Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Club cricket thread

14243454748109

Comments

  • Also, scorecard that's cropped up after our WhatsApp group started talking about tours of Arundel and the like:

    http://www.bdistrict.play-cricket.com/website/results/1083627

    Recognise the name of a certain no.6 for Bromley who opened the bowling...?!
  • If clubs are willing to do anything to win you are never going to be able to stop that . It comes down to the integrity of the people in charge who pick the teams. Seen this happen time and time again . If the kids are that good put them in the U17s when they are available or play them in the Sunday dev side to challenge them . The same club were called out over playing 3x 1st team players in their 2nd xi a few weeks ago when the 1s didn't have a game...……...
    One of those players was a particularly blatant example - he's played 25 Saturday 1s games and just 3 Saturday 2s matches and the previous two occasions were friendlies. All of those 2s games were when the 1s didn't have a match and of course he returned on each occasion to the 1s the week after.
  • PaddyP17 said:
    Also, scorecard that's cropped up after our WhatsApp group started talking about tours of Arundel and the like:

    http://www.bdistrict.play-cricket.com/website/results/1083627

    Recognise the name of a certain no.6 for Bromley who opened the bowling...?!
    Conteh Nixon is playing for Bromley Common 1's now and is a decent bowler.  I umpired Bromley u13's for a season in 2010, but don't remember THD!
  • One of those players was a particularly blatant example - he's played 25 Saturday 1s games and just 3 Saturday 2s matches and the previous two occasions were friendlies. All of those 2s games were when the 1s didn't have a match and of course he returned on each occasion to the 1s the week after.
    I didn't think "loading" was allowed!
  • Pedro45 said:
    I didn't think "loading" was allowed!
    It's not - but easier to prove at the end of the season than the beginning
  • All comes back to the Clubs integrity. If they have to win at all costs then so be it . Wonder how the boys that usually play in the U15s and were replaced by the Rep players the 3 x guys they dropped from the 2nd XI felt when they were told they were being left out ?? 
  • It's not - but easier to prove at the end of the season than the beginning
    Quite. 

    It must be said that I had a couple of 3rd XI players for me this weekend - I think I've already mentioned it on the thread. Two of them combined for bowling figures of 12-2-20-5 but I had no-one else available, as a lot of my players had marked out these two weeks where OCs only had three games as "holiday" weekends.

    Equally, the previous week I had a talented bat ton up for me, but he won't play more than one or two Saturday games a season, because he prefers the Sunday banter with Waggoners.

    I take no pleasure in stacking a team, because I'd rather win properly with the lads I know want to play for me for as much of the season as possible. But on every occasion when it so happens I have an accidental "ringer", it's out of necessity and good fortune.

    When it's stacking the team because you want the win and there's no need to do so... That's not on.
  • PaddyP17 said:
    Also, scorecard that's cropped up after our WhatsApp group started talking about tours of Arundel and the like:

    http://www.bdistrict.play-cricket.com/website/results/1083627

    Recognise the name of a certain no.6 for Bromley who opened the bowling...?!
    The number 7 is currently opening the batting for Beckenham 1s - his sister plays for Kent Women and his dad used to play for Blackheath, Sidcup, Wickham Park and Hayes as well as Kent Over 50s. 
  • I've only just twigged who you were talking about. My memory of him goes back almost 50 years when I first came into contact with him - he threatened as a 6th former to put this then 11 year old in detention for being cheeky.

    He went onto to gain a reputation as being a gritty opening bat in county cricket and one who knew numerous nurses of the accident and emergency units around the country on first name terms such was the frequency of his visits as a result of being hit on the fingers.

    I also understand that his reputation of being a miserable so and so was somewhat harsh. Well that's what I'm told anyway! 
    I assumed you would! Legend has it that he holds the unwanted record of being hospitalised, from injuries sustained while playing cricket, in each of the 18 first class counties. Not sure how true this is, but it’s a great story. 

    Paddy has the other bits right, I’m sure - my own account is full of holes as I missed 17 of these years when living abroad. 
  • PaddyP17 said:
    Also, scorecard that's cropped up after our WhatsApp group started talking about tours of Arundel and the like:

    http://www.bdistrict.play-cricket.com/website/results/1083627

    Recognise the name of a certain no.6 for Bromley who opened the bowling...?!
    The number 7 is currently opening the batting for Beckenham 1s - his sister plays for Kent Women and his dad used to play for Blackheath, Sidcup, Wickham Park and Hayes as well as Kent Over 50s. 

     That’s a fair collection of clubs !
  • Sponsored links:


  • PaddyP17 said:
    @Addick Addict the man ruined the Colfes-Colfeians relationship in favour of founding the Roebucks in 2005, and eventually ensured our own Colts section was so unsustainable that it led to its winding down in 2012 and subsuming by the GJCA. This now benefits every other club except ours. 

    Ash - I'd disagree that the Greenwich thing has worked for us. Other than your son and Fraser, there are zero colts and any U18s who do play for us come via friends of OCCC members.

    I think his reputation is certainly justified.

