Author Topic: Middlesex  (Read 8413 times)

Offline LeedsExile

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1579
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #15 on: September 07, 2020, 10:09:33 AM »
Yes Andy he is responsible for overseeing all aspects of the match. If he is unhappy with anything then he reports it to the ECB who then consider a response. This is what happened at Taunton last year. After reporting the pitch a committee was convened and the punishment handed out.

Online nat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6179
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #16 on: September 07, 2020, 10:27:29 AM »
anyone know what's wrong with RTD?

Offline essexfan548

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2134
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #17 on: September 07, 2020, 10:48:01 AM »
I think they said back spasm.

Offline Andy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6889
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #18 on: September 07, 2020, 12:06:00 PM »
I think they said back spasm.

Happens to us all when we hit 40...

Offline squarelegumpire

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1428
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #19 on: September 07, 2020, 02:43:58 PM »
I think the match referee is Peter Such. Not, so far, what you'd call a high scoring game is it!

Offline honkytonk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 830
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #20 on: September 07, 2020, 02:56:04 PM »
Suspect a win isn't going to be enough, Worcestershire need just one more batting point than us to finish above us should they win, which looks very likely considering our position. Derbyshire just need to beat Lancashire and they are facing a second XI Lancs bowling line-up tomorrow to tuck into.

As we all suspected, the embarrassing batting points column is going to cost us a place at Lords, unless Tendo, Wheater and Harmer can do something remarkable tomorrow. Murtagh will have them all out by 11am I reckon.

Or maybe not!!

Offline SirChef26

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1246
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #21 on: September 07, 2020, 05:06:55 PM »
Does anyone know what the tie-breaker comes down to should two teams finish level on points? I wasn't under the assumption that it was wins, but the BBC Derbyshire commentator seems to think that it is, which has thrown my permutations post above into a curveball and means we are in a far better position than I originally thought!

If it is overall wins, then the only way we'd miss out on the final is if either we don't go onto win, or we win, but Somerset win and Derbyshire make it to 250 (currently 120/7) and win as well.

I need a lie down, maths was never my strong point! Would love it if Worcestershire knocked the Cidermen out, but it's not looking good for them right now. Also, well played Adam Wheater, super knock today.

Offline ytsejam1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 361
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #22 on: September 07, 2020, 05:14:37 PM »
Does anyone know what the tie-breaker comes down to should two teams finish level on points? I wasn't under the assumption that it was wins, but the BBC Derbyshire commentator seems to think that it is, which has thrown my permutations post above into a curveball and means we are in a far better position than I originally thought!

If it is overall wins, then the only way we'd miss out on the final is if either we don't go onto win, or we win, but Somerset win and Derbyshire make it to 250 (currently 120/7) and win as well.

I need a lie down, maths was never my strong point! Would love it if Worcestershire knocked the Cidermen out, but it's not looking good for them right now. Also, well played Adam Wheater, super knock today.

Derbyshire only need 200 not 250 (and of course a win!) to beat us and the way their 8th wicket partnership is going (59 so far) then that is still very possible.
I hope that wasteful 249-3 nightwatchman blunder isn't going to cost us that one vital point that loses us a Lords place!!

Offline SirChef26

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1246
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #23 on: September 07, 2020, 05:18:30 PM »
Does anyone know what the tie-breaker comes down to should two teams finish level on points? I wasn't under the assumption that it was wins, but the BBC Derbyshire commentator seems to think that it is, which has thrown my permutations post above into a curveball and means we are in a far better position than I originally thought!

If it is overall wins, then the only way we'd miss out on the final is if either we don't go onto win, or we win, but Somerset win and Derbyshire make it to 250 (currently 120/7) and win as well.

I need a lie down, maths was never my strong point! Would love it if Worcestershire knocked the Cidermen out, but it's not looking good for them right now. Also, well played Adam Wheater, super knock today.

Derbyshire only need 200 not 250 (and of course a win!) to beat us and the way their 8th wicket partnership is going (59 so far) then that is still very possible.
I hope that wasteful 249-3 nightwatchman blunder isn't going to cost us that one vital point that loses us a Lords place!!
Of course! I forgot that they were a point ahead of us going into this round of games. Told you my maths is abysmal!

Oh in that case, it's definitely going to cost us! The nightwatchman wasn't the issue though, it was Dan Lawrence blocking out the last over before lunch in all his wisdom!

Offline IlfordEagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2251
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #24 on: September 07, 2020, 05:27:56 PM »
We are in a good position but need to finish off Middx's innings by lunch tomorrow ie not need more than 100 to win, just in case nerves creep in. Some good batting from the oft maligned Wheater that helped us to a substantial lead, gutsy display from Tendo & useful runs from Harmer. Good to see Beard getting some wickets' definitely have to finish them off early tomorrow.
I hope it rains in Liverpool & Leeds all day tomorrow (& Weds).

Offline ytsejam1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 361
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #25 on: September 07, 2020, 05:53:35 PM »
Does anyone know what the tie-breaker comes down to should two teams finish level on points? I wasn't under the assumption that it was wins, but the BBC Derbyshire commentator seems to think that it is, which has thrown my permutations post above into a curveball and means we are in a far better position than I originally thought!

If it is overall wins, then the only way we'd miss out on the final is if either we don't go onto win, or we win, but Somerset win and Derbyshire make it to 250 (currently 120/7) and win as well.

