Taking a Sabre to a Gladiator

Does anyone else agree with me that we should probably give Charl a day off. I've no idea if Caddy will be able to return anytime soon and we surely cannot afford for Charl to break down. So giving him three days of complete rest before the next CC game might appear to make a lot of sense?

As Ben Phillips seems to be JL's choice of new ball bowler, you could make the same case for him?

I guess Jonah and Alphonso Thomas would appear to be a pair of ready-made replacements?

Meantime, unless JL is going to put any faith at all in Wes's bowling, then I wonder whether we might get our first look at Omari Banks? I would have thought we might?

I don't really forsee any changes in the batting line-up, unless the captain fancies a breather after his big innings in this one?

Incidentally, is anyone thinking of going along tomorrow?

I'm still contemplating it, but undecided.

Does anyone know if we can count on proper ball-by-ball commentary on Somerset Sound, if not?

After all, they can't switch us to the Gloucester game tomorrow, but is there some wretched Bath rugby or something awful that they could switch us to? or are Bristol City playing?

Actually in the one dayers, Jonah is the new ball partner for Charl. Caddy is back in training as of tomorrow so may be an option for the next CC1 game. Turner may be in the reckoning as well given that he ahsn't bowled for a while and the seconds are raving about Alfonso after the game this week.

Options options options

---

The up to date gen on tomorrow is that we will play this CC1 side with Thomas and Jones coming in to replace Edwards and Munday

---

No, AG2, Bristol City played their first play game today and won first leg 2-1 at Crystal Palace. Bath Rugby lost 8-6 to Gloucs so will be away in the play-off first game for the winners of the Premiership (daft idea that).

So Somerset Sound have no excuses left.

Yah, Grockle, I meant that Ben seems to be JL's choice as new-ball bowler in the first-class stuff. Hence, if we were going to rest Willow (which apparently we're not) we might possibly have rested Ben as well (he was rested from the last FP Trophy game, if you recall.)

I think I shall go along tomorrow.

I particularly want to have a look at Thomas and also to see how young Mr Kieswetter is maturing.

p.s. are we any nearer to understanding that has been going on with Caddy? Did he really have three separate injuries? i.e. shoulder/back/neck or was it really one injury which didn't easily lend itself to description? The back injury was described as 'upper back,' which is of course close to the shoulder and the neck. Or has AC picked up back and then neck injuries in swift succession after the initial 'shoulder,' ailment which led to him being withdrawn from the attack at Fenner's? It's all been rather confusing. Still, if he is back in training, then that would be great news.

Phillips was rested because there were doubts about Turner for the Hampshire game (well founded it seems).

They needed him to take the new ball role that Turner was expected to take so I think Ben's position is temporary once Cadd and MT are fit.

The news is that Caddick will only come back when he is fully ready to work for the whole season. There is also a lot more faith in the ability of Turner than I imagined and he is expected to take a much bigger part in the county's year than expected

All interesting stuff

---

But they're surely not going to just leave Caddy 'training,' ad infinitum? Surely they'll only know whether he's strong enough to come back for a sustained run by testing him in an actual game - even if it's a second XI game, to start with?

Do the powers-that-be believe Mark Turner may be healthy for the next CC game, then?

I must say this compeition for places in the seam bowling slot is novel and really rather exciting!

Turner could be pivotal to our season given Phillips and Trego are primarily containers (not a criticism) and Caddick's lack of fitness.

It's clear either Caddick or Turner must be involved for our attack to have "edge". The you have a choice between Munday and another seamer, probably Phillips. I would not play Thomas since I really couldn't face a double Kolpak opening pair and I'm not sure many in the club can either.

That of course assumes you play 5 bowlers including Trego and Blackwell as we did against Hants.

I'm not in favour of De Bruyn although he does give us another seam option.

Thomas isn't an opener and they are looking for 'shock and awe' from Mark. There is another aspect though.

Steff Jones is presently doing more than making up numbers and as a level of aggression this year that I remember from his first spell here. He certainly isn't just going to lie down and accept a one day fate.

---

"Wretched Bath rugby", AGod2, there is no such thing!

According to my newspaper today, Mark Turner hopes to begin bowling again tomorrow after his "abdominal strain" injury. He is quoted as saying:- "The Championship game with Sussex at Taunton on Wednesday may come a bit soon for me, but I'll be doing my best to be fit."

Also in my paper were the headlines - "Somerset gain surprise win against rivals Gloucestershire."

Gloucestershire 23 pts. v. Somerset 29pts.

Let us hope that our cricket side can achieve the win that their magnificent rugby counterparts did!

Sumorsaete Ealle.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:11:11:00:26 by Palairet.

If anyone is trfying to find radio coverage. Somerset Sound are there from 2:00 but according to BBC Sport there is live coverage on Radio Gloucestershire from 12:00.

Damned if I can get it! The link is there but there is also a great deal of silence or some wonderful Realplayer error message.

Why do the BBC insist on putting things on Realplayer only?

---

If you think thats amusing check out the entirely fictitious worcestershire scorecard on the bbc website! Hampshire are batting in the real world as evidenced by radio commentary.

Radio Gloucestershire coverage seems to have disappeared now entirely from the BBC Sport info box so it looks like 2:00 before we hear anything.

The official line yesterday was slightly wrong because they also seem to have rested Phillips as Wes Durston is on the Cricinfo teamsheet.

Now will we see him bowl today? It's maybe because they look at Sussex and also that it may be a game too near for Turner (by his own admission) and Andy C has only started training this weekend so will probably miss it as well. Then again, as AG said on one thread - resting Willoughby might have been considered (especially as he bowled more yesterday) but he's bowling so well it's doubtful you'd leave him out.

---

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:11:12:12:42 by Grockle.

Radio Bristol said earlier that coverage wouldstart at 3.

It's on now.

Link:- [www.bbc.co.uk]

---

Nope. It's on now. The link is straight to the coverage from the frontpage story at the top of this thread.

134 for 4 with Langer and de Bruyn in after short performances from Trescothick, Blackwell, Hildreth and a 30 from Kieswetter.

They've used 6 bowlers in 30 overs but we're only looking at the mid 200's and not a lot to accelerate with so it's going to be a long hard slog and a good bowling performance please.

---

Gloucester are helping us with 17 wides.

Lets hope Langer and Trego stay together.

---

Great recovery work lads.
What do we all think we can defend at this place?

70 off 36 balls and the Somerset 250 up with the skipper 2 from another ton. Slow bowlers seem to be having the best time. Free hit for Cap'n Langer but he only gets a single - yay 103 super stuff!!

---

Commentary on Radio Bristol now

The Skipper has hit form,great news.
Hats off to Trigger too.
Just how much does this lad have to do to prove he's the business?

270 would be nice.

Been there for the past hour Rob - well at least on the internet

---

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:11:14:12:11 by Grockle.

Trego is becoming Mr Reliable - another half century this afternoon. I wonder if we can persuade BJ that he's any good.

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

I would love to see Kirby's face at the moment

---

290 would be even nicer.

No Kabeer Ali. Marshall and Gidman to open Spearman and North to follow it seems.

Tight and hard to score off is what we want from the off. Big score but a placid pitch - great support from Trego - as the commentators have just said. "If only he could do that week in week out". Let's hope he is going to become "Mr Reliable" in the next month and a half.

Somerset took 111 off the last 10. They reckon it's 50 over what they should have got.

---

I did say a week ago that winning the Gloucester match will do us a lot of good in the table, and it still does.

Table:- [www.ecb.co.uk]

---

Wouldn't it be nice, Mike, if we could just edit the tables as we see fit before the matches take place. We all know what the table ought to look like at the end of today, so why do we have to wait till the end?

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

Quote:

Grockle
"If only he could do that week in week out".

Typically crass comment from commentators. If he could "guarantee" fifty at a 150 strike rate every week, he wouldn't be batting at 8, would he. The very nature of the all-rounder's role is that you kind of accept that they'll be unlikely to have an "every week" success rate in both disciplines. Show me any all-rounder, Botham included, who wouldn't have been happy to influence every game with one or other of bat or ball.

I didn't hear much of the commentary but I got the impression that Trego has only just come back to SCCC and needs to prove himself; no mention was made of his first class batting average of 52 in 2007.

I think we'll have to send BJ round with the dogs.

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

I'm on my way LoL.
What is it with the majority of the media?
Is it a prerequisite for that trade to have your brain removed?
Why let the facts get in the way of a good story?
How true.

I can never object to bias towards your own county, for we're all guilty of that here. What I find so unprofessional is the failure to do some homework on the opposition players.

But I suppose it's hard in the case of SCCC, consisting as we do entirely of Kolpak players imported from South Africa the day before yesterday.

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

How is your illness Jim (was it a virus?).

You will be able to safely come to Taunton from this week; they are going to start on the church yard from tomorrow. (Only joking)

I am looking forward to seeing your photo’s on here.

---

The emotive issue of home-bred and journeymen cricketers has been raised by the commentators. Of course Gloucestershire are perfect in every way, but I don't think the SCCC situation is so very bad. Of the England-qualified players in this side we have four who have not played for any other county (Trescothick, Hildreth, Durston and Kieswetter - I include him, as he has clearly indicated his intention to qualify). Then there are two who started their careers with Somerset and have returned to the county after dalliance elsewhere (Trego and Jones). Finally there is Blackwell, who came to Somerset very early in his career (rather like Adshead of Gloucestershire).

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

Played the ex Middlesex boys , JL ton and Trigger 50 .

See the wickets tumble now, Trego is coming on to bowl.

---

Gloucester who?

You trained them well TDro.

---

Not much training with Trigger , he just needed a bit of directional adjustment and a few games to realise home is where the heart is . As for JL ,the guy is just a "run monster".

