***Official*** English Domestic Season 2007

[Richard]

Haha, what does that achieve? You see batsmen routinely top-edging cross-bat strokes and splicing things to short-leg, do you?

No. You virtually never see either of those things except on complete trampolines which are unique to a single ground in The World (and even those have been out-of-service in the last 3 years or so).

 

[UncleTheOne]

a middlesex batting lineup of strauss, godleman, shah, joyce, ed smith, nash and dalrymple knocked over for 176 by the military medium of notts and made to follow on, a quite awful display. something is rotten with us at the moment.

 

[Richard]

It happens - we saw something similar in 2003 with a Surrey team of (David would be able to confirm if I'm wrong) Butcher, Ward, Ramprakash, Thorpe, Stewart and Hollioake fall to Lancs.

Mind, that team did feature IIRR Martin, Chapple and Anderson.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Haha, what does that achieve?

Uncertainty in the batsmen's mind whether to go forward because of the bounce and pace of the pitch. Harmison would imo be perfectly suited to that sort of a pitch as we all no that most batsmen don't like the ball at their head.

 

[Richard]

Most batsmen don't have the slightest problem with the ball at their head, that's what helmets are for - you either duck out of the way or you Hook or Glance it.

And uncertainty about whether to go forward or back rarely results in wickets, it just results in an unconvincing-looking stroke.

You won't get too far as a bowler at the top level on consistent pitches without making the ball go sideways.

 

[UncleTheOne]

It happens - we saw something similar in 2003 with a Surrey team of (David would be able to confirm if I'm wrong) Butcher, Ward, Ramprakash, Thorpe, Stewart and Hollioake fall to Lancs.

Mind, that team did feature IIRR Martin, Chapple and Anderson.

we fell to shreck, ealham and franks

 

[Richard]

Franks and Ealham are hardly novices. And Shreck, for whatever reason, has got rather a few wickets in the last 1-and-a-bit seasons.

 

[Pup Clarke]

.

And uncertainty about whether to go forward or back rarely results in wickets, it just results in an unconvincing-looking stroke.

Don't agree with that comment tbh. I feel that this results in catches behind the stumps when bowlers pitch the ball in the "corridor of uncertainty" and the batsmen in unsure whether to play forward or back and just pokes at the ball. I'm sure that's one of commonest reasons of how a caught behind was obtained.

 

[Pup Clarke]

And Shreck, for whatever reason, has got rather a few wickets in the last 1-and-a-bit seasons.

Maybe because he's a pretty useful bowler from the little I'm seen of him. Lovely action and a genuine away swing bowler who bowls very close to the stumps. Seems like the kind of bowler when on a roll he can just decimate the top order as evident of his hauls against Middlesex this year and last.

 

[Richard]

Don't agree with that comment tbh. I feel that this results in catches behind the stumps when bowlers pitch the ball in the "corridor of uncertainty" and the batsmen in unsure whether to play forward or back and just pokes at the ball. I'm sure that's one of commonest reasons of how a caught behind was obtained.

Disagree. It happened with McGrath (between 2001 and 2004 at least) a hell of a lot, but rarely does with anyone else, especially not someone as inaccurate as Harmison.

In any case, bowling in "the channel" has little to do with the bounce of the pitch.

 

[Richard]

Maybe because he's a pretty useful bowler from the little I'm seen of him. Lovely action and a genuine away swing bowler who bowls very close to the stumps. Seems like the kind of bowler when on a roll he can just decimate the top order as evident of his hauls against Middlesex this year and last.

Indeed, but it's strange that someone like that could just appear out of nowhere. He's, what, 26, and had been playing Minor Counties cricket for an age, then had an awful first First-Class season.

 

[Swervy]

Maybe because he's a pretty useful bowler from the little I'm seen of him. Lovely action and a genuine away swing bowler who bowls very close to the stumps. Seems like the kind of bowler when on a roll he can just decimate the top order as evident of his hauls against Middlesex this year and last.

I have seen him just a few times, and he has impressed me a hell of a lot, but it is strange how he has snuck under the radar

 

[Pup Clarke]

Indeed, but it's strange that someone like that could just appear out of nowhere. He's, what, 26, and had been playing Minor Counties cricket for an age, then had an awful first First-Class season.

Apparantly was spotted by Chris Tolley after Shreck have knocked his stumps over back in a minor counties game in Devon. He then proceeded to get a contract from Notts and have a pretty successful couple of seasons before an injury in 2005 kept him out for the whole season. More than made up for it with his season in 2006.. Does seem very odd indeed that at the age of 25 he was still playing minor counties cricket as it must have been obvious that he could have moved up to first class level before.

 

[Richard]

In fact, now I think about it he actually took 5-19 in a Cornwall game in the C&G against a FC county. Can't remember the season or the oppo, though.

 

[jakob1978]

Very disappointing day for Kent today - the only bright spot was creeping up to 400 to get maximum points, which should have been done with ease given our overnight position. Then more wayward bowling, too many extras given, and by the looks of things, too many boundary balls served up. Add in sloppy fielding (Benkenstein dropped on 10 by VJ, Di Venuto dropped badly by Jones on 28) and it's been pretty rubbish. Might need rain to come to our aid tomorrow to escape with a draw. I'm not impressed.

Well, it's been raining all evening and doesn't look like it's going to stop anytime soon, and the forecast for tomorrow is for light rain. Hopefully we can bat for a little while, get the lead above 350 and see if Harmison, Plunkett and Onions can get us the win. Given how big the scores have been so far though, i think my money would be on a draw.

What was the problem with Joseph? It looked like he went off after 5 balls of his 3rd over, but looking at Cricinfo he seems to have come back and has now bowled 6 overs (though he still leaked runs at 8.5 an over)

 

[Pup Clarke]

I know it might seem farfetched Richard but do you think he can break into the England test or odi team. He's certainly gaining a reputation as a guy who can get alot of wickets when on song. I mean if Mahmood and Bresnan are selected... anything's possible.

 

[Richard]

I know it might seem farfetched Richard but do you think he can break into the England test or odi team. He's certainly gaining a reputation as a guy who can get alot of wickets when on song. I mean if Mahmood and Bresnan are selected... anything's possible.

As you say - perfectly conceivable.

It should be noted Bresnan only got in for ODIs, though - can't believe anyone has ever seriously considered him in Tests.

 

[Pup Clarke]

.

can't believe anyone has ever seriously considered him in Tests.

The selectors.

 

[Richard]

Oh, I don't think they have. And certainly none of the Press Pack have ever mentioned him the way they have Plunkett, Mahmood, Broad, Onions, Khan, etc.

 

[marc71178]

Just wondering what people think of the bonus points scoring system at the moment, with up to 5 available for batting and 3 for bowling. Considering that cricket is becoming more and more of a batsman's game and we have roads like Taunton and Chelmsford on the county circuit, I would rather see it revert to 4 points being available for each or - even better - 5 for bowling and 3 for batting.

The reason it was changed was because 130 overs is more than enough to dismiss a side.

I don't see why a team should be given any extra benefit for taking that long to bowl the opposition out, so 3 points is the max in relation to the batting points IMO.