I need a lie down, maths was never my strong point! Would love it if Worcestershire knocked the Cidermen out, but it's not looking good for them right now. Also, well played Adam Wheater, super knock today.

Derbyshire only need 200 not 250 (and of course a win!) to beat us and the way their 8th wicket partnership is going (59 so far) then that is still very possible.
I hope that wasteful 249-3 nightwatchman blunder isn't going to cost us that one vital point that loses us a Lords place!!
Of course! I forgot that they were a point ahead of us going into this round of games. Told you my maths is abysmal!

Oh in that case, it's definitely going to cost us! The nightwatchman wasn't the issue though, it was Dan Lawrence blocking out the last over before lunch in all his wisdom!

Yup, bit of both really as Porters 8 from 54 balls didnt exactly push the run rate along much either!!....bad bad errors especially when there had already been a lot of play lost to bad weather and the forecast was abysmal too. Hopefully it wont come down to that point but one of these days the good luck we seemed to have enjoyed in the red ball game for quite some time now, is going to change!!

Offline Andy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6889
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #26 on: September 07, 2020, 07:29:44 PM »
Our batting is poor this year and we can't expect to win anything with relying on bowling sides out for even more paltry scores!  Wheater doing a Fossie by holding the lower order together to an extent.

Still, the past three seasons were great and this was a wierd "season" anyway!  Having recently experienced a couple of sudden deaths (one an in law another a colleague both great guys in their late 50s) it sort of puts things sporting into perspective.

Offline neil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1077
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #27 on: September 07, 2020, 08:01:34 PM »
Our batting is poor this year and we can't expect to win anything with relying on bowling sides out for even more paltry scores!  Wheater doing a Fossie by holding the lower order together to an extent.

Still, the past three seasons were great and this was a wierd "season" anyway!  Having recently experienced a couple of sudden deaths (one an in law another a colleague both great guys in their late 50s) it sort of puts things sporting into perspective.

And yet only two sides have more batting bonus points in the South group and we have the joint lowest number of bowling points
Just how much the pitch at Chelmsford effects the bonus points situation I'll leave to the more statistical minded forumites

It is a one off season and I have tried to not to take it too seriously. Just giad there is live sport to follow

Sorry to hear of your losses Andy. I think the pandemic has made many of us re-evaluate what is important.

Offline ytsejam1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 361
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #28 on: September 07, 2020, 08:43:58 PM »
Our batting is poor this year and we can't expect to win anything with relying on bowling sides out for even more paltry scores!  Wheater doing a Fossie by holding the lower order together to an extent.

Still, the past three seasons were great and this was a wierd "season" anyway!  Having recently experienced a couple of sudden deaths (one an in law another a colleague both great guys in their late 50s) it sort of puts things sporting into perspective.

And yet only two sides have more batting bonus points in the South group and we have the joint lowest number of bowling points
Just how much the pitch at Chelmsford effects the bonus points situation I'll leave to the more statistical minded forumites

It is a one off season and I have tried to not to take it too seriously. Just giad there is live sport to follow.

Sorry to hear of your losses Andy. I think the pandemic has made many of us re-evaluate what is important.

Please don’t be pedantic!!!.....the maximum amount of bowling points we could have picked up this season (‘cos of the weather) is 12 and we have........12!!
Sometimes people just have to be contrary for the sake of it I reckon!!

Concur fully with your last paragraph though.

Offline neil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1077
Re: Middlesex
« Reply #29 on: September 07, 2020, 08:52:08 PM »
Our batting is poor this year and we can't expect to win anything with relying on bowling sides out for even more paltry scores!  Wheater doing a Fossie by holding the lower order together to an extent.

Still, the past three seasons were great and this was a wierd "season" anyway!  Having recently experienced a couple of sudden deaths (one an in law another a colleague both great guys in their late 50s) it sort of puts things sporting into perspective.

And yet only two sides have more batting bonus points in the South group and we have the joint lowest number of bowling points
Just how much the pitch at Chelmsford effects the bonus points situation I'll leave to the more statistical minded forumites

It is a one off season and I have tried to not to take it too seriously. Just giad there is live sport to follow.

Sorry to hear of your losses Andy. I think the pandemic has made many of us re-evaluate what is important.

Please don’t be pedantic!!!.....the maximum amount of bowling points we could have picked up this season (‘cos of the weather) is 12 and we have........12!!
Sometimes people just have to be contrary for the sake of it I reckon!!

Concur fully with your last paragraph though.

Not being pedantic - just trying to make the point that this batting V bowling thing isn't necessarily as straightforward as some make out. You can't base it purely on numbers

We've played three games at Chelmsford where scoring tends to be quite low. I wonder how many batting points the opposition got there?  One at Hove where neither team scored over 200 (admittedly Sussex had a weak team out) . The only time we were on what seems to be a good track we were going along quite nicely at Arundel


From an article in the Cricketer on Dan Lawrence

"Until then, he had gone without a century in 2019 as Chelmsford’s surfaces made for challenging company.

A shift away from his long-term trigger movement, however, saw him make 147 in a comprehensive victory. It is a performance of which he is immensely proud; no one has found run-scoring easy at Chelmsford in recent times. “Definitely,” he adds when asked whether – in the mind, at least – runs there count for more."
« Last Edit: September 07, 2020, 09:06:41 PM by neil »