The run rate was creeping up to just over 6 an over and now Willoughby has taken a wicket.

---

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:11:16:17:29 by Mike BOS.

Mike,my pictures are a little bit like the one Grockle did with the vast expanse of green.
Infact Grockles was quite Kevin Carteresque compared to my efforts.
Trigger was simply using the other Counties he visited briefly to get used to as many different wickets and training facilities as possible.
He's as Somerset as the Quantocks and was always going to come home.
He did all his learning here.
He just practiced there.

Good point Jim.

We had management at the time who couldn’t deal with somebody with a bit of temperament.

---

Foot on neck time.

Grizzzly

Just tuned in via the real player , anyone else suffering really quiet audio or is it just the signal won't reach London at full strength ?

How did you know what I'm up to at home Grizzz?
No problems with real player for me.

Hampshire’s run rate is going to suffer today, Worcester are 191 off 24 overs for 1 chasing only 210 to win.

---

Just me then Jim , suffered the same from Sussex the other day. That Worcs result(probable) will do you guys some good , not Hamps though .

Stefan ,the buisness !

4 down, lets go and finish them off now!

I found the BBC Somerset link quieter that BBC Bristol.

This is the link to all of the local stations. [www.bbc.co.uk]

---

The one at the top of the page has worked perfectly well for me all day.
Most enjoyable too,though I haven't heard Tractor yet.

What do you expect from Grockle, he's simply the best.

---

Banger has a achilles tendon injury so he isn't on the field!

With the present position, the 30 over target would be aiming for is 145 in the hope you hit double in the last 20 overs but it's down a lot to Spearman and we need him gone.

They are there or there abouts at the moment. According to Hurry we were looking for 260 and so we were also above the expected run rate.

The wicket seems to be losing pace so Blackie's 10 will be important

---

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:11:16:56:14 by Grockle.

Who is this commentator?
Blackwell needs to lose 2 stone apparently if he is to achieve his full potential.
According to this font of knowledge anyway.
Trescothick injured,don't like the sound of that.

Let's hope it's just bruising,he has the foot in an ice bucket so that may be a sign that that is the problem.
Fingers crossed.

Sorted , I player radio rather than real player. Anyone would thing the Beeb had some sort of self intrest in downing the real player audio volumne.

Should have gone with the Grockmiester link rather than anything from Aunty .

Cheers Big Jim.

That Inzamam, that Milburn... they weren't much good, were they?

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

Come on Steff hat-trick ball

---

Evening all.
Good stuff this.
Cmon Steff, Hat Trick Time

Two in two for Steffan! Excellent one-day bowler!

Hat trick averted tho'

Spearman the only danger??

I go for a wee and Stef takes two in two !!

Should I need to visit the room upstairs again I will let you lads know.

Well done Steffan,superb stuff.
He's doing well so far this year.
Is he just a one day player?

Give em a wave trigger

I am getting nervous.

---

So am I !

Grizzzly

There is no longer any tension, alas, and so no cause for nervousness.

Roll on the next match

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

They think it's all over, and it just about is now.

I hate to say it, but Spearman is a true gladiator!

Well we threw that away!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:11:18:28:11 by Westcountry Wolf.

Oh dear.

Well batted Gloucs I guess, although questions will be asked.

Grizzzly

Alas, although we have done much recruitment, we don't seem to have a very tight bowling attack, but at least we're scoring some runs.

A very exciting game though.

Yep We got speared!! Well played to Adshead as well - not a lot after him so he had to stay.

Little confused about the maintenance of faith in Zander when he's getting belted and you have used Alfonso not a lot - I know he went but you do the Smiffy thing and alternate and move 'em about, keep 'em on their toes.

Although not sure it would have done that much.

---

Hey ho!
Back to the real stuff on Wednesday.

Fair play to them,great batting.
We should have won this with that score.
Any news on Banger?

290 and lost. Im afraid we were not up to it

I've got an idea that changing the ball after 34 overs is helping score quicker run towards the end. (for both teams)

---

Maybe you're right Mike.
We were just blown away by Spearman,new ball or not.
We need to get over this quickly and get a championship win on the board.
Any news on Banger?

If you visit the Somerset CCC cricket website on this network you can't fail to be impressed at the sheer virtuousity of the commentators and they are quite rightly very proud of their team, and point out how superior their team is compared to crummy little Gloucestershire CCC.

Considering their extensive knowledge of the game I would appreciate their explaining to me how they managed to lose today at Bristol. The sunshine was warm and bright, the grass glowed emerald green and Craig Spearman treated us all to a masterclass in batting as Glos once more proceed towards yet another cup. Extraordinary!

It is a truth universally acknowledged, averageside, that a good number of one-day matches are won by a single outstanding performance.

It wasn`t that Somerset were not up it, as you eloquently put it, but that they came across a player in Craig Spearman giving that outstanding performance.

A trifle early in the season for such a disproportionate display of self indulgence.

Ah well, whatever floats your boat.

Grizzzly

Don't see anyone calling Glos "crummy" William and I think we've been quite eloquent about how Craig beat us today but as most of the ones talking here weren't there I doubt any of us got the sheer beauty of Spearman from the Glos commentators who were almost as biased as we are..

But there you go - sorry it's such a surprise that we look for the best for our team...have you noticed the word "Somerset" in the title of the site?

---

The other web site said something about a fitness test before the Sussex game.

Marcus told the web site that he don’t think it is serious.

Mind you they also said today’s game was played at Taunton (nobody told me)

---

Just got back from Bristol. Harrumph!

One thing to clear up before I make many comments;

I'm fairly sure that Alfonso Thomas went off injured and that's why he did not bowl anymore after his opening five overs.

I was sat right by the sightscreen at the opposite end from the main Pavillion.

Towards the end, there was a man wearing a shirt saying "Thomas," fielding at long-on near me. However, I'm pretty certain that it wasn't Thomas. I thought it might have been Mark Turner, but then if he's not back in training until tomorrow, obviously not!

However, the man that was identified by the PA as Thomas at the start of the SCCC innings, opened up from the Pavillion End and it looked to me that this man had a very short, cropped hair style.

The guy wearing the Thomas shirt later on had a thick, buyoant mane of hair on his head.

I read hear that Banger also went off but the announcers at the ground announced that SCCC had two "twelth," men (sic) on the field at one point...... Certainly, if Thomas was still on the field, I can't see why we'd have bowled Zander and Wes????

The commentators said at one point that Francis was on for somebody but couldn’t work out who for.

---

Right.. fuller thoughts on the game.

1) Mr Hurry may have said that we were aiming for 260 but I think the wicket was rather flatter and better for batting on than that. Until the final few overs it appeared that we would, indeed, score 260 and I did not think that that was likely to be enough.

2) Whilst everyone is talking about Spearman, a huge factor in the win for the enemy was Marcus North's bowling. He completely becalmed the middle overs of our innings. Without North's bowling, we would probably have ended up with 320 and would probably have won, Spearman or no.

3) I'm afraid the continuing experiment with Craig Kieswetter as an opener is looking a little odd. It is abundantly clear that Craig has not been given any instruction to pinch-hit. Rather, it seems that he is being asked to simply bat as a conventional opener. I say this based on the commentaries from the previous games, coupled with seeing this one. Craig just batted in standard opener mode. Isn’t this somewhat illogical? Isn’t Justin Langer a conventional opener? Craig has succeeded in being solid and getting a start but he has not succeeded in going on in any of the three games where he’s got the start. Since he’s a young man and not an opener by trade then I’d suggest that he’s probably not used to batting for an extended period of time. If we want to bat a conventional opener, then I would submit that we need to use JL or, failing that, JF or NE in that role.

4) Wes’s role is a little odd too. He seems to be down at seven as some form of insurance in case the batting fails. And he seems to be in the team as some kind of fall-back option in case the bowling fails. I find this a little odd. I’m afraid it did not really happen for Wes today, so I’d assume that we might finally get to see Omari next time out – or maybe even Arul who could even open up?

5) Today’s batting effort was rather uneven. Sensible stuff from JL. Sensible, up to a point from Craig and Zander. However, they both squandered their starts by trying to hit over the top at a time – in each case – where there was no apparent or obvious need so to do. Peter Trego was absolutely sublime. He was the only player who approached the ease with which Spearman played. Indeed, Pete played exactly like he did the last time I saw him live – in the FP game with Middx, at Lord’s last season. Ian played an uncharacteristically tentative shot and was brilliantly caught by Taylor. Hildreth played a rather poor shot.

6) The bowling was okay. But no much better than that. Jonah bowled with fire and was the pick of the attack. Neither Charl nor Ian bowled as well as they are wont to do. Fielding, I’m afraid, was lack-lustre and at least one full notch below that of the Gloucesters. We gave away one overthrow on, I think, four separate occasions. Apart from that, we just did not really look alert, sharp and ‘on it,’ in the field, which was disappointing to see.

7) Again, to everyone who’s saying that we blew this with the ball, I’d point out that if it wasn’t for a total melt-down by the Gloucs attack in the final 6 overs, then we’d have got nowhere near 290. The melt-down included Ireland being ordered out of the attack for a 2nd beamer and a guy making his debut having to bowl the rest of Ireland’s over. Incidentally, I was surprised that we did not attack the guy – Stayt – who was making his debut from the beginning. On a flat-track, I would have thought it would have behooved us to have done so? Unsurprisingly, when we did attack him later in the piece, he did wilt under the pressure.

8) I agree with Grockle about JL's captaincy in the field. It was rather formulaic. For instance, why did we bowl Charl all the way through? This made a ton of sense in the earlier games where he bowled excellently. But he was not bowling so brilliantly today.

One final comment.

