Username
Password
Glam Slam?

New Team Tonight?
By Grockle June 17 2008
Justin promises a new side tonight with new responsibility in the middle order. Well let's hope so because if we miss out tonight it is over and done with. Suppiah and de Bruyn play. No James Hildreth. It's overcast and dark Glamorgan won the toss and they'll be fielding.

v Glamorgan Twenty20 @ Taunton Tuesday 17 June 2008

Scorecard

A darkish afternoon in Taunton and Somerset's future in the shortest form of the game rests on their performance for the next 3-ish hours.  Justin has said on the official internet voice that he's had a bit of a think over the weekend and instilled a new fire in the boys during a long practice session yesterday.  More middle order responsibility in the batting and tighter bowling;

here are the boys who are going to put the 'Langer Theory' into practice.

Trescothick, Kieswetter, Langer, de Bruyn (for Hildreth), Blackwell, Trego, Suppiah (for Jones), Phillips, Turner, Thomas and Willoughby

Loadsa bowlers (8 if Langer doesn't turn his arm) including Willoughby.  BUT (in the words of Richard Sharpe) "...can they stand...".  The batting is solid to 6 and very solid in the form of Zander.  If this lot fail this time the tail may start at halfway. At least Craig should be guaranteed a visit to the wicket before number 8 in this line-up.

The skipper and his VC open as usual.  No reason not to, this partnership has at least performed in the games up until now.

Harrison opens for the Dragons and Justin faces the first and takes the single. Marcus flashes at the second, nicks it and wanders back to the Colin Atkinson, passing Peter Trego on the way and we are 1 for 1.  Well he had to fail once but it was a real lazy shot. It's 5 after the first and Wharf bowls the first from the River, his first ball goes to the new stand boundary.

From the crowd point of view.  It's cold and the usual areas of the ground are sparse.  The scoreboard green seats are again not that popular with the punters but the Botham stand has black muslin over part of it as a sight screen so at least it looks full tonight.  Lots of fleeces and hands in pockets tonight though.  Real sharp breeze for mid June.

Back to the cricket. 14 after the second, nearly equal honours to the batsmen. 23 after 3 and Trigger seems to be settling nicely as he doubles his score while JL stays put.  Wharf finishes him off as well as the skipper mistimes a drive and gets it straight up and then straight down into Dalrymple's hands.  He goes for 8, we are 27 for 2 and Ian Blackwell is at the crease halfway through the 4th.

At 5 we would be 9 for 2 except that Trego  has scored 35 so we are 44 for 2.  Ian doesn't look too comfortable bt hopefully he can stay with his partner and pick up the pace later in the push towards the 20th.  Watkins has replaced Wharf at the River for the 6th and while Blackie  misses the full toss he serves up as his second, he sixes the third into the Atkinson second tier to bring up the team 50.  Still a bit 'adventurous' though...he doesn't look exactly 'in the slot' so to speak.

Cosker heralds the first spin of the game as the lights on the scoreboard start to look like floodlights and rain spits onto the pitch.  We go into 'run a ball' mode and it's 58 for 2 after 7.  Good first over from the Welshmen's slow man.  Croft starts his four from the River but the rain is getting heavier, the pitch is getting slippier and the light is getting poorer. 64 for 2 after 8.

Ian changes grip (aka 'Kevin') and tries to reverse sweep.  But when you miss it you look a bit of a prat and he is probably thinking about that as he walks back to the pavilion with 14 to his name and 'LBW Cosker' at the end of the the line. 64 for 3. Kieswetter gets an early call therefore in nasty driving rain...but it is getting lighter.  The halfway score is 76 - 150 plus?  Well with 3 wickets down and lots of bowlers to come anything more might be a tall order.

While we're thinking about that, Peter has gone to 50 off 32 balls with 7 fours.  Followed by a very impressive 6 to the scoreboard. Followed by another one to the "ice cream" stand.  Then we wait about for mnutes because they couldn't get the ball back from the crowd.  Finally it returns from its hiding place and on we go.