    He nabbed all the School's players and stopped them from attending OCs eventually. Hell, look at the Roebucks website - it actually says the club was formed so youngsters could continue to play cricket after school!

    Ultimately, we have a long old rebuild to undergo and we're attempting to ensure this happens sustainably. 
    Are there many OC’s at Roebucks now ? I was led to believe it was a “guns for hire” club
  • Are there many OC’s at Roebucks now ? I was led to believe it was a “guns for hire” club
    Good question - and as a former Elthamian(!) I don't actually know. 

    However, I know that a few OCCC players were poached and paid a few years back, and of course Chris Lewis is skippering. Their rise has been facilitated by financial backing in many parts I believe.
  • PaddyP17 said:
    Good question - and as a former Elthamian(!) I don't actually know. 

    However, I know that a few OCCC players were poached and paid a few years back, and of course Chris Lewis is skippering. Their rise has been facilitated by financial backing in many parts I believe.
    There are still 3 or 4 by the looks of it but not regular 1s players 
  • Played Roebucks in the league last season. 

    Had some bloke from the West Indies who was recently playing Middlesex prem bowling 75mph+ round my ears on a pitch doing all sorts. Got absolutely peppered for my 6 lol.

    This is the league below div 5 i believe. In any case, it's a joke he was playing at that standard.

    That sort of financial muscle is absolutely against the spirit of cricket. 

    This isn't professional football, it's amateur cricket where most have to pay to play. To start giving players a wedge at that level is shocking IMO.
  • Played Roebucks in the league last season. 

    Had some bloke from the West Indies who was recently playing Middlesex prem bowling 75mph+ round my ears on a pitch doing all sorts. Got absolutely peppered for my 6 lol.

    This is the league below div 5 i believe. In any case, it's a joke he was playing at that standard.

    That sort of financial muscle is absolutely against the spirit of cricket. 

    This isn't professional football, it's amateur cricket where most have to pay to play. To start giving players a wedge at that level is shocking IMO.
    Found the scorecard and the bowler in question. He must be getting paid a tidy three-figure sum per game; there's no other explanation.

    Roebucks and Minster are inevitably going to collapse in a big way once the money runs out - just look at Hartley et al as cautionary tales. 

    If I'd have somehow ended up playing against Chris Lewis and them lot - hell, I might even end up doing so if there's a freak 1s appearance for me next year or something (nearly the case on Saturday!) - I'd be celebrating and raving every single block and every single minute I survived out there.
  • edited June 2019
    PaddyP17 said:
    Found the scorecard and the bowler in question. He must be getting paid a tidy three-figure sum per game; there's no other explanation.

    Roebucks and Minster are inevitably going to collapse in a big way once the money runs out - just look at Hartley et al as cautionary tales. 

    If I'd have somehow ended up playing against Chris Lewis and them lot - hell, I might even end up doing so if there's a freak 1s appearance for me next year or something (nearly the case on Saturday!) - I'd be celebrating and raving every single block and every single minute I survived out there.
    I believe he caught me that game. 

    Pinged one to him at mid-off off the bowler at the other end who I was trying to score against while trying to survive against the West Indian haha.
  • PaddyP17 said:
    Found the scorecard and the bowler in question. He must be getting paid a tidy three-figure sum per game; there's no other explanation.

    Roebucks and Minster are inevitably going to collapse in a big way once the money runs out - just look at Hartley et al as cautionary tales. 

    If I'd have somehow ended up playing against Chris Lewis and them lot - hell, I might even end up doing so if there's a freak 1s appearance for me next year or something (nearly the case on Saturday!) - I'd be celebrating and raving every single block and every single minute I survived out there.
    I think Roebucks may struggle to get promoted from div 5 this year. The Littlebourne Gould's should see them up, and Bromley Town have a good Kiwi playing for them this year. Bexley are very strong as we know from above and Dan Haley may get a thousand this year unless he loses form. Of the rest, Faversham, Chisles, and Offham can be dangerous on their day but are in survival mode, while Rodmersham and Betteshangar have the same players that have struggled over recent times.
  • edited June 2019
    For context we were playing at sydenham girls school near County Ground in Beckenham. 

    If anyone knows it then they will know that the pitch is not suitable to that sort of bowling (75 is probably a tad conservative as an estimate) against opposition that are of the same standard, let alone against clearly weaker opposition who you plan to blow out of the water. 

    Pretty outrageous looking back at it.

    Still, we got relegated and have been having a really enjoyable season this time around. 

    We've won 4 from 4. However, one was a 1 wicket win and one was a 2 wicket win. Both of which we were destined to lose but dug deep and pulled it back. I.e close games of cricket that I'm sure tehy were gutted to lose, but they woild say "great game of cricket". 

    It's what we all play for. No one wants to get rolled for sub 75 or chase leather for 45 overs just so some blokes can put money in their pocket.
  • edited June 2019
    Pedro45 said:
    I think Roebucks may struggle to get promoted from div 5 this year. The Littlebourne Gould's should see them up, and Bromley Town have a good Kiwi playing for them this year. Bexley are very strong as we know from above and Dan Haley may get a thousand this year unless he loses form. Of the rest, Faversham, Chisles, and Offham can be dangerous on their day but are in survival mode, while Rodmersham and Betteshangar have the same players that have struggled over recent times.