I was "reprimanded," by an extremely intemperate old Gloucs woman who was sat in front of me.

In the wake of the Gloucs bowling melt-down (in which we must have added about 70 odd in the final six overs) she decided to inform me that;

"I've been watching cricket for more years than you've been alive. I do not care to hear your thoughts on what constitues a good shot, or what should be called a wide, or where a batsman might look to hit the next ball. In the 2nd half, you would do well to keep quiet"

Of course, nothing I said was in conversation with her anyway.

I replied;

"Why on earth would I take orders from you. This is a free country and people can say whatever they please."

She replied;

"Well, they shouldn't be able to," came the reply.

"If you don't like it, move to China," I said.

She then stalked off for her lunch and the Gloucs supporter who was next to me opined that she should 'go back to the football, if that's her attitude."

Later, I took immense pleasure when one of the subs ran down to field near us to hear her to turn to her son and say;

"Is he allowed to bowl, the sub."

I did think of leaning over and saying that whilst she might have been watching for a good deal longer than me, she'd obviously not been taking much of it in, but thought better of it.

At the end - after her side had won, she mustered an apology of sorts telling me that;

"You weren't the first and won't be the last that I've had words with. I was brought up to believe that cricket should be watched in silence."

"I replied, you were probably annoyed that your lot fell apart in the final six overs."

This was meant to invite an actual apology for her intemperance.

But, instead she simply said;

"Well, it was a good game, so all's well that ends well."

Great report AG,the radio reporting was a bit shabby making it difficult to get a clear picture of what was going on.
I think William's post was an attempt at gloating.
I think he must have missed everyone saying well done to his side,it was probably done in a moment of shock at the victory.
I'm sure we all offer Gloucestershire the very best for the season and hope they can make some progress up the second division table this year.It's hard being bottom of the table as I'm sure some of us remember.
Their fall from grace in recent years has been painful to watch.Poor old WG must be turning in his grave.
Perhaps this solitary success against us will offer a little hope,a small ray of light.
Let's not begrudge them their moment of glory.
It's tough at the top.
It's a darn sight tougher at the bottom.

hee hee, Jim...

p.s. having look at all of our pictures in Who's Who I have concluded that the guy wearing the "Thomas," shirt might very well have been something to with our opponents i.e. we may have borrowed one of theirs.

Could somebody that has seen Thomas - e.g Grockle who saw him last week confirm that he does, indeed, have close-cropped short hair?

Could somebody else confirm whether there is some kind of rule which says that you can't have two people wearing two shirts each of which bear the same player name? I assume that this is the case and since Thomas did not seem to be the man wearing the "Thomas," shirt later in the piece, that would seem to confirm that he was hors de combat.

Having said that, I did not see any obvious injury or anything occur. Therefore, it may be a minor niggle or perhaps he felt ill like JL did the other week.

As for Banger, I distinctly recall last year that Banger had some kind of achilles issue then as well. I think it was mentioned that he gets intermittent tendonitis in that area. As I recall, he missed one CC game, which was probably at about this time last year. Let's hope that the situation this time is no worse than it was last time.

If he does miss a game, perhaps that might give either John Francis or Arul Suppiah a chance to do something?

I'd like to see Arul given some kind of chance in either the CC or FP Trophy teams.

Quote:

AGod
I can't see why we'd have bowled Zander and Wes????

You've been screaming for him to bowl for weeks!

Quote:

Re: Seconds at Riverside new
Posted by: AGod (IP Logged)
Date: 09 May, 2008 09:40


Good to hear that Omari has found the middle of the bat, at last. Perhaps he will now be in genuine first-team contention?

And if Wes plays at Nevill Road, perhaps Mr Langer might care to throw him the ball?

This is THOMAS,who I believe is the player on the leader story.
Nice haircut,I like it.

Quote:

Re: Heavy Cloud and the Welsh
Posted by: AGod (IP Logged)
Date: 10 April, 2008 16:15


I do rather wish we could have found more credible opposition than Gloucs and Glam.

A warm-up versus a first division county, i.e. the calibre of opponent that we will be facing this season would surely be a better yardstick?

Perhaps this (and several less charitable remarks not only from AG) might have something to do with why Mr. Blessing feels the need to come here and gloat.
I for one, Grockle, am always very uncomfortable when words like "hapless" and "abject" are used, as they have been a lot lately, to describe opponents, all of whom should be respected. We shouldn't denigrate others for their "football-like" mentality, and then behave in the same way ourselves.

AGod,

In the four matches in which Somerset have batted in the Friends Provident this season Craig Kieswetter has lost his opening partner in approxiametely the first, second, third and fourth overs. In two of the matches the next two partners have gone for less than 10. If you were the captain you may also give the " instruction" to Craig in these 4 matches to stay there and try to steady things instead of being a " pinch hitter "

Your point 3) suggests it is odd Craig is playing as a conventional opener and he should be " pinch hitting sooner " but your point 5) suggests he was trying to do this too soon even although he had "been solid" after facing 50 balls. This is an example of whatever he does is wrong.

Until yesterday's match the conventional opener " Justin Langer " had scored precisely 9 runs in the two innings he had batted in.

Obviously there is no comparision between the talents of Justin and Marcus compared to Craig but to be fair, on current form it is the " other " opener who seems to be having a few problems.

You seem very keen that the club makes selections based on form and not on reputation I would suggest that as an opener you probably want a fairly consistant performance which Craig has had. I am sure in the other matches had he not lost partners so quickly he would have become more explosive.( experience will teach him what to do when he looses partners quickly.) It is the middle nos which have been hero or zero in the last 4 games.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well put 0117.
He's averaged almost 36 at a strike rate of almost 62, so it's hardly been either ineffective or pedestrian.
And a couple of weeks ago, AG was saying we didn't need a pinch-hitter as such, because Banger always scores at a healthy rate.
Consistency, it seems, is in short supply; as much amongst posters as players.

We still love you (him) 0117!

I think we should use a pinch hitter and take advantage of the fielding restrictions. If we lose an wicket, then revert to an anchor batsman.

Did anyone notice that Hants used a fine third man, at Taunton, for the FP match? He saved several boundaries.

What a good idea. I just wonder why you hadn't thought of it before, Wurzel!

Re fine third man and saving many boundaries...is this because Hants bowling attack is ordinary and there were a lot of boundaries to be saved? Also, how many boundaries were scored in more conventional areas where that fielder might otherwise have been?

I know others on here ridicule you, wurz, about the F3M thing, but I think you have a point...I'm just not sure whether it shouldn't be a deep cover point rather than a conventional point!

Quote:

wurzel
Did anyone notice that Hants used a fine third man, at Taunton, for the FP match? He saved several boundaries.

He didn't save them the game though, eh, wurzel?
Where was the fielder taken from and was it a "net-sum-gain"?



Edit: and, just to be clear, I'm teasing, not ridiculing.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:12:10:37:17 by Frome Exile.

Nope, 0117, you're putting words in my mouth. I didn't say in point 3 that it was illogical that Craig was not pinch-hiting. I said I thought it seemed illogical that he is being asked to do the job of a conventional opener.

I never said that he should be aiming to pinch-hit, nor that we should necessarily be aiming to play a pinch-hitter in that role.

What I said is that he appears to have sent out with instructions to bat as a conventional opener. And that is what he has been doing. It seems odd to me that we're trying to make our wicket-keeper bat as a conventional opener when we have other conventional openers on our books, not to mention Mr Langer!

My comment about him hitting over the top when he didn't really need to at that stage was in the context that he's had several starts as an opener and not been able to go on. I don't really think this is his fault. I think it's more that he's being asked to fill an unfamiliar role.

"I am sure in the other matches had he not lost partners so quickly he would have become more explosive."

Yes, but I wasn't saying that he 'should have been more explosive.'

And, yes, perhaps he might have tried to pinch-hit if Banger hadn't fallen early but I don't think that most teams that play a pinch-hitter turn around and call the whole thing off because someeone is out early on.

At Lord's last year, Banger was out first ball, but Peter Trego took no obvious notice and continued with the team plan.

I'm not criticising Craig, I was criticising the logic of the apparent plan.

And of course, 0117, you are right that JL failed in his two previous FP Trophy games. Again, my point really is that JL is used to playing lengthy innings. Therefore, when he gets in, one expects him to go on with things.

"And a couple of weeks ago, AG was saying we didn't need a pinch-hitter as such, because Banger always scores at a healthy rate.
Consistency, it seems, is in short supply; as much amongst posters as players."

Sorry, FE, you will have to actually read what I wrote and tell me where I said (as opposed to you inferring that i was saying) that what Craig SHOULD be doing was pinch-hitting. My comments in reference to Craig vis-a-vis not playing a pinch-hitting role are in relation to the fact that that's usually why a team steps someone like their keeper up the order e.g. McCullum.

And yes, you're right, I don't think we need a pinch-hitter with Marcus.

"I can't see why we'd have bowled Zander and Wes????"

I didn't say in preference to Thomas, FE. And, furthermore, I was talking about how spinners seemed to have been productive on both sides, when I was suggesting that Wes might have been turned to.

On this occasion, Ian had already bowled and not been particularly effective, by the time that Wes was introduced.

Quite apart from all that, when I say that I don't see why "we," would have bowled Wes if not for Thomas being indisposed ( as I think he was) I meant why JL would suddenly do so, having not previously bowled him.

Perhaps you'd care to think some of this through before attempting to pick holes in what others have written?

Failing that, perhaps you'd care to post your own observations from your impending trip to the Yorks game (I believe it is?) And perhaps you'll take everything you've ever previously said or written with you, to make sure that nobody else can suggest that you haven't been 100% 'consistent.'



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:12:10:54:12 by AGod.