Peter is in really sparkling form.  The first of those sixes was just a case of foot down the track and stroke the ball to mid wicket with the minimum of effort and the maximum of timing. 

His footwork isn't as good when it comes to running however. With the first delivery of the twelfth, he hits the ball, steps as if he is running, gets Craig moving and then stops.  Kieswetter is absolutely stranded halfway down the track as Gibbs (almost standing at the wicket) flips the ball up to Croft who simply needs to remove a bail.  He misses it and our keeper sheepishly regains his ground while the spinner scrabbles for the ball.

96 at the start of the 13th and Dalrymple joins the fray, as does our first streaker for quite a while who pops on, waves things about and then escapes before our svelt-like security (including a lady) go after him!!  Meanwhile Trigger has smacked a quite magnificent six onto the indoor school roof to put his side past 100. Mr Streaker has been escorted out of the ground after the lady steward caught him by following him into the Gents!

The 50 stand comes up on 'Nelson' in a little over 5 overs and with CK contributing only 14.  It's 119 at the end of the 14th. While we wait for Trigger to change his bat, it;'s worth mentioning that the young man has just passed the best Somerset batting performance against Glamorgan in the 20/20  well played that man!  124 with 5 to go. Anyone willing to predict over 175?

Wharf is back on. Trego smacks the first one with his new bat....to the fielder at long on (Dalrymple) and he's gone for 79.  Magificent inings off 50 balls with 7 fours and 3 huge sixes.

124 for 4 and Zander is in and off the mark.

133 with 4 to go.  Craig needs to take control because the big South African seems hapy to nurdle it about and let his younger partner hit the big boys.  Halfway through the 17th he introduces Watkins to the double six move as he puts the medium pacer into the same spot twice in m consecutive balls.  The 150 arrives from his bat at the end of the 17th.

Unfortunately Craig is bowled for 42 next ball and Arul joins Zander with a job to do to get us near 200 because his partner will anchor the innings. 156 for 5 at the end of the 18th. de Bruyn cuts one to the new stand boundary but when he tries the same again he is caught by Croft and we are 161 for 6 halfway through the 19th.  Phillips is the new man and they belt 3 sets of two runs and take 11 off the over.  167 with 6 to go.

Ball 1 - single (Suppiah), Ball 2 - six to the CA (Philips), Ball 3 - 2, Ball 4 - 2, Ball 5 - single and Ball 6 - six to the CA (Suppiah)

Fighting last over 18 of the over well played Ben (17) and Arul (9) and 185 for 6.  Best batting performance so far in my humble but mostly down to the Mighty Trego.

7:00 PM. 

Croft and Hemp come out to face.  Crofty gets Charl who is around the wicket for the first and swinging wildly (wide).  The second is too full and the first four but he gets his radar sorted by ball three. But Mr Croft is a wise old one dayer and he milks Willough for 12 off the first. Turner takes the first at the River and has his captain marshalling fielders with lots of pointing and waving. Unfortunately the third ball from the quickie let's the batsman do a lot of waving...waving the ball over the boards.  It nearly happened again but Thomas and Suppiah combined well to stop a certain boundary.  20 after 2 does not bode well though.

However, you can't keep a good man down and Hemp returns to the changing room courtesy of the bowling of Charl and the hands of Alfonso Thomas before the score moves on.  But that brings Gibbs in and that can't be good for any side!  Phillips is given a one over burst at him from the River but goes for 10. Nevertheless Willoughby has the inswinging yorker going and nearly has Croft at the end of the 5th as they reach 39 for 1. Turner returns and is greeted by the Gibbs smash, twice to the CA and once to the ITB and up comes the 50 courtesy of that 12. It is followed by a fourth to the mid-on boundary.  He ends with 18 off his over.  Welcome to the big boys league Mark!

Now Willough has to retrieve the situation after only going for 2 in his last. Gibbs has ominously gone to 33 by the halfway stage of the 7th.  It's 66 by the end. Willough has gone (4 overs 28 for 1) and now we have Ian Blackwell trying to stem the tide. He does to as they move to 72 by the start of the 9th. 

