• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

LVCC D1 v Hampshire

Status
Not open for further replies.

hutch said:
You obviously havent seen Andy bowl!!!
Click to expand...

Seb ;)

This isn't going to plan. Hopefully we can get one of these two out before lunch

Borthwick into the attack and finally we have a break through.

I dunno why the spinners haven't done the bulk of the bowling so far today tbh. Considering a spinner got 6fer on the first day and it's now day 4 you'd think it would be turning sideways by now.
 
Looks like a draw, not a bad result i suppose but could of been better considering the position what they were in.
 
Slol said:
Looks like a draw, not a bad result i suppose but could of been better considering the position what they were in.
Click to expand...

It's looking like not enforcing the follow on could have cost us imo
 
Andy.SAFC said:
It's looking like not enforcing the follow on could have cost us imo
Click to expand...

I don't share this, if we enforced the follow on and they went on to score 400 before putting us in, we could have been struggling on Day 4 with a depleted batting line-up. It was the right thing to do for us to bat again. Not getting a wicket last night was bad but not getting one in the whole of the morning session was criminal. That's where the chance of a win was lost.
 
brandon said:
I don't share this, if we enforced the follow on and they went on to score 400 before putting us in, we could have been struggling on Day 4 with a depleted batting line-up. It was the right thing to do for us to bat again. Not getting a wicket last night was bad but not getting one in the whole of the morning session was criminal. That's where the chance of a win was lost.
Click to expand...

If they had followed on and got 400 we would then have had at least 2 sessions to get 200 ish which on this track I don't think would be too difficult.
 
Andy.SAFC said:
If they had followed on and got 400 we would then have had at least 2 sessions to get 200 ish which on this track I don't think would be too difficult.
Click to expand...

against batsman who would have been fielding for 2.5 days (our two best batsman being 35 and 36 years of age as well)


:lol:
 
Andy.SAFC said:
If they had followed on and got 400 we would then have had at least 2 sessions to get 200 ish which on this track I don't think would be too difficult.
Click to expand...

Seen the track have you? Read 3 reports, and all 3 indicate it's a slow track. Why do you think Thorp (medium pace) and Blackwell (spin) have gone for less than 2 an over when they've both bowled 23+ overs? Should have hoyed the ball to Benks.
 
Aleem Dar said:
Seen the track have you? Read 3 reports, and all 3 indicate it's a slow track. Why do you think Thorp (medium pace) and Blackwell (spin) have gone for less than 2 an over when they've both bowled 23+ overs? Should have hoyed the ball to Benks.
Click to expand...

No, but look at the amount of runs that have been scored on it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top