Quote:

Frome Exile

Quote:

wurzel
Did anyone notice that Hants used a fine third man, at Taunton, for the FP match? He saved several boundaries.

He didn't save them the game though, eh, wurzel?
Where was the fielder taken from and was it a "net-sum-gain"?



Edit: and, just to be clear, I'm teasing, not ridiculing.

Most teams use the third man quite wide, but Hants used him much finer. The square boundaries are quite wide, at Taunton, allowing the finer fielder to cut off many thick edges and conventional shots, but fine nicks usually escape, unless the fielder is fine, or in other words a ;fine fielder'!

Quote:

AGod
I was criticising the logic of the apparent plan

On the basis of nothing other than your own perceptions. You have no way of knowing what instructions Craig, or any other player, has been given, but you still create wild conjectures about all sorts of things including pitch preparation, tosses and Rose pulling Langer's strings in some Machiavellian fashion.
Why don't you just watch what happens and take it as read that the players and Captain are playing their own game to the best of their ability, in response to the circumstances and conditions which prevail at the time?
Sometimes they'll succeed, sometimes they won't. But once an individual, professional player crosses the rope that generally has got pretty much the square root of naff all to do with instructions or plans.

Why don't you take it as read that this is a message board and that it is here for the purposes of debate? If we all just said 'everyone's doing their best, everything seems logical and well thought out and why don't we just leave it at that,' then there would be no meaningful debate, FE, and we might as well all go home, quite frankly.

Silly me; you're right again old boy. As always!
How could anyone have the temerity to contradict you.
After all, you're the only person here (loverboy included) who has never conceeded a single point of argument.
AGod truly is omniscient!

Quote:

AGod
Why don't you take it as read that this is a message board and that it is here for the purposes of debate? If we all just said 'everyone's doing their best, everything seems logical and well thought out and why don't we just leave it at that,' then there would be no meaningful debate, FE, and we might as well all go home, quite frankly.

Debate is fine; but it does not have to be mean-spirited, and its main purpose should not be to prove how clever the debater is.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:12:10:59:57 by Frome Exile.

Wurzel.
Fine third man is a position that has been used by cricket captains since time began.
It is a valid position and of course there is a place for it in the modern game.
As has been said before though,on a number of occasions,where do you take the fielder from to field in that position?
Cricket,like most things evolves.
The position has become redundant because batsmen have manufactured shots which require the fielding skipper to use "less-orthodox"positions than would otherwise seem normal.
I think we all recognise that there is sometimes a need for a fielder down there,nobody is saying you are wrong.
You put somebody down there all the time though and you'd soon see shots getting put through the gap from where he came from.
It's just the way it is and skippers will sometimes be prepared to shed 30 runs through that area if it means saving 50 elsewhere.

As usual, FE, you are using completely selective memory to suit yourself.

I have admitted several wrong estimations and judgements on my part. For instance, I remember your staunch defence of the signing of Charl.

I wasn't impressed, based on his record for Leics (just as you weren't impressed with Zanders based, partly, I assume, on his record for Worcs).

I have admitted that I was totally wide of the mark with that estimation. And on several occasions.

I suspect that you might be about to issue forth with some kind of 'you shouldn't make assumptions about someone based on their one season with another county,' type of statement. And that I should have looked at Charl's wider first-class career.

If so, you're probably right. However, I believe that it was also you that has said, fairly recently, that you don't entirely trust the figures of players from SA in the light of the James Bryant debacle etc (debacle being my choice of word, not yours.)

I apologise. Never was clearly too strong a word.

"its main purpose should not be to prove how clever the debater is."

I was offering an opinion on what I think the apparent strategy at the top of the order appears to be. I don't understand this apparent strategy. In what way was this trying to 'appear clever'??

As for 'mean-spirited'???

To whom am I being mean-spirited? You?

Craig Kieswetter?

If you thought I was being critical of Craig (or saying that I thought he should have been pinch-hitting, based on what I wrote - which was written late at night after a long day in the sun - perhaps you should have sought clarficiation, FE, rather than just diving in to criticise.

Thank you, FE.

Peter Trego and the wisdom of bringing him back is another occasion. Again, I seem to recall you were supportive of this move, at the time.

My feelings on Zander de Bruyn's signing have nothing to do with him or his record. They are the same as my feelings on our signing of Neil McKenzie last year, which was equally nothing to do with him or his record.
I don't feel either brings much more to the squad in the short term than Wes, Arul, and Wood could (or could have), and that in the long term we will be more in need of such signings if those players and others lose opportunities to gain first team experience. I believe the policy is self-sustaining and self defeating.

To be fair to Wurzel, Jim, there weren't a huge amount of unorthodox or manufactured shots about in yesterday's game. I suspect they, perhaps, tend to come mainly in the 20:20?

We saw one "20:20," shot, yesterday, superbly executed by Pete, when he scooped the ball over the keeper's head. I'm not at all sure that a fine third man would have saved it, however.

Mean-spirited in the sense that whenever people fail, you regard them as "hapless" or lacking "gumption" or application, or having been given duff instructions. And very often you speculate about hidden agendas.
Your glass is always half-empty in your appraisal of others and their efforts and I find that mean-spirited.
Just a style issue I suppose; and I'm probably just a Grumpy Old Man today.

Forgive me if i'm wrong, FE, but I think that part of the debate - certainly as it related to McKenzie, last year, did centre on the notion that if you are going to bring in players from without, they should be out of the top drawer. As I recall it, you and I debated this point and were actually in agreement on it, in the case of McKenzie at the time! Logically, that means we had formed an opinion of McKenzie's merits as a player and I'm sure his record must have been a part of that - perhaps more so his test record?

Guess what? we were both wrong! (at least in terms of that part of the argument about whether McKenzie would be a big help in the short-term.)

Quote:

Big Jim
Wurzel.
Fine third man is a position that has been used by cricket captains since time began.
It is a valid position and of course there is a place for it in the modern game.
As has been said before though,on a number of occasions,where do you take the fielder from to field in that position?

You don't take him from anywhere, you just move third man to a very fine postion, possibly having a deep, backward cover point.

That's true enough.
If I can wriggle a little and defend myself, it was almost a two-layered thing.
He came as cover for Cam, an overseas player, and for that I felt he should be out of the top drawer and possibly wasn't, given that I now somewhat mistrust South African first class stats. I was wrong about that.
My feeling about his retention as a Kolpak however, and Zander's recruitment as such, were and are pretty much unrelated to ability.

Quote:

AGod
To be fair to Wurzel.

How kind!

I feel this ftm position is similar to the TFL, one gets a better understanding as time progresses. I started with several players in the IPL, but now I'm running at quite a pace, with my journeymen.

Sooner or later all Grockles will appreciate my captaincy skills. As sure as Blackacre farm eggs are eggs!

As to your wider point, FE, about self-sustaining and self-defeating policies of recruiting extra players such as Zander;

A case could certainly have been made that we should have gone with JL and our hold-over cast of young players and seen whether JL could inspire them to new heights.

However, from the point of view of someone like Mr Rose, I would imagine that he would be thinking to himself that certain of our younger players were lifted by Smith and Ponting but that their subsequent performances post-those guys did not maintain their 'new,' standard of performance.

In this light, I recall that John Francis did really well when Punter was here.

When Smith was here, Matt Wood did really well.

Of course, theose were shorter term assignments. Perhaps, given that Langer is here for longer, this issue may not have re-occurred had we gone with Langer and our own players?

Perhaps we should have given that approach a chance?

Another point concerns Mr Hurry. Mr Langer may be off after this season. Mr Hurry, presumably, will not be. We have improved greatly since Mr Langer joined the club. We have improved greatly since Mr Hurry joined the club. Which has been more significant? Does one need the other to succeed?

The above are pertinent questions in terms of 'whither SCCC post Langer.'

In the meantime, I would submit that Zander is looking quite a useful 'short-term,' signing, so far.

All good points, AG; but hopefully moot!
We'll win the thing and JL will be irresistably drawn back to defend it!
SISUO demands it!

I'm not saying you're wrong Wurzel.
I just think that if you put somebody in that position the ball will stop going there and will go elsewhere.
As Skipper what do you do then?
You have to take a fielder from somewhere.
It's a position that I've used when being in charge and don't have a problem with it.
I simply don't think it should be heralded as an innovation as it's as old as them there hills.
Managing players on a field is a difficult business and captains have to be quick thinking and also flexible with ideas.
I'm sure we'll see one of our boys in that position at some stage this season.
Just don't expect to see him there for too long.

If all our players were truly greenhorns, I would have no issue with Zander's signing as it would serve in the short term in the first team and in the medium term by giving 20-23 year old players (let's say) time to develop in the seconds.
I just don't see that players like Wes and even Omari, at 27 and near 26, with 30 and 60 first class matches each in 6 to 7 year careers, are going to gain anything from Second XI cricket. If anything, they're likely to go backwards.

In terms of fielding, Jim, as a general point, I do tend to think that captains should be less eager to scatter men to the boundaries in one-day cricket. We all know how much psychological pressure can be exerted in one-day cricket if the scoreboard is not ticking over. As a general rule, I would prefer to keep a tight circle of fielders to prevent singles and challenge the opposing batsmen to hit over the top in order to get boundaries.

Obviously, there are different conditions and cirumstances as the game wears along. Flat pitches and/or world-class and/or well-set batsman are different kettles of fish. As are people that are bowling badly. But, even when conditions are tough for run-scoring, I think captains tend to start putting people out on the boundaries almost as a reflex action (once the restrictions are lifted.)

Yes, FE, they might go backwards playing second XI.

On the other hand, I do think that the standards in division one are quite high at the moment and that the Kolpak 'invasion,' as helped with standards. Logically, if the standard of first XI cricket rises, then I think second XI cricket should do, too.