Langer now turns to Arul at the OP and he does well, with the help of some very determined outfielding. The 'Welsh' have reached 91 after 10, are ahead on the rate required and looking very very comfortable. 9.6 per over is high but perfectly possible in this kind of game.  We are looking at another loss as Gibbs goes to 50 off 28 balls with a six and 9 fours. 100 at the end if the 11th and Gibbs and Croft have added 80 in 8 overs.

But it's not getting better as Craig  gives away the second four byes of the game and they move to 114 by the start of the 13th to be bowled by Alfonso.  We need something special to stay in this one as they are looking at a target of 72 off 8 which is dropping all the time. Crofty goes to 50 during the over off 36 with 5 fours and 1 six. Then he has a moment of madness and one hands a wide ball straight to Trescothick.  Joke ball and daft wicket but it is a chink that we need to open into a gaping chasm of we can!! Powell comes in and Alf finishes the over with a wicket and only 120 up. 

66 off 7 but while Gibbs is still in we are chasing this game.  They've moved Arul to the River end and a Powell single moves Gibbs onto strike.  His second ball finds Gibbs stranded and run out!!  The umpire (Jesty) gives it and then they realise that Kieswetter broke the stumps WITHOUT the ball and Herschell gets a reprieve.  Would the decision have been the same if it hadn't been for the fact that Gibbs just didn't walk?  We'll never know. It was pretty easy and he really should be watching the rest of the game from the balcony. 125 at the end of it but is that the minute that decides the game? 

Or is the next one where Thomas fields off his own bowling and destroys Powell's stumps at the non strikers end with him nowhere near his ground at 127?  Well Powell will take no more part and Dalrymple joins Gibbs.  Thomas gets another wicket and goes for three 128 for 3.  They need 58 off 5.  At the other end Arul is having a bit of a battle with Gibbs who is having a prblem getting him away.  He goes for 6and they still need 52 off 4.  Well done Arul!

The fielding goes up a level (except for probably Blackie's dive over a Dalrymple four) and the Glamorgan guys are only getting singles.  142 at the end of the 17th.  43 off 3.  Blackie delivers the 18th but the first goes for four and so does the second.  Long hop follows full toss.  The fourth goes for six.  It's 160 after it and a really poor over from the man!

It's 26 off 2 with Thomas bowling the important one.  The first is a swing and maybe a miss but Craig misses catching it so if he hit is it doesn't matter!!  Kieswetter has had a mare tonight! But Alfonso hasn't once again and bowls a wonderful over with only 5 off it!  They need 21 off one. Phillips should bowl the last but Langer has turned to Mark Turner with Dalrymple facing.

Ball 1 - dot, Ball 2 - Wicket from a real wide swipe caught Trigger 165 for 4  Ball 3 - Gibbs facing 21 needed. Excellent straight ball and a single, Ball 4 - four, Ball 5 - same wide ball, same swing and Wright goes to Trescothick.  Ball 6 - dot.  We win by 15 runs with Gibbs 76 not out and Wallace finishing on 0.

Great perfromance with the ball from Alfonso once again 21 runs and 1 wicket (plus the Powell run out).  Excellent support from Suppiah.  Peter T gets the Man of the Match but we also have to thank Glamorgan for at least 3 wide wickets and Turner in particular ought to thank the Welshmen for his last over figures.

But a win is a win is a win and the 'dream' is still alive.  Bring on the next victims!!  Nite!! 

 

Bookmark or share this story with:

Goto Thread: PreviousNext
Goto: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Goto Page: 1234567Next
Current Page: of 7
Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Grockle (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:16:38:48

It's going to be a dark one tonight people. It's just on the edge of what we would normally play in and it is certainly not going to get better

(Sm72)

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Grockle (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:17:17:32

Is no-one interested in this one? Shame you couldn't have seen the six that Trigger has just put on the indoor schol roof!!

(Sm72)

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Frome Exile (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:17:27:36

I'm here Grockle. Can't get commentary though!

