Latest news:


WELCOME TO THE MIDDLESEX ROOM, THE ONLY MESSAGE BOARD ON THE INTERNET DEDICATED TO MIDDLESEX CCC

Eating away over the winter


Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2
Re: T20 v Kent 29th August 2020
Jonathan Winsky 29 August, 2020 17:11
I held little hope of Middlesex avoiding defeat when Steven Finn bowled himself for the 18th over, as it meant that unless we made a big decision to bowl Nick Gubbins at the death or introduce Martin Andersson or even Max Holden, the final two overs would have to be bowled by James Harris (figures at this stage: 2-0-31-0) and Tom Helm (figures at this stage: 3-0-40-0), who of course indeed bowled those overs.

I would have thought that future matches will see Gubbo doing some more bowling, with maybe Andersson also getting some overs. We will have to see whether future matches also see another spinner being brought into our side or there being changes to personnel in our fast bowling line-up or the times in the innings when they bowl.

Re: T20 v Kent 29th August 2020
Seaxe_man1 29 August, 2020 17:30
It was wide wide Delilah for the time penalty if applied.

Re: T20 v Kent 29th August 2020
adelaide 29 August, 2020 17:45
Quote:
Seaxe_man1
It was wide wide Delilah for the time penalty if applied.

Middlesex in over rate trouble - it's not unusual.

It was good though to see the green green grass of home.


Adelaide

Re: T20 v Kent 29th August 2020
snicko 29 August, 2020 18:20
No penalty runs for slow over rates this season (possibly due to the hand sanitising and fielders retrieving ball from empty stands etc.) - however, the umpires now penalise the bowling side by reducing the number of fielders outside the circle in the final over, which is precisely what happened today.

Re: T20 v Kent 29th August 2020
adelaide 29 August, 2020 20:03
Ah, I think I must have forgotten that. I have a feeling that is a permanent change, not itself Covid-related. The commentators on the feed didn't twig. Kevin Hand might have done (having shared our pain on over rates so often), I suppose.

I'm inclined to think that the penalty is not really a penalty when so few are needed to win, as you would probably bring much of the field in anyway to save singles. Arguably by forcing the issue and removing any temptation it actually helps. If twelve are required, it really would be a penalty as there would be less need to put the ball in the air. It would also be a serious penalty in the first of the two innings.


Adelaide

Re: T20 v Kent 29th August 2020
Jonathan Winsky 29 August, 2020 21:22
I remember the changes to the playing conditions being announced, although as the pandemic increased the time between the announcement being made and the Twenty20 season starting, I had forgotten about them. The changes may have been mentioned in articles previewing this competition, but I have been reluctant to read them, as the fact that I doubt that I will be allowed to attend any means that I may not share the writer’s excitement about this competition.

Previously, six penalty runs were awarded for each over not started by the cut-off, but now - in the words of a Cricinfo article from December 2019 which buries this in the middle of mentioning the playing conditions for The Hundred - “the fielding side will be allowed one fewer player outside the 30-yard circle for however many deliveries remain after the time limit is up”. As most innings tend to see the final over starting just before the cut-off and finishing just after, it will surely be a regular occurrence for fielding teams to be penalised. For example, if the cut-off is 9:04pm and the final over starts at 9:02pm and finishes at 9:07pm, this would previously have meant that teams would escape a penalty, but will now mean that any balls bowled after 9:04pm would be bowled with restrictions on fielding positions.

Steven Finn has spoken to Middlesex’s YouTube page about this match:


Re: T20 v Kent 29th August 2020
adelaide 29 August, 2020 21:48
The most interesting thing is the reference to Daniel Bell-Drummond having said in his interview how well Tom Helm had bowled .,... throughout. We viewers were (mostly) cursing as another one fizzed down the leg side while the professionals saw it as part of the deal for what he was trying to do (as Chunky intimated earlier in the thread).

Finny claimed that the Gubbins over was a tactical ploy. Running out of time did not feature.


Adelaide

Re: T20 v Kent 29th August 2020
Seaxe_man1 30 August, 2020 07:13
The commentators were excellent and stuck to the job in hand. With so many rule changes hard to keep up. Finn was worried cos he kept jogging back to his mark. Plus kept his nerve with Harris and Helm who looked two unlikely lads.

Re: T20 v Kent 29th August 2020
adelaide 30 August, 2020 09:27
Finn was very obviously worried! It's just that he claimed the Gubbins over was tactical rather than dictated by circumstances. He may have been being economical with the truth of course.


Adelaide

Re: T20 v Kent 29th August 2020
Seaxe_man1 30 August, 2020 10:58
He was stretching it a bit Adelaide. Captain's privilege. It was a batters dream and a bowlers nightmare pitchwise. I thought Kent's out cricket had the edge in that game. Strong batting side so we did well on that front. Hope we see more of that positive play. SL was no slouch during his playing days.

Re: T20 v Kent 29th August 2020
hdo 30 August, 2020 18:49
Quote:
adelaide
The commentators on the feed didn't twig.

They don't seem to twig to much, as far as I can tell. I've mostly been listening with the sound off so far this season. Basic errors all over the place in their descriptions of the action.

Re: T20 v Kent 29th August 2020
chunkyinargyll 30 August, 2020 19:42
At the moment we have a choice of commentaries.

The advantage of the one the club provide is that it is synched with the vision, but I still prefer Kevin Hand, even if it means being about 10 seconds behind the action. That could change if he is joined by Don Topley for an Essex game, and would definitely change if we ever play Gloucestershire again (Bob Hunt).

My worry is the BBC might give up their commentaries if too many listen to the club provided commentaries, which, from the little I've heard seem inferior.

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net