There's also the element that many of us have discussed previously of the motivational aspects of major-league competition for places.

Incidentally, having looked at a picture of Alphonso, I can confirm that the guy wearing the "Thomas," shirt for the final 10-12 overs or so of our innings was definitely not Alfonso.

Doubting Thomas?

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

Breaking news:

Membership applications have just been issued for the newly formed AG/FE mutual appreciation society.

They are available from Wurzel, to be found at fine third man.

Happy Monday all !

Grizzzly

Quote:

Grizzzly
Breaking news:
Membership applications have just been issued for the newly formed AG/FE mutual appreciation society.

They are available from Wurzel, to be found at fine third man.

Happy Monday all !

Grizzzly

If a vote is needed, then Loverboy to be returning officer and Janet to bake the cakes.

But you see there's the difference - with a couple of over the top bits which both have apologised for there's a debate with a bit of banter which sticks mostly to the point and everyone comes away feeling they've had their say and made some ground.

no accusations of abuse, no editing of posts to make a point seem something it wasn't, no attacking the other personally and if something goes a little over the top then an apology and a more measured second posting.

I don't have to edit this lot - no-one feels belittled by a comment, the theme tends to stay in the thread and we all read it rather than comment on the purile nature of it.

It's the first real theoretical spat we've had in quite a while and all the healthier for it. Have a rest boys!

And welcome to 0117 - a poster I see reading quite regularly but posting rarely

---

Nice post Grockle.

Yep and no rise to the FTM debate I'm getting mellow in my old age!

Oh if you had bee a fly on the wall in the Press Box when a couple of local journalists debated Hampshire's use of it...were your ears tingling I wonder.

---

Also isn’t it nice having “The Diamond ruled ok” on here posting good comments sometimes with a bit of humour and banter? People like that are always welcome.

---

Re: Hampshire Friday or Somerset Saturday? new
Posted by: AGod (IP Logged)
Date: 09 May, 2008 16:08


I've been to the pub, so I love everyone!!

Forecast for Bristol is looking good as well, so I may well attend to see us grind the Gloucester into the dirt. They MUST be crushed!!


Yes, I had noticed a few over excited comments on the perceived inablity of Gloucestershire to play cricket, so perhaps I was "gloating", and why not?

It takes all sorts and we at Bristol have more than our fair share of pompous knowalls, who shall remain nameless. The odd fan can go over the top and I thought I might ask you if anyone knows who the Somerset supporter chap at square leg by the tennis courts next to the roller in a white hat and who had been drinking solidly all day was? To be honest it was an embarrassement for the surrounding spectators to have to listen to him.

He seemed to be a bit of a booze crazed professional type who had lost most of his marbles and was mumbling and shouting gibberish in a quite unfunny way. What happened to him? He was gone by the time I had returned several hours later to watch Mr Spearman stroke the winning hit to the boundary.

Its all very well being sporting and congratulating your victors, but I for one know our CEO, Mr Richardson, was more than a little pleased about that result. And so was I. And why not?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:12:20:06:36 by WilliamBlessing.

I know a few that it could have been but will not name names.

And so you should be very pleased with the result, William.

Does Marcus North regularly bowl that intelligently and well in the short stuff?

I wouldn't know anything about folks at square leg, since I was behind the arm at the opposite end to the pavilion. What I will say is that I cannot comprehend, for the life of me, why anyone would choose to watch from square leg if they have the option of watching from behind the arm?? You get a far better picture of what is going on if you can see things from perspective that is not dissimilar to that of batsman/bowler/umpire than if you're off at mid-wicket, square-leg etc.

In that vein, I was surprised that there is so little seating behind the arm at the end that I was sat at. Furthermore, a Gloucs fan that I was chatting with tells me that the capacity is swollen by temporary stands for the 20:20 but that they still don't put one near the sight-screen at that end.

As for being a bit over-excited, if we can't get excited about playing one's greatest foes in an important game in perfect weather, then we might as well all give up and climb in our wooden boxes now!

As for my intemperate lady that decided to cross swords with me, whilst the Gloucs fan next to me thought she should 'go back to the football,' my immediate thought was what on earth would she do at the 20:20? I mean I'd not touched a drop of alcohol in the first innings and did not utter a single rude word.. so heaven only knows what she'd make of the kind of 20:20 fan that we get here in London!

Yeah we've had the same at derby's here from Bristol commuters. Shocking isn't it?

Ahhh well I'm sure you'll live without him and he'll live without your appreciation.

Gloating is something we all feel like doing after a good victory but it can come back and bite you in the buttocks at a later date. Quite a few on here have learned that when you have an erratic side who suffer from a lack of consistency then gloating is something probably to be avoided.

We had a guy last year who came on with a wonderful signature listing all the Gloucestrershire victories over Somerset. Funny he stopped adding them when we beat you hollow twice in the space of a short time and then got shirty when supporters here mentioned them to him. You gloat and you open yourself up.

But as long as you can take as well as give everything will be fine I suppose

---

God, I'd completely forgotten about him. Them were the days ...

VtF.

There are a few stuffed shirts around the ground and one gets to know how to avoid them. I've always enjoyed watching the game from a 360 degree tour which can on, a dull day, go into 720 degrees and more.

The advantage is that you get to chat to all the people you know, and whilst some people like to have their own particular spot, I like to keep on the move. Lets face it cricket can be dull. Its the people in the ground that make it interesting. At Bristol and beyond we have our fair share of oddballs, none of us aware of our own eccentricities, probably none more so than I, but I go on what other people gently say to me for that guess.

The attraction for me of square leg, especially on the shortest boundary is that you get more of an impression of the speed of the ball through the air and also of its level of bounce off the wicket. Also for the end of the game its near the exit and my parked bycycle by the Hammond Room ready for a quick escape up Nevil Road.

At Bristol our great pundit Adrian Thomas, who is, I stress, not a know it all, but someone who really does know it all, and is fortunately for us not shy in coming forward with the facts, thus keeping me and others thirsty for knowledge well informed , normally perched behind the bowlers arm on the Hammond Room surrounded by his army of devoted admirers, who when the great man decides to decamp to his second favourite spot, the Jessop Stand in the sun, are then free to speak with each other without fear of being rightly chastised for speaking folly.

A bit of winding each other up is good for the game, and the cricket writer is an essential part of the appreciation of the proceedings. Brian Johnstone is still sadly missed although Henry Blofield plays gamely on in his role. Christopher Martin-Jenkins will also be missed and I regret to say that his replacement Michael Atherton immediately irritates with his lack of passion for the commonplace.

I read his article in the Times this morning about the selection for the coming test match and was pleasantly surprised until he had to do an "Atherton" and condemn the eagerly awaited encounter with new Zealand at Lords this Thursday by saying..

"For the spectators who have bought tickets for Lord's, Flintoff's absence is a blow. There is precious little in this series to set the pulse racing etc etc.....zzzzzzz....zzzzzzz"

....including Michael Atherton's dull commentary on SKY no doubt. No one expects a cricketer to be literarally gifted. Of corresspondents we expect them to be. So why should a cricketer expect to excel with the keyboard?

In contrast there is no shortage of such talent here for which I thank you.

Yes, Mr Atherton can indeed be irritating and I don't think that the decision (if that's what it was*) to replace CMJ with MA will be vindicated.

*maybe CMJ had had enough, who knows?

It's taken some finding, but this piece, which I remembered having read, certainly suggests that the decision was CMJ's. It also suggests he approves of his successor.

I think I know of the annoying man to whom William refers. He was also present at the Hants FP matches.

At the Rose Bowl, he was totally emabarrassing, with his continuous diatribe, upsetting many around him, to the extent that I was surprised to see him at Taunton, unmarked!

At Taunton, he was as quiet as a mouse. He only seems to behave noisily at away games. He lives in Bridgwater and works at Musgrove.

Sounds like a Consulatant surgeon judged on that behaviour.

Personally, I find Atherton to be most excellent both on the air and on the page. His first couple of articles in The Times as their cricket man have been a bit dry perhaps but he'll grow in to it. He has an eye for detail, he is an ex-Test player and even better an ex-Test captain. Who better to point out to me things that I would never have spotted or thought of ? He also played recently enough to be relevant, in tune and interesting. He's also prepared to call it like he sees it and is not afraid to talk of players whom he probably over-lapped with at some stage in his career. So he called the New Zealand series as unlikely to be a "whizz bang". Sorry but to be brutally honest has anyone ever really had their blood stirred by a NZ series ? I was a great admirer of Howarth, Hadlee and Martin Crowe to name a few but it's not a series to charge the pulse. I'll happily watch McCullum and Vettori and Southee obviously has promise (Oram is also a very honest player, especially in ODI's and I might miss Shane Bond a bit) but otherwise I think that Athers is not far wide of the mark.

In my opinion CMJ is moving on as the game has moved on and he saw it was time to hand over the biro (or these days the USB connection). No doubt the words perhaps don't flow from his pen quite the way they did and he is no doubt tired of the travelling.

Angus Fraser is the one who bores me to death. I have a lot of time for Hussain, Pringle, Marks and a few others. Boycott is excellent. Botham has his moments on certain elements of the game but not others and Allott and Willis should be quietly ushered from the building. Gower is smart and smooth but Nicholas has decided to present cricket as if it is a game show and I don't care for that. Ian Smith I find very good but Jeremy Coney has a strange way with words, almost as if he brings them all out but in the wrong order. Ian Ward & Nick KNight are inoffensive but I could do without them but someone has to present highlights from across the globe in the early hours I suppose.

The great thing about most TV coverage these days is that the stints only last 20 minutes or so and like a Marcus Trescothick boundary, there's always another along in a minute.