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: brother of (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:17:47:37

Commentary on bbc sport

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Grockle (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:17:55:42


Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: brother of (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:18:01:37

Listening to "dizzy" gillespie on radio wales he said that pete was a lower order batsmen who after 6 overs of todays game seemed to not know how to play the spinners.
Cheers dizzy!!!!

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Bobstan (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:18:06:09

Well done to Bobo. A useful little innings from Big Ben.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Frome Exile (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:18:23:21

Thanks, Grockle. That one works, but I've lost out to The Simpsons now!

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: tufnell parka (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:19:46:18

Thanks Grockle. Excellent service. Really pleased with this win. Big game on Thursday on SKY - we might just have a sniff if we pick up a win at New Road

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Big Jim (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:19:47:02

A win,do I see that we've won?
That's great news,well done boys.
And girls,for making sure the kits were nice and clean.
Let's hope the rot has stopped.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: wurzel (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:21:10:58

One of those Trigger sixess was nearly caught by me, but I saw sense and ducked, even though the ball landed on the EBC roof! I've learn't my lesson, I can't catch under pressure!

Parts of our game were really good and thommo is a real crowd favourite. He was tremendous and I thought Arul supported him well. Blackie was in one of his, 'I want to be somewhere else' moods. His bowling was loose and he got out to an unecessary reverse sweep, when he was looking good.

Trigger was simply sublime.

I can't understand the Gibbs dismissal. We appealed, he was given out, but refused to go so the umpire changed his mind. He can only give what he sees and with no replay, he shouldn't change his mind. He got the 'bird'!

The crowd were lively, again, and how they deserved a win!

http://www.freemyspacegraphics.com/Graphics/Funny_Animations/images/32.gif

Bring back Blackie

Fine third man is in the future of blueprint of 20/20

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: doc hennessy (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:21:12:28

Anyone see the Gibbs 'stumping/ run out' incident? He started off down the wicket, only to be sent back. The throw came in to the keeper, the wicket was broken and the square leg umpire's finger went up. Gibbs stood his ground with much gesticulating, and after some discussion the decision was retracted. Apparently Keiswetter broke the wicket before he had the ball. Maybe justice was done , but I thought 'out' meant 'out'? Does this mean it's OK to dispute the umpire's decision now?

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: doc hennessy (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:21:17:05

I thought CK's keeping was extremely ordinary tonight. He made a lot of mistakes and his habit of standing up whenever possible meant that many balls went straight through for extras, including several boundaries.
Thought Pete thoroughly deserved his MOM, he looked a class act from the outset. Rather ironic that he's not allowed to bowl a few overs, as he seemed to spend the second innings saving runs by launching himself headlong around the boundary.

I hope that Arul has done enough to remind the selectors what a good all round player he is. Apart from his little cameo with the bat ( inc six off the last ball ), he bowled extremely tidily when Gibbs was looking to launch and was excellent in the field. I'm looking forward to seeing him in the longer stuff.
Alfonso Thomas? His figures (4-0-21-1) tell the story and his stock seems to rise with every game.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Mike BOS (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:21:20:04

We got the impression that the wicket keeper may not have had the ball in his hand when he demolished the stumps.

Did Langer tell the umpire that's what happened? your guess is as good as mine.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o244/mixstar_album/cricket.gif



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:06:17:21:25:04 by Mike BOS.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: fRed (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:21:23:40

I think the bails were already off, so he needed to pull a stump out.

Anyway well played Trig and Thomas (Sm13) The smile's back.

This ain't summer.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: wurzel (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:21:34:06

Quote:
Mike BOS
We got the impression that the wicket keeper may not have had the ball in his hand when he demolished the stumps.
Did Langer tell the umpire that's what happened? your guess is as good as mine.

I feel there's a need for these things to be explained to the crowd. How can new watchers be educated if such farcical situations go unexplained?

It is said that decisions even themselves out over a season. No-one can be sure what happened as everyone was watching the ball. He was given out. End of debate, or as Tractor might have said, "or was it the start"!

