewer personal insults?1 -
Addick Addict said:That injury is down to the ECB and their insistence that their centrally contracted superstars play in their Mickey Mouse competition. Played 3 games, scored 4 runs and hasn't taken a wicket. He opted out of the World Cup to get fit, hasn't played in the Vitality Blast for over three years and wouldn't be playing in this if it wasn't for them. Somehow they are successfully managing to undermine the game both on and off the pitch. That's quite an achievement.
Will be interesting to see if he plays for Durham in their Blast QF Vs Surrey on the 3rd September, as far as I can tell all the centrally contracted players are being made available so should be some very strong lineups being put out. Not being too biased but Sussex getting Archer,Mills and Robinson all in the same side (as long as Archer and Robinson don't find new ridiculous ways to get injured yet again) against a Lancs lineup potentially featuring Buttler (if fit) , Salt, Livingstone, Jennings, Luke Wood and a fit again Saqib Mahmood. Same with Surrey assuming they have something akin to some of their group stage sides with Pope, Lawrence, Atkinson, Sam Curran and Jamie Smith all available.
Shame most of them won't play finals day if they make it as it's sandwiched between 2 T20s Vs Australia....1 -
If Stokes doesn't make it then could it be a Jordan Cox debut ?
0 -
By all accounts he has been practising his seam up bowling. Ignoring that, it would mean our bowling is, once again, one short in which case we might not play him and see Smith move to 6 and Woakes to 7 - albeit that we would have quite a tail. There really aren't many authentic all rounders around.billysboots said:If Stokes doesn't make it then could it be a Jordan Cox debut ?1 -
Such a shame Sam Curran has all but given up on long form cricket. Whilst he had faults in his test career he is a very talented player and wasnt used in his best role. With time he could easily have developed into a bat 6 and 4th seamer.Addick Addict said:
By all accounts he has been practising his seam up bowling. Ignoring that, it would mean our bowling is, once again, one short in which case we might not play him and see Smith move to 6 and Woakes to 7 - albeit that we would have quite a tail. There really aren't many authentic all rounders around.billysboots said:If Stokes doesn't make it then could it be a Jordan Cox debut ?2 -
Just seen on social media that Chris Woakes, who was meant to be available from today to play in The Hundred, has been withdrawn by the ECB. "Horse and bolted" spring to mind.0
-
What would your view be if Lloyd jones got injured playing against Bromley in the pizza cup? Is it a case of a footballer playing football or should he be rested for cup games?Chizz said:It's ridiculous that a player is forced to play in an ECB match. There's the risk that he might get injured. It's totally the ECB's fault when a player playing in one of their matches gets injured. Totally. They should feel ashamed of themselves.
I mean, why would they ask a cricketer to play cricket? Can't they see how dangerous and risky it is?
We're now having to go into a Test series with Sri Lanka with a player missing, because he got injured playing cricket. Let's hope his injury heals in time for this winter's tours. Because broken fingers can take a long to to fix properly.0 -
Never mind next week's test, I think Stokes could well be out for the entire summer
I hope it's not as bad as it looks1 -
I missed what happened. What has he injured ?Gravesend_Addick said:Never mind next week's test, I think Stokes could well be out for the entire summer
I hope it's not as bad as it looks0 -
Running between the wickets while batting. Looks like he has done his hamstring. Scan tomorrow.golfaddick said:
I missed what happened. What has he injured ?Gravesend_Addick said:Never mind next week's test, I think Stokes could well be out for the entire summer
I hope it's not as bad as it looks0
