• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Lancashire = Cheats

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

essex boy

Striker
Should Durham follow Lancashires lead and play on a club wicket every home game to ensure a result? Is this classified as cheating?

I envisage Lancashire getting relegated when they return to OT
 

We used play on result pitches every week and finished bottom about 5 years running ;-)
 
Well, result pitches mean losing out on bonus points and of course you still have to win on them. You can't really call Lancashire cheats for playing better than their opposition and winning games. Plus, home advantage is meant to be an advantage! Every team tries to prepare their own wickets to suit their own team.

Hence why Sussex and Northants used to play 2 or 3 spinners and prepare turning pitches. We surely don't need reminding of Hampshire's pitch preparation! AND also remember our pitches are prepared to offer assistance to our seamers initially with some turn later on for Blackie and Borthwick.

I'd rather we played on a pitch that would be lively and which will produce a winner than a pitch where both teams score 500 in first innings and it peters out into a boring draw.

You could even argue that Lancashire have played 8 away games and 8 neutral venue games! :lol:
 
essex boy said:
why?

Surely most must appreciate outgrounds produce result wickets by and large as they havent been 'prepped' to play continous 4 day cricket on over the years



did you answer my Stoneman question
Click to expand...

Probably not
 
essex boy said:
Should Durham follow Lancashires lead and play on a club wicket every home game to ensure a result? Is this classified as cheating?

I envisage Lancashire getting relegated when they return to OT
Click to expand...

Bit strong calling them cheats, but I agree that is why they won the championship. The fault lies with the points system, ok we want to see competative cricket, but four times as many point for a win as a draw, regardless of weather etc. BONKERS
 
maghater said:
Bit strong calling them cheats, but I agree that is why they won the championship. The fault lies with the points system, ok we want to see competative cricket, but four times as many point for a win as a draw, regardless of weather etc. BONKERS
Click to expand...

result wicket.

Lancashire club green top wickets are hardly the type top level sport should be played on
 
essex boy said:
if you wish to twist my words no probs
Click to expand...

how is that twisting your words?

you compare stoneman's record to chanderpaul's in an attempt to make rocky sound shite.

1 century in 5 games is not embarrassing.

in fact for the record chanderpaul's FC record is 55 100s in 264 matches with an average of 54.26.

stoneman 1 100 in 5 matches with an average of 52.25 this season
 
Twisted said:
how is that twisting your words?

you compare stoneman's record to chanderpaul's in an attempt to make rocky sound shite.

1 century in 5 games is not embarrassing.

in fact for the record chanderpaul's FC record is 55 100s in 264 matches with an average of 54.26.

stoneman 1 100 in 5 matches with an average of 52.25 this season
Click to expand...

not good enough

if your opening batsman you need to post 100s when your in nick
 
essex boy said:
Indeed and he has had a poor year

Was it me who was asking the question of whether he should be dropped earlier in the season (MDV)?

Nice to see I am consistent
Click to expand...

so youre saying he's had a poor career?

edit: marcus trescothick 49 100s in 284 matches
 
Last edited:
essex boy said:
MDV has averaged that over a career

Stoneman is in a superb run of form

1 hundred is poor
Click to expand...

so when stoneman is in good form [and this is early on in his career] he's on a par with the likes of diva, chanderpaul and trescothick?

wish i was as poor as that like
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top