BTW, Mike, were you perched next to Frosty's wife?

http://www.freemyspacegraphics.com/Graphics/Funny_Animations/images/32.gif

Bring back Blackie

Fine third man is in the future of blueprint of 20/20

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Grockle (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:21:37:23

Craig didn't have the ball when he broke the stumps. Well not quite that. He broke the stumps with the hand that didn't have the ball. That was the opinion of the people in the box and the scorers box.

Gibbs was facing him trying to get back and saw it so didn't go and Jesty checked with his partner and recinded the decision. There wasn't much said by us so one assumes that was the case.

It's difficult to explain something like that to the crowd when you're an announcer with no idea what is going on yourself but I didn't see Gibbs gesticulting with anyone but the Somerset players who sort of swamped him when he didn't walk immediately.

They weren't aggressive but it all got into a bit of a discussion but the umpires walked in, talked to a couple of people and waived the decision. I think Craig must have told them what happened as well because it all settled down quickly.

Craig didn't have the greatest game with the gloves but he was useful with the bat. There was about four incidents that could have been better for us had the keeper held the ball.

(Sm72)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:06:17:21:43:26 by Grockle.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: wurzel (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:21:44:20

I believe that consulting your colleague prior to giving a decision is fine and should be encouraged, but changing your mind after an appeal by the batsman, is not.

http://www.freemyspacegraphics.com/Graphics/Funny_Animations/images/32.gif

Bring back Blackie

Fine third man is in the future of blueprint of 20/20

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Grockle (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:21:46:23

Gibbs didn't appeal Wurz. He stood his ground (which he has the right to do)and waited for the umpires to discuss it. The only person he talked to was his batting partner and a couple of Somerset players.

(Sm72)

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Mike BOS (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:21:51:19

Grockle being up in the clouds you would have a better view than most of us.smiling smiley

You must have a good view from there.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o244/mixstar_album/cricket.gif

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Loyal of Lhasa. (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:21:55:32

Thanks for the account of the match Grockle. Looks like we have a lot to thank Trego and Thomas for.

Now BJ, how many times do I have to tell you? If you're going to take your clothes off, please do it in a dull old four-day match and not in one of those Twenty20 things where we are already guaranteed wall to wall entertainment. Is it those dancing girls that get you so excited?

LoL

Sixty Seasons a Somerset Supporter

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: VictheFish (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:21:58:03

Good win. Keeps the balls in the air - speaking of which ...

Must be a careful Wurzel that pads naked down from the EBC to run on the ground showing the value of a FTM!

Sorry, cheap gag. going to bed now, no coffee and biscuits.

Well done the boys!

VtF.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Grockle (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:22:01:53

It's more to do with being in a room with a number of people who watch this stuff for a living Mike. They discuss the things to death to make sure they get the facts right before they put it in a story.

They also have the advantage of access to the scorers who check the facts with dressing rooms etc. Far too precise for me.

Trigger and Thomas did well LoL but Arul was no passenger and he and the other two were really active outfielders as well. Arul and Ben really put the icing on the batting as well with that last over.

Have to agree with you Wurz. Ian did have one of those "I hate this game" sort of days. The shot he got out to was daft as a brush (which is what he might as well have been holding)!

(Sm72)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:06:17:22:07:35 by Grockle.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Mike BOS (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:17:23:33:32

Pics from today

http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/5545/gibbswasheinoroutnotoutwq9.jpg

Gibbs was he in or was he out

http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/9807/rcroftjustkeepingthebaloa7.jpg

Willoughby nearly had Crofty with that one.


http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/9774/petertrego6runsmediumweqi6.jpg

Man of the match Trego one of his 6's

http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/6117/petertrego6runsmediumwesf6.jpg

Peter Trego shows he can do it again with another 6


If the Photo's made it look light it wasn't it was dark most of the time.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o244/mixstar_album/cricket.gif



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008:06:17:23:41:46 by Mike BOS.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: wurzel (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:04:47:24

Quote:
Grockle
Gibbs didn't appeal Wurz. He stood his ground (which he has the right to do)and waited for the umpires to discuss it. The only person he talked to was his batting partner and a couple of Somerset players.