For a horrible minute I thought I had written consultant sturgeon.
Now he really is the biggest fish in Musgrove.

I like Atherton too,he has a superb cricket brain and is always interesting.
I'm looking forward to the Kiwi matches,it would be arrogant in the extreme to write off such talented,competitive sportsmen.
Southee looks great entertainment and has already beaten one of Bradman's Test records.
Now that can't be bad.

Save for the fact that I'd switch Pringle and Fraser, I agree with every word you write TG'sB.
Pringle, I find, isn't as clever as he'd like us to think he is (but then perhaps who is ), but Gus strikes me as a pundit in much the same way as he did as a player. He's just an honest trier who doesn't really try to be anything else.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:13:10:33:05 by Frome Exile.

BJ, I don't disregard the NZers and have every respect for the way they come together to scrap it out with whoever they are up against. Test matches are special occasions all by themselves as well. It's just that, for me, personally, I find that Tests versus NZ don't have me ringing round desperately for spare tickets or rushing home to catch the highlights on TV. They just have that effect on me unlike the Aussies or West Indians (even in their current state I just find West Indies cricket interesting and intoxicating - too much exposure to Richards, Lloyd, Marshall and all the rest I expect). It's like I enjoy watching Pakistan play but find that watching India can sometimes be a bit of a tour of duty. Watching South Africa can also be a little like being hit over the head with a croquet mallet (to steal a phrase from Humph) but I love watching Gibbs and Kallis bat and Allan Donald bowl.

I didn't mean you TGB,I agree with most of what you say.
There seems to be this feeling in the media and generally that the Kiwi's are a gimmee.
Of course they are not in the same class as Australia but then again who is?
England should not underestimate them as they could very easily make them look like fools.

As they did in the 1st Test of the Winter series ! England's record at HQ has often not been of the best but I would be disappointed not to see us take control. If I was NZ I would undertake the ol' Aussie & Windies trick of targetting the opposition skipper and the player most under pressure for his place. In England's case, this is the same bloke as it happens.

My main problem with Mr Atherton, if I am honest, is his attitude to the County game. It's bordering, frankly, on the dismissive.

Perhaps Mr Atherton imagines that, even without much of a formal county structure, he would automatically have graduated from Cambridge to the England Test Team but if that is what he thinks, I don't know how he could possibly hold that view with much tenacity.

As for the Kiwis, I think we will find that if they pick an attack of Mills, Southee, Oram, Vettori and Patel, then that will constitute a genuinely good bowling attack, since each of the five is a decent bowler. Martin, for my money, is less good (more profligate) despite being their most experienced paceman.

Indeed, if we're looking for a new overseas player for next season and if he's not heavily involved in next year's IPL, then we could probably do worse than Kyle Mills, I would have thought.

We're getting in to different areas here AG but there is a definite school of thought it seems to me that the England team is becoming more remote and less relevant to the county game or maybe the other way around. They are in danger of becoming 2 separate things it seems to me.

What do the current Northants or Leicestershire sides (for example) have to do with the England team when they have on display up to 6 overseas and Kolpaks etc. taking up spaces ? What have they really got to do with local identity anymore ? Is it all becoming like watching a multi-european Arsenal team in North London ? I switch on the TV sometimes and see a county bowling attack's stats up on the screen and often these days I can't work out which county is playing (and I'm meant to be a cricket follower).

All this talk of pyramid structures as a route up to the England squad seems to me to have been subverted by Kolpaks, central contracts and counties re-signing the likes of Shaun Udal and Jason Gallian (and I know we have had this discussion before re. Caddick, Ramprakash, Hick et al).

One day recently I was watching Warwicks who re-signed a late-thirties Tony Frost (I think) as cover for Tim Ambrose as w/k. Ambrose goes to the Tests and Frost is injured and only then does the 19 year old 'keeper (now relegated to 3rd in the pecking order) get a chance. What chance for a promising spinner for Middlesex or a promising batter at Essex ? What about Surrey re-signing Chris Lewis for Twenty/20 ? How is all of this helping Team England by preparing the players of the future ? Should the next England batting cab off the rank really be a nearly thirty year old Robert Key (unless it's Michael Carberry or Owais Shah ?).

Maybe there should be an "All County" developmental side in one of the competitions for those promising players who can't quite get in to their county side ? Each county would nominate one player for this team at the start of the season giving a squad of 18 (players could be transferred in and out during the season - I don't know, just an idea).

I agree that Atherton has never been a fan of the treadmill county game and he was lucky that his talent took him up relatively quickly. The same may yet happen for Billy Godleman, Steven Davies or Steve Finn. Ryan Sidebottom has equally shown that it is possible to make it on the conveyor belt but as a primary England performer now, Sidebottom will presumably play less and less for Notts. Therefore up and coming batters get to face him less and less.

Personally, I doubt if the county game can go on for much longer as it is. I may be wrong and I quite frequently am but there are so many changes and external forces pressing now and with so many reviews going on, it seems unlikely that the model for county cricket as it currently stands can hold out. How long before someone figures out, why are we playing championship matches in front of nobody when it seems that everyone loves Twenty/20 ? Is 4-day cricket like the National Portrait Gallery in that we all feel better just for knowing that it's there ? How long before ODI's become Forty/40 matches of 2 x 20 over innings each ? How long before Test players become the only ones playing games that last longer than a day ? How long can a county like Derbyshire hold on ? How long will people like Rod Bransgrove at Hampshire stay in the game ?

I'm not especially pro any of this, I just wonder what is going to happen ? Anyone any thoughts ? Just feeling a bit
of a heretic today.

I still think there's merit in the three conferences of 6 format with a round robin for the Conference winners to decide the Championship. Reducing the volume of cricket and making more matches meaningful?

Add perhaps a draft system for UCCE players like in US Sports, where the League (in this case the ECB ) hold the registrations of young players and the weakest county each season gets first draft? Doesn't maintain the "local" flavour of teams, but as you say, that's largely gone or going anyway.

Of course another way that the NFL works is that the winners theoretically get the toughest intinerary the next season, too.

I think you're right in that some heresy may be required: it is perhaps time to at least think the unthinkable, if only in order to eliminate accusations of Canute-like tendencies.

As to your question about a late-twenties Key being NCotR, I'd say no, he shouldn't be. But that's because I don't think he should still be waiting on the rank.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:13:12:46:10 by Frome Exile.

Well, TGB, whatever degree of prepraedness (or otherwise) that you feel that the county game offers for Test cricket, it would very clearly not be enhanced by having a situation where only Test Match players play first-class cricket!?

I don't think even Atherton is advocating no first-class cricket, though it's clear that he does not seem to understand why people enjoy watching it. MA made some comment the other week to the effect that 'England is the only place in the world where people actually watch first-class cricket that is below test level."

I am uncertain of the veracity of Atherton's statement. Even if it is true, he said it as though the fact that people do enjoy watching it here barely matters.

What Atherton is advoacting is the usual tired plan of re-organisation by which he means that the "smaller," counties should dissapper and the likes of his Lancs should continue. The usual rationale behind all of this is to do with "commercial viability."

However, I'd be very surprised if it was not the case that the Test Match Counties actually owe such commerical viability as they have to the simple fact that England happen to play international matches on their grounds. It's not the case, after all, that teams like Lancs attract huge gates for CC games, whereas no-one goes to Taunton. Not the case at all.

I do think that central contracts have been profoundly detrimental to the game.

As to the inevitability of any of the things that you suggest will happen, there's still the issue of turkeys voting for Xmas?

Unless someone can tell me otherwise, then I believe that any changes still have to be voted on by the counties and that a simple majority is needed to effect changes. In other words, ten counties would have to vote for this "brave," (sic) new order. I suppose you've got the traditional test match counties - Lancs, Yorks, Notts, Warks, Surrey and Middx. And you've got the aspirational ones, Durham and Hants. But that still leaves them two short. And, even then, that ignores the tendency of people to sometimes engage in 'thin edge of the wedge thinking.' That is, "if I'm Hants and I vote for the counties to be cut to 10 teams, how long it will be before we get asked to make a furhter cut? A cut that would eliminate me?"

At the moment, the consensus - according to Atherton - is that the imminent change to the first-class game will be a reduction of the number of CC games to just ten. This would be a fairly dismal development in my view. It's also entirely unclear as to how it would, in any way, help to develop 'commercial viability.' I suppose their answer would be that they could play yet more 20:20 cricket. But I strongly suspect that the 20:20 market may already be maxed out in this country.

What might be the effect of limiting the number of over 25's permitted to play in Second XI Championship matches? If your 19 yr-old keeper has at least been playing meaningful cricket when Ambrose gets injured, might you be less likely to go back to an out-of-practice Tony Frost?
It might fall foul of employment law in terms of ageism I suppose, but it might be possible to argue that it doesn't impinge on senior pros employment prospects as they aren't primarily employed as Second XI players?

Restraint of trade, I would guess.

Who are you omitting to get Key into your team, FE?

Would a salary cap constitute a restraint of trade, though?

It certainly doesn't under American law or maybe an anti-trust exemption gets them round it, but they certainly exist in American sports.

My understanding is that some kind of salary-cap is also in operation in UK Rugby League?

I suppose in the current climate of the IPL/ICL, then a salary cap would not work. However, once the magnates realise the full extent of their pecuniary losses from the IPL/ICL, then that may very quickly fall through anyway.

A salary cap would prevent too many counties persuading folks from Test Match Nations e.g. Jacques Rudolph, Hamish Marshall etc to qualify as Kolpaks. It might, by default, lead to most counties having to include a handful of young (cheap) prospects within their squads. And then, once the more expensive players sustain injuries, there would be no choice other than to turn to younger ones.

to answer my own question, US sports do have anti-trust exemptions, hence no problem.

