[cite]Posted By: northstandsteve[/cite]read the title of the thread and first post none of you tossers helped me out for that no cheap shirts !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!;-)
I thought Stevens & Denly batted shockingly. It was SO obvious that they had to get ahead early if they were going to win, yet they turned down singles and didn't push to turn singles into twos. Very poor batting has cost Kent the game. No excuses, they just got it very badly wrong.
[cite]Posted By: Red_Pete[/cite]I thought Stevens & Denly batted shockingly. It was SO obvious that they had to get ahead early if they were going to win, yet they turned down singles and didn't push to turn singles into twos. Very poor batting has cost Kent the game. No excuses, they just got it very badly wrong.
Totally disagree. Kent had no idea how long the match would continue. D/L is all well and good when you don't lose wickets and that is what Kent followed. They made sure they didn't lose a wicket. If you have ever played cricket you know that after a good stand 1 wicket often brings another. Then you are under pressure.
It is so wrong that Sussex had so much say, they bowled slow bowlers while it suited them but once ahead the brought on a quickie and the light was too bad.
D/L should only be used if the weather has interviend, not if your bloody floodlights fail. Sussex should lose the game by default.
And if I ever see Paul Alott again in the flesh, I will punch his lights out = PRAT.
Chirpy the difference between losing a wicket and the extra runs needed because of it was very small (about four to six runs if I remember correctly) Denly and Stevens blew it big time, two or three hefty blows at any point during our innings instead of the softly softly approach and the result wouldn't have been in doubt....they still had all their wickets in tact FFS!
All the other arguments re the unfairness of it all (which are very valid of course) would have been completely academic if only they hadn't sailed so close to the wind.......................a wind they could so easily have avoided.I began to feel very uncomfortable after around six overs....I had a nasty feeling they were getting it wrong and so it proved.
We blew it BIG time...totally unproffesional and inexcusable to have got themselves in that position......Rob Key watching somewhere on Sky must have been flabbergasted!
Got to agree with SoundAs. After about 6 overs they knew there could only have been four or five overs at best. According to the commentator the difference in losing a wicket after 8 overs was just 2 runs. Even taking it safely they should have ensured they were at least one run ahead of the well publicised run rate. Totally unprofessional and they blew it in my opinion.
There is no doubt in my mind Kent blew it. There were singles there for the taking and with the knowledge that a wicket would change the situation they could in my mind easily have got themselves into a match winning position and held it. They knew the options when they one the toss and chose to bat second albeit that there was still a remote possibility of the lights working by the second innings.
Having said all that it is a disgrace that Sussex the hosts come away with the points and the paying/viewing public were so badly let down in the form of not seeing a genuine cricket match.
One point that didnt get much air time was the quality of the light in the last 2 overs. Seemed in the end to effect the batsmen far more than the bowlers/fielders and ultimately decided the game.
[cite]Posted By: Miserableold-ish git[/cite]Shouldn't the umpires have offered the Batsmen the light 1st ?
No. They made it quite clear at the start that they would decide when they thought the time was appropriate. The Kent batsmen misjudged it. Simple.
Hated it as a Kent fan but was more annoyed with Denly/stevens for not pushing ahead when they could have. Even a couple of wickets wouldnt have changed it that dramatically if they had approached it better from ball 1.
Comments
http://www.charltonlife.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=20016&page=4#Item_33
no excuse for not going after the spinners,wouldn't have happened if Key had been there very poor effort.
me and mog did... on the other thread.
Not buying you a pint now.................runs off and sulks in corner
Totally disagree. Kent had no idea how long the match would continue. D/L is all well and good when you don't lose wickets and that is what Kent followed. They made sure they didn't lose a wicket. If you have ever played cricket you know that after a good stand 1 wicket often brings another. Then you are under pressure.
It is so wrong that Sussex had so much say, they bowled slow bowlers while it suited them but once ahead the brought on a quickie and the light was too bad.
D/L should only be used if the weather has interviend, not if your bloody floodlights fail. Sussex should lose the game by default.
And if I ever see Paul Alott again in the flesh, I will punch his lights out = PRAT.
All the other arguments re the unfairness of it all (which are very valid of course) would have been completely academic if only they hadn't sailed so close to the wind.......................a wind they could so easily have avoided.I began to feel very uncomfortable after around six overs....I had a nasty feeling they were getting it wrong and so it proved.
We blew it BIG time...totally unproffesional and inexcusable to have got themselves in that position......Rob Key watching somewhere on Sky must have been flabbergasted!
Having said all that it is a disgrace that Sussex the hosts come away with the points and the paying/viewing public were so badly let down in the form of not seeing a genuine cricket match.
One point that didnt get much air time was the quality of the light in the last 2 overs. Seemed in the end to effect the batsmen far more than the bowlers/fielders and ultimately decided the game.
No. They made it quite clear at the start that they would decide when they thought the time was appropriate. The Kent batsmen misjudged it. Simple.
Hated it as a Kent fan but was more annoyed with Denly/stevens for not pushing ahead when they could have. Even a couple of wickets wouldnt have changed it that dramatically if they had approached it better from ball 1.
Still not sure.
I take it Kent lost because they captain/manager weren't savy enough?
And when do I get my shirt Steve
Seems Kent have gone maroon and blue ... !!!!!1
A lot on here will be pleased to hear that Kane is a Vegan