Does he have the right to stand his ground, once given out? I don't know the rules / laws well enough to know, but Mike's pictures clearly show that we thought he was out. I'm not arguing about whether or not he was actually out, but the principle.

A NZ batsmen was given out caught behind, on Sunday, but the ball came off his thigh pad. He was clearly disappointed, but accepted the decision. Surely standing your ground is tantamount to dissent?

Mike, juding by your camera angle, I guess I was right about your 'position'!

Vic, yes I've lost some weight, but the guy showing the TM, was not considered by those around me to have a ftm.

http://www.freemyspacegraphics.com/Graphics/Funny_Animations/images/32.gif

Bring back Blackie

Fine third man is in the future of blueprint of 20/20

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Grockle (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:05:53:53

Yes the picture shows that WE thought he was out but he is looking away from the ump and by the time he'd turned around Jesty was walking in to discuss the siuation and made the signal to recind the decision.

A player can wait for a decision to be made. Personally I wouldn't take the word of the opposition that I was out. I'd wait for confirmation from the officials

(Sm72)

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: wurzel (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:06:44:32

Quote:
Grockle
Yes the picture shows that WE thought he was out but he is looking away from the ump and by the time he'd turned around Jesty was walking in to discuss the siuation and made the signal to recind the decision.
A player can wait for a decision to be made. Personally I wouldn't take the word of the opposition that I was out. I'd wait for confirmation from the officials

I believe you're missing the point. The umpire had clearly given him out, so why didn't he walk? He had no right of appeal.

http://www.freemyspacegraphics.com/Graphics/Funny_Animations/images/32.gif

Bring back Blackie

Fine third man is in the future of blueprint of 20/20

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Big Jim (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:07:26:14

I have to say that Craig is looking a bit shifty isn't he,a bit like the little boy who's been caught with his hands in the sweet draw just before dinner.
If he corrected the Umpire and informed him he broke the stumps prior to receiving the ball,which is how it seems then I think the correct decision was made.
I see what you're saying Wurzel,a decision from the main man should be final.Unless of course a mistake has obviously been made and the word of another player can overturn the decision.
It sounds like the correct thing was done here.
I await the quotes from the rule books as I'm as intrigued as the next person.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Grockle (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:08:03:16

No you're missing the point. Gibbs was on his knees facing towards the ice cream stand in a crowd of players. Jesty was over by the new stand and although you clearly saw him give the player out, there was no way Gibbs did.

By the time he was standing and facing the right way the umpire was walking in discussing it with his partner umpire in which case you wait for the decision.

He certainly didn't see the umpire raise his finger. And if an umpire can't recind that decision then why is there a sign for it to let the scorer know?

If Gibbs had seen the initial gesture then he should have been making his way back to the pavilion but he didn't so he wasn't.

It certainly seemed that he thought there was an element of doubt in the umpires mind so he simply waited for the decision - which i suppose to him was the first (to the spectators and our players it was the second). It was and he stayed.

Whether Jesty was told the real situation by the keeper (didn't look likely) or he backed down because he thought Gibbs was going to be awkward wasn't clear.

So shall we also debate the gamesmanship of Craig if he didn't come clean? What would be your stance if Gibbs had walked and was given out unfairly because another professional did not tell the truth?

Personally I think the situation was ajudged fairly and the right decision was made and certainly the one without blame is Mr H Gibbs.

(Sm72)



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2008:06:18:08:40:00 by Grockle.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Frome Exile (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:08:06:43

A stumping is kind of a "multi-part decision", wurzel.
When one plays at club level, these kind of things happen regularly, and it's pretty much an unwritten law that even after the Umpire has raised his finger to confirm that one part (in this case that Gibbs had failed to make his ground) is kosher, one can politely enquire whether the same or second Umpire is absolutely sure that all the other parts (such as gathering the ball) were ok, too.
Often a batsman will ask the S/L Umpire to confirm that a catch has carried after the standing Umpire has confirmed that it touched the bat.
A polite request for confirmation doesn't constitute dissent in my book.
I don't think matters like this are covered in the Laws, Jim: more likely in the "Spirit of Cricket" documents or codes of conduct.