Now, what i want to know is what is the situation that obtains in rugby league?

All interesting stuff,some valid points.
I think the County Champioship will survive but possibly in a slightly different form.
Let's take a look at what happened in Welsh rugby.
The game was struggling,crowds were dwindling and lots of players were being lost in the messy system.
Regions were introduced incorporating teams who had long been sworn enemies.
The RFC's i.e Neath,Swansea,Llanelli still exist but are now "semi-pro" and are used as a proving ground for the higher level.
Many think the regions will be condensed further to leave just two,a West and East.
Think of this in cricket terms.
The County system still exists,maybe in the form already suggested by the likes of FE.
We then have a regional system above this,West,,Mid.....you know the score.
This is the step up to the higher grade of Test cricket and could be run along similar lines to that in Australia.
Like I said,just thoughts.
I'm not blinkered enough to think that the current system will go on forever and I adore County cricket.
It does need to have a purpose though and that purpose should be to provide exciting entertaining cricket whilst ensuring the best players go on to Test level.
We do need a system that nurtures our finest talent and makes sure it doesn't get lost.
The leaders of our game need to lead the way in making sure this happens.

I've never been opposed to the idea of some kind of regional cricket (first-class) tournament. Indeed, I've often thought that it could be an intermediate stage between the county game and Test Match cricket. However, I'd prefer it if the Regional Tournament was confined to a few games at the beginning or end of the season. If played at the beginning of the season, they could serve as trials for the summer's test matches, if played at the end, as auditions for the winter's touring parties.

All good thoughts and most interesting. I like the idea of an NFL type draft for UCCE players and would like to be a
fly-slip on the wall when that one gets voted on.

I also hear what you say AG about who gets to vote on all of this. I just think that the movers and shakers in cricket are more than likely to change soon as the huge bow wave of people like Texan Allen Stanford hove in to view. What does he care about the traditions of non-Test hosting counties or that WG Grace used to play for Gloucestershire ? Maybe he does, I don't know but he certainly wants fast, results based, harum scarum matches played in front of full crowds and where he is prepared to stump up large wodges of cash. That's the kind of person that has cricket in his sights these days I think. Not unlike multi-millionaires in Mumbai bidding for players services in what I personally thought was one of the most distateful developments in the game for years. It did nothing for the dignity of cricket (how pompous can I sound exactly) but this is the way it seems to be going. Did I hear "dumbing down" from anyone ?

It seems to me, to draw another US Sports comparison, that county games could become like the minor leagues and only on securing a central contract do you get to go to "The Show" where everyone starts to learn who you are. Where this leaves Test cricket is anyone's guess. After a while, who exactly are you preserving it for ?

I wasn't necessarily meaning I'd leave anyone out. More that a combination of rough treatment due to his physique, a little bit of failure to gasp the opportunities he has had, and a certain amount of bad timing and bad luck have meant that he hasn't got the number of caps his ability deserves.

An untimely shoulder(?) injury, Strauss starting so well when the selection had been something of a toss-up between them, Vaughan shilly-shallying about where he wanted to bat, Nasser going mid-series rather than at the end of '04 when Key scored a gut-ful, the whole England top four (and sometimes five) all being openers originally, Flintoff getting injured meaning a need for overs from the top order and hence Collingwood: all these things seem to me to have conspired more against Key than anyone else.

I think if any of us had been asked in 2002/3 who would be England's number three and four in 2007, the names of Bell and Key would have leapt from more lips than Cook, Strauss or even Pietersen.

I think many here are being a little uncharitable towards Allen Stanford in comparing him to the Bollywood magnates of the IPL. The Stanford 20:20 isn't about putting money into the pockets of Mahendra Singh Dhoni or Adam Gilchrist, and the comparison is unjust.

Stanford has at least gone some way to ensuring that to some extent cricket in the Caribbean might just become a viable career choice for Caribbean youth. There is now money to be made fromplaying the game in the region which there wasn't before, as Congar so eloquently informed us.

re: rich movers and shakers; "Where this leaves Test cricket is anyone's guess. After a while, who exactly are you preserving it for ?"

TGB - if you are a marketing man and you are looking at England (as distinct from India) then surely the facts are that what works, at the minute, in England IS Test Match cricket?? In terms of making serious money, I'd have thought that Test Match Cricket is the only headliner on the bill at the minute? Therefore, if you want to make money in England, then I'd have thought you'd need a product that somehow approximates Test Cricket??

A few weeks ago, I was thinking similarly dark thoughts to some of those that you seem to be currently entertaining. However, since then there has been talk that the Indian moguls that bought IPL teams are losing lots and lots of money. I suppose some of these guys might view their cricket teams as "loss leaders," for whatever products their company sell (i.e. the cricket team as human billboards etc)? But I'm not sure about that? I suspect many of them are in it to make money directly (just like the guys that have bought out Liverpool, Manchester United etc)

There's a lot of excited chatter about new money in cricket at the minute. But unless the "new," money generates even more "even newer," money, then this may prove to be nothing more than a short-lived fad.

Certainly, I think any substantial re-organisation of the domestic game which is predicated on the idea that the Sandfords of this world are here to stay in cricket would be a mistake. Surely, it would be prudent to see if they are here to stay - i.e if their ideas can be made to work - before changing.

Yes, I don't disagree with much of that and I'd only add a couple of points. One is that I meant nothing against Allen Stanford and I doubt he worries much about what I think. I agree that if he is on a one man mission to revitalise West Indies cricket then I have nothing but every hope for what he is doing. I haven't bumped in to him yet (surprisingly - I'm in Sainsbury's in Harpenden every weekend) but like JP Getty I'm sure he is a cricket nut - he must be. My point I think was that someone like Stanford may well be more than happy to start making changes or taking positions that go against the grain of many years of tradition and history because a great deal of it might not be so important to him as to prevent him getting where he wants to go and the product he wants to be involved with. If he is going to bring a tournament over here to the UK and we are keen to accommodate him then I can imagine that decisons might have to start getting taken pretty quickly if we wish him to stick around for a bit.

Secondly, I understand your point about Test cricket in England AG but that's always been the way here. We English love to talk about the highest, purest form of the game the same way that we think we make the best cheese. What about the rest of the world ? What about if and/or when the Asian countries have been sucked in to a Twenty/20 vortex and England are left holding the only Betamax tape in the shop that represents Test cricket ?

I didn't mean you exclusively, or even primarily, TG'sB.
I just wanted to point out that the Stanford 20:20 is a very different beast than the IPL, and that it certainly doesn't seem that Stanford's primary concern is making it pay in monetary terms.

Yep, TGB, it's possible that the Asian nations might quit Test cricket. Which means we'd be back to a reduced circuit of teams, as we were before the war. It would be a great shame to lose the Asian nations. BUt I wouldn't turn around and scrap Test Matches just because they didn't want to play anymore.

Is not one of the main worries over Atherton`s totally dismissive attitude to the county game (and particularly the smaller counties such as Somerset and Glamorgan), the fact that he is now conducting his campaign from one of the most powerful positions in cricket?

As Cricket Correspondent of The Times (the newspaper of record) his destructive views carry ten times the weight of a Sky television commentator - or even indeed a former captain of England, the only one in history to be fined and reprimanded for blatant cheating during a Test match.

TGB says Atherton was fortunate enough to have the talent to move away fairly rapidly from `the treadmill county game`. However, this did not stop him from collecting what at the time was a record Lancashire benefit of well into six figures, despite constantly underperforming at county level. Just ask any Lancashire member what he thinks of Atherton and his behaviour post-benefit.

There is one other major downside to employing all these ex-cricketers - one or two of them more than acceptable writers and commentators but without any real journalists` skills or experience. Can they cope when the big story breaks unexpectedly? Answer: no.

You only need to recall the sheer panic, indeed fear, on the faces of the ex-cricketers in the Sky commentary box when the Pakistan team refused to take the field after tea at The Oval in 2006 in protest at Darrell Hair penalising them for ball-tampering. You would have thought Atherton would be able to brief everyone on that particular subject.

But for well over an hour the commentors ran around like headless chicken trying to discover what had happned. It took a proper journalist, Atherton`s predecessor Christopher Martin-Jenkins, to get the story.

Apologies that I went off on one for a minute there. Must be to do with being in a team thumped by 10 wickets last Saturday.

THe short-answer to your first question, CJM, is yes.

One of the most pleasing voices to hear from the test match special radio broadcast is your very own Vic Marks. I do love to hear his chuckle and amusing insights and asides. And we haven't mentioned for me the mainstay of the program, Jonathan Agnew, always good hearted and inventive, descriptive and fluent on air. Both are cricketers, so perhaps its not quite fair to say that players of the game should stick to playing it.

And of course there is Sir Geoffrey. He may have bored the pants off us in his narrow minded pursuit of runs for his career statistics, but he more than makes up for it in his dogged pursuit of calling a spade a bluddy great shovel.

But in the end we listeners want to know about the buses and trains and seagulls and cakes that fly around the ground. We want a picture, and Johnners and Blowers and perhaps Arlott did what a poet and not a cricketer can do. Paint that picture.

As far as the future organisation of cricket goes, I believe that a pyramid system should include relegation from the top two county divisions, so that new money can come into the game. Open it up, let it grow, not stifle and restrict as Mr Atherton would have it.

I personally believe his attitude is the only thing we have to fear. A bit of sunshine and talk it up. Not down.

And on the subject of talking it up, how about the rematch between Glos and Somerset Bank Holiday Monday 26th May at the the Recreation Ground, Bath? The Big Shoot Out!