Edit: and of course if Gibbs, as Grockle states, didn't see the finger then the discussion in this case is somewhat moot.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:06:18:08:10:43 by Frome Exile.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: AGod (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:08:25:57

Good to get a win, obviously.

I thought as I was watching on CEEFAX that we'd committed the stupidity of having Charl replace Alphonso when the latter did not bowl for ages. Thankfully not. And the ploy of holding Alphonso back worked a treat.

Still not totally convinced that the batting order is the right one, though.

What about this for the top six next time?

Banger
Trego
Langer
Kieswetter
Ian
Phillips

As I mentioned before, Ben played at least two significant (and violent) innings for Northants in what, I think, was his final year there. I didn't look further back to see what he did for them in previous years, but.. to judge from the scorecard, he did a good job of dispatching the Glam bowlers at the death yesterday?

I would even consider amending the above and giving Ian a well deserved rest. To judge from the scorecard, he certainly did not have his best game yestrday and could, perhaps, do with resting that knee?

If so, why not give Parsie a go?

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Grockle (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:08:36:08

Have to say that we all thought that we'd committed it again giving Mark the last over with Gibbs still in and only 21 needed.

But, with quite a bit of help from desperate Glamorgan batsmen, that came right and will have given Mr Turner loads of confidence to boot so good for that.

It really does look like Alf is getting the measure of the home pitch (at least in these short bursts) and it was very very good to see Arul doing the stuff.

I always thought we were a kolpak heavy and that Arul was the player we should be investing in. It may be that admin stuff got in the way but he has a lot to offer with a bit of ecouragement.

One thing I think we also ought to remember is that we did the job last night wthout the bowling of PT which would have figured significantly I think. So even better.

(Sm72)

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: AGod (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:08:36:39

My other question concerns Omari Banks.

I'm afraid to say that I am beginning to wonder whether (or not) we might have been taken for a ride here?

Omari delivered a brilliant performance last year for the second XI to win a contract. Since winning that contract, he appears to have barely done enough to be even considered for selection (i.e. included in first team squads). Was his performance last year an anomaly and not indicative of his true abilities? Is he carrying some kind of injury which means he cannot be effective? Is he coasting now that he's got his deal? It seems very odd to me that a sometime international cricketer who is only, I think, 25, cannot even manage to get himself into real contention for a place in our side - at least in the short stuff?

I know he played one 20:20 game - what was he like? Was he awful? I believe he's not even been picked in the squad again after his lone appearence?

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Frome Exile (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:08:40:06

And without Steff, who I think most of us expected to be a significant contributor in this format.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: AGod (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:08:44:39

I feel a bit sorry for Steff. He really did not bowl particularly badly at Beckenham, whatever the scorecard might have suggested.

He seems to have been usurped by Alphonso.

To be honest though, unless Ben is going to bat higher up the order, as I've suggested, then he's not necessarily worth his place in this format, ahead of Jonah, as far as I am concerned.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Grockle (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:08:47:44

I think we may be partly to blame in that on here AG by bigging him up.

He has a name because he has played international cricket (but for a country with a very weak line-up at the time). He was a second team player last year and he's a second team player this year.

Maybe that is what he is at the moment. He was given a contract and he isn't selling his services as a kolpak so the club being 'taken for a ride' is maybe a bit harsh. Mike Parsons didn't take us for a ride. The club assess and decides who to offer papers to. Sometimes it doesn't pan out exactly how either sidce expected it to.

Omari says he's learning all the time but maybe the curve is a bit steeper than he or the management realised.

(Sm72)

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: AGod (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:09:00:28

Yeah, but my point really was that he made some massive score for the second XI last year, in his trial game, I believe? Perhaps he just 'got lucky,' or happened to be in absolute plum form at the time of his trial?

As I recall there was debate about whether or not Omari would effectively be 'taking a place,' from Wes. It was pointed out that when they played in the same second XI side, Omari's performance was on a different planet to Wes's. I'm just wondering how that can have suddenly gone to ...

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: AGod (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:09:02:31

And speaking of Wes and threats to his place in the scheme of things, I'm really wondering whether, if the powers that be determined after the SA game that they aren't happy with James's form that we might see Pete in specialist batsmen mode as the first cab off the rank to replace James (with everyone else shuffling up one place,) and Pete playing at six?

That's assuming, of course, that Pete is still not fit to bowl. Is there any news on that front?

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: AGod (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:09:11:26

And yes, very good to see Arul doing so well.

Of course, we most of us can't understand why he wasn't in the side from the start in this competition and he's done nothing to make it any clearer!

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Grockle (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:10:18:58

It's Wes as a bowler I think that is the question. He usually contributes with the bat but if he can't conribute to the bowling it puts him down the pecking order and (in the absence of Omari) pushes Arul up it. I'd concentrate far more on Arul than Zander.

I like de Bruyn's no nonsense solid style but we don't require it if the front end fires. The problem is there is always the chance that it won't and then you have to gamble on Arul coping with the pressure.

But there are times when we don't need another medium pacer but we do need a second effective spinner to vary attack. Arul is the choice then surely. Of our "second string" bowling allrounders I personally think Suppiah is the best bet. But that doesn't seem to be Mr Langer's view - although the 20/20 may change that and that is what it is for to some extent.

(Sm72)

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: wurzel (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:11:26:40

Quote:
Grockle
No you're missing the point.

I knew I'd be wrong!

Mr Gibbs did see the decision. Don't try and tell me that a batsman in a potential run out doesn't look at the umpire!

http://www.freemyspacegraphics.com/Graphics/Funny_Animations/images/32.gif

Bring back Blackie

Fine third man is in the future of blueprint of 20/20

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: AGod (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:11:27:49

I think Arul is certainly the best bet from a bowling stand-point in all short forms of the game.

In terms of the CC, Zander's century vs Yorks will obviously ensure his place in the team. But that doesn't mean we have to bowl him.

However, I do wonder whether Charl's miraculous performance as a spin bowler at Whitgift might obviate the need for a 'second' spinner other than on obviously helpful surfaces. On those obviously helpful surfaces then, so far as I'm aware, the plan is to still to deploy Michael Munday.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: 0117 (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:12:23:09

Re the Gibbs run out - when Craig saw the umpire raise his finger he immediately said to the other umpire that he had dropped the ball and that Gibbs was not out.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: tufnell parka (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:12:25:51

we won

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Grockle (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:12:50:20

I think you need to look back at the photo - Gibbs ISNT looking at the umpire - why should he be if he saw Keiswetter break the stumps without the ball?

Anyway the assumption that a batsman looks straight at the umpire is not that common either (if you're guilty then you want to look like you have no reason to question and if you're innocent then you have no reason to think the umpire will give you out)

What I put here was the general view of the crowd I was with.

I'm not disagreeing with you about the correct action should a batsman see the decision. The problem is that not everyone necessarily agrees with your submission that Gibbs saw the decision.

Can I suggest that you don't get into an argument if you're going to take comments from an opposite position personally.

If you were in the EBC then we were closer than you were but you're entitled to your opinion. All I'm doing is telling you what I saw and saying what should have happened in that case.

If I'm mistaken then the EWCB will take action and Gibbs will be fined I suppose. Don't think I was and don't particularly care if you agree. You saw it your way I saw it mine.

If it happened your way (which of course it must have and all I'm doing is picking on you again) then Gibbs should have walked.

If there is a possible other explanation (which of course there can't be because that would make me right and that can't happen if you think something different) then Gibbs was right to wait until a decision was made and everything was done properly.

If you are right though and Gibbs had walked would you be making this fuss about Keiswetter's actions had he allowed him to?

(Sm72)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:06:18:14:27:59 by Grockle.

Re: Glam Slam?
Posted by: Frome Exile (IP Logged)
Date: 2008:06:18:12:57:18

And you have ignored my post altogether, in which I suggest that it is quite reasonable to ask whether the raised finger from square leg indicated that all factors required for a decision of "OUT" were present to the satisfaction of that Umpire alone.

I might sulk! (Sm117) winking smiley