What picture will be painted? Edvard Munch's "The Scream"? Perhaps Constable's "The Haywain", or Monet's "Les Parapluies?( french for umbrellas)

Sadly, not all of us here would agree with you about Agnew, who so frequently shows how out of touch he is with the county game. We get the impression he has a bias against Somerset and he certainly irritated us a lot when he said last year that we had won Division Two with hardly any home-qualified players, especially when Leicestershire have such an appalling record in that respect.

I agree with you completely about the need for a bit of poetry, of local colour, of something other than the cricket itself. One of the more amiable newcomers is Arlo White, who gives the impression there is more to his life than cricket.

And of course VJM can do no wrong, even if he DOES giggle and talk about prep schools a bit too much.

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

Re BH Monday, it's a 'blessing' that the Bristol City match has been moved from the usual day, to the Saturday, as many will be able to go to both.

"hardly any home-qualified players, especially when Leicestershire have such an appalling record in that respect."

And finished down with the dead-men despite having numerous Kolpaks etc which, in Agnew's world, are some kind of automatic passport to success.

Agnew is to cricket as Thatcher was to socialism.
Arlo White is ex Radio Five LoL and is very good.
Those who listen to that station will know that there are many good reporters on that station.
All is not lost in the sports reporting world.
It just seems like it at times.

Following on (to coin a phrase) from yesterday's interesting debate - I note on the back pages of The Times today (not The Sun strangely enough) that Jack Simmons is suggesting a drop from 4 days to 3 extended days for CC matches in order to make space in the calendar for yet more Twenty/20.

Flat Jack Simmonds.
Not a popular man in Lancashire cricket circles.
If he comes out with dross like that he'll lose any credibility he had elsewhere.
T20 is probably the preferred format for the Northern County as many of their fans feel the weather is the only thing responsible for them not winning the CC more frequently.
That and a mediocre side maybe.
Perhaps the shortened form of the game will enable them to be seen to their best advantage.
Didn't we beat them once in the hit and giggle?

Why, I believe we did, Jim!!

Seeing as it is raining everywhere.....I wanted to try and keep something going about the future of the game.......did anyone see the article relating to a deal done between Allen Stanford and the ECB over the use of the Stanford innovation of the "Black Bat" ? There's something in "The Times" today. Seems that Mr. Stanford has negotiated a compromise in that black bats may be used in Twenty/20 matches between England and his All Stars XI in the West Indies but this won't be the case at Lord's. A new law passed by MCC about the colour of bat blades was deemed not to apply as the Stanford XI will not be an official international side.

The ICC rejected the idea that the Indian authorities had come up with the ploy about bat blade colour as a way of combating any atempt by Stanford to compete with the IPL.

Is this where I came in.......?

Again, I think we have to wait and see what transpires - above all whether any of this succeeds in actually making any money for anyone - before we can really judge or should begin making any substantive changes to our county game.

This time next year, the IPL might already have collapsed under debts, for all I know.

Yesterday was a blissfully Atherton free zone in the Times, but this morning reading the paper I was aghast to see his occupying two whole pages. One page was an astonishingly personal attack on Daniel Vettori for not putting the Test Series with England before the IPL 20 20 tournament.

Yet Atherton has written this off as of little interest to himself either, but how dare anyone take such a similar attitude to his beloved test cricket.

I'm surprised that it doesnt seem to have been commented on. Am I alone in thinking that in the attempt to strain himself out of a writers block, he has literally incurred a bout of literal diahorrea. When England are giving at least 99.99% can we expect anymore?

The way I see it is much simpler.
Atherton has an opinion and is not afraid of stating it.
I welcome that.
The man is knowledgeable and has a superb cricket brain.
If that's how he feels then good for him for writing it.
There are far too many sycophants in the business whose main business is to please the players and administrators.
CMJ is priceless on the radio.
His comments on fishing are legendary.
Think I'll buy The Times today.

I too like Atherton and respect his opinions (on most things!). In this case, I agree with him - as captain of NZ, Vettori should not have missed the first two weeks of an important tour to earn megabucks in the Indian hit-and-giggle.

As for his fishing outside the off stump, I agree, BJ - priceless!

As an ex-Test captain, I imagine Atherton takes this extremely seriously. I'm also certain that had Vaughan done the same thing and turned up late for an England tour to Australia it would have been front page news for days. I don't think that's unreasonable to point that out and that's part of a journalist's brief. The difficult thing these days is by how much you can judge a current international by those old fashioned values that were around from yesteryear. The decisons and commitments to be made these days are very different. Having said that, personally I feel that Vettori was wrong and he should have stayed loyal to his higher calling but at the same time he's a professional sportsman who is earning a living and somebody was waving a big pay day at him.

I'm a bit upset that the "Spam Code" for this entry is "MUPET". Is somebody trying to tell me something ? Am I Statler or Waldorf ? I used to love The Great Gonzo.

Yup, SJB, spot-on. When there's a serious threat of bad-light that's generally more of a reason not to declare than it is to declare

er..wrong thread, sorry.

"One page was an astonishingly personal attack on Daniel Vettori for."

I think William is right. The article went over the top, principally in respect of the fact that it used some petty points as part of the attack.

At one point Atherton said;

"When you go out there in your blazer to toss up with Michael Vaughan (unless of course you forget to wear your blazer as you did, twice, last winter.)

...Personally, I find it a little disturbing that Atherton has, apparently, been counting the occasions on which Vettori has or has not been wearing his blazer. I'm also puzzled that he thinks the point is of any relevance.

"As an ex-Test captain, I imagine ..." writes TGB.

You've kept that a secret for a long time. Congratulations!

I've always thought you were more than averagely well-informed and now I understand why.

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

Yes, TGB, and whilst Atherton might have been able to say, with conviction, that he would have stayed true to England, I also strongly imagine that the England job is relatively better paid than its NZ counter-part.

I think up to two doesn't count as counting, AG.

If you see what I mean. You are just aware of it. Four would be counting.

On the subject of the IPL, the TMS team were talking yesterday about the vast numbers of tickets being given away for the games. Perhaps even the Indians have reached saturation point on 20/20, perhaps prices are too high. I guess it matters not if the real money is with TV deals. I found it suprising though.

Yep, Bloke, i've heard that fans are having to be bussed into stadiums in huge numbers just to put (non-paying) bums on seats.

As I've said before, I think the problem is not so much that 20:20 is dull as the fact that there is no logical reason for fans to have allegiance to any of the teams as mercenaries are parachuted in on a series of short-term assignments.

You are right, LOL, I am actually Mike Brearley....just in a very good disguise.

I thought there was something special about you... Cambridge Double First and a few good cricketing achievements under your belt in that box of yours.

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

Thinking tangentially - I use that word to avoid thinking of myself as a butterfly brain - LoL, TGB, AG and anyone else :

Which Twentieth Century Prime Minister was the most highly qualified academically? I am thinking here only of first degrees.

I would reckon Asquith was up there - and so was Harold Wilson. Both had Firsts from Oxford, I am pretty sure - and Wilson may have edged it.

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

Margaret Thatcher had a Chemsitry degree and an Law degree.

Apologies for the past tense; obviously she still has them.

I don't believe that she got an outstanding result in her first degree, Chemistry.

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

You've ruined my day FE.
Your use of the past tense made me send out for champagne.
Back to water I'm afraid.

I certainly believe you are correct, LoL. From memory, Wilson had a Double First in PPE.

However, wisdom and common sense may be more important for a PM. There must be at least one from the last Century who had one or both of these! I just can't think who it was at the moment.

Tony Benn?

PPE is one degree and, as far as I know, you can't get a double first in it. He probably got something like a starred first, marking him as something rather special compared with those merely ordinary first class chaps and chapesses.

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

No, I've remembered who it was, Jim. It was Clem Attlee(sp?).

Second Class Honours, LoL; so no, not outstanding.
Better than my Chemistry degree, though!

I haven't even got Chemistry O Level - or ANY science O Level for that matter

---

LoL

Sixty-one Seasons a Somerset Supporter

According to Wikipedia, LoL, there are strict and loose definitions of what constitutes a Double First: the strict being First in two entirely different subjects, the loose being Firsts in two parts of a tripos, such as PPE or Natural Sciences. The terms are also, apparently, used slightly differently at Oxford and Cambridge.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:16:16:53:36 by Frome Exile.

I just feel so superior, although not to you,FE, as I scraped Physics with Chemistry O Level!

Harold Wilson

At Oxford, Wilson was moderately active in politics as a member of the Liberal Party but was later influenced by G. D. H. Cole to join the Labour Party. After his first year, he changed his field of study to Philosophy, Politics and Economics. He graduated with "an outstanding First Class Bachelor of Arts degree, with alphas on every paper" in the final examinations.[1] He also received exceptional testimonials from his tutors, including a comment from one that 'he is, far and away, the ablest man I have taught so far'.

Although Wilson had two abortive attempts at an All Souls Fellowship, he continued in academia, becoming one of the youngest Oxford University dons of the century at the age of 21. He was a lecturer in Economic History at New College from 1937, and a Research Fellow at University College 1938-45. For much of this time, he was a research assistant to William Beveridge, the Master of the College, working on the issues of unemployment and the trade cycle. (Wikipedia)

Addendum: Thanks, FE. So Harold got one of your 'loose' Double Firsts!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:16:16:51:11 by Bobstan.

I have got 2 Chemistry O Levels, LOL. You can have one if it makes you feel better.

How do you get two, Wally?

Let there be light, and there wasn't light. Shame.

I posted this on the wrong thread. However, I am cheered by the fact that another Somerset and Ipswich fan did the same earlier!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:05:16:17:55:48 by Bobstan.

Scottish qualification. Failed the Higher (A level) and was awarded a complimentary for a near miss, or as my teacher pointed out. Had obviously done nothing for 2 years.

Ah, right!