    Bexley 3s are playing the Goulds this week. The 1s and 2s are playing Sandwich with the former without, for varying reasons, Messrs MacLeod, Robinson and Ball. Whereas I suspect that Sandwich will have Grant Stewart and Fred Klaassen opening the bowling. That will be a real test.
  • For context we were playing at sydenham girls school near County Ground in Beckenham. 

    If anyone knows it then they will know that the pitch is not suitable to that sort of bowling (75 is probably a tad conservative as an estimate) against opposition that are of the same standard, let alone against clearly weaker opposition who you plan to blow out of the water. 

    Pretty outrageous looking back at it.

    Still, we got relegated and have been having a really enjoyable season this time around. 

    We've won 4 from 4. However, one was a 1 wicket win and one was a 2 wicket win. Both of which we were destined to lose but dug deep and pulled it back. I.e close games of cricket that I'm sure tehy were gutted to lose, but they woild say "great game of cricket". 

    It's what we all play for. No one wants to get rolled for sub 75 or chase leather for 45 overs just so some blokes can put money in their pocket.
    There can’t be any future in it For Roebucks i would have thought. For all of the flack that Minster are receiving  they are trying to build a colts section as well as buying their way into the prem within a couple of years.
  • Sponsored links:


  • PaddyP17 said:
    I've edited this post as I'm aware much of what I mentioned was inaccurate. 
    Respect to you sir. 
  • edited June 2019
    Sam has been at it again.
    3 tons in last 3 innings. an unbeaten 44 ball 100 in a friendly, 115 in 71 balls yesterday in the league and 139 in 80 balls last week in the league.
    Another 150 yesterday I believe for Mr Lockwood. 
  • Bexley 1s beat Sandwich yesterday and if they win their match in hand they will go top. I wrote HSBC off last week but they won yesterday albeit against struggling Blackheath.

    The 2s met at 9.15am at the Club, won the toss and scrambled to 187-7 either side of a two and a half hour rain break. Sandwich were on 108-6 off 26 overs when proceedings were called to a halt at 8.00pm. So no result and no Duckworth Lewis either.

    We got back to the Club at just after 9.30pm. That's a bloody long day for an incomplete game. But there again, we only have to make that particular journey once. Sandwich have to make a similar trip virtually every away game!
  • Bexley 1s beat Sandwich yesterday and if they win their match in hand they will go top. I wrote HSBC off last week but they won yesterday albeit against struggling Blackheath.

    The 2s met at 9.15am at the Club, won the toss and scrambled to 187-7 either side of a two and a half hour rain break. Sandwich were on 108-6 off 26 overs when proceedings were called to a halt at 8.00pm. So no result and no Duckworth Lewis either.

    We got back to the Club at just after 9.30pm. That's a bloody long day for an incomplete game. But there again, we only have to make that particular journey once. Sandwich have to make a similar trip virtually every away game!
    Bexley looking good this year! It's another Blackheath shocker, and will shut up all those saying HSBC wouldn't win a game this season. Great hundred by Matt Abbett (a player I never feel safe umpiring as he hits the ball very hard and straight!) by the look of it.

    And you didn't get any extra points playing an incomplete rather than an abandoned game either...something the umpires may have considered when going out after a 150 minute rain break?
  • edited June 2019
    Pedro45 said:
    Bexley looking good this year! It's another Blackheath shocker, and will shut up all those saying HSBC wouldn't win a game this season. Great hundred by Matt Abbett (a player I never feel safe umpiring as he hits the ball very hard and straight!) by the look of it.

    And you didn't get any extra points playing an incomplete rather than an abandoned game either...something the umpires may have considered when going out after a 150 minute rain break?
    We did get 4 extra points so we got 10 and Sandwich 9 (as opposed to 8 each for an abandoned game) - but if DL was available we could have had a result
  • If you can’t reduce overs once in play could the captains agree to reduce overs once in play ? Say Bexley had declared after 40 overs - and sandwich them had 40 overs to get the runs - if they didn’t make it at 40 they would declare as well ? 
  • The Umpires wouldn't allow that to happen because the Rules don't allow it. For your suggestion to happen Bexley would, effectively, have to be all out in exactly 40 overs. And the Umpires would then insist that Sandwich batted for their 50 overs so, again, Sandwich would either have to get the runs inside 40 overs or very soon after be all out if they didn't have a chance of getting them for the "arrangement" to work.

    And both sides would then, quite rightly, be reported to the KCL for improper conduct because all other teams would have played their games within the rules (and spirit of them).
  • The Umpires wouldn't allow that to happen because the Rules don't allow it. For your suggestion to happen Bexley would, effectively, have to be all out in exactly 40 overs. And the Umpires would then insist that Sandwich batted for their 50 overs so, again, Sandwich would either have to get the runs inside 40 overs or very soon after be all out if they didn't have a chance of getting them for the "arrangement" to work.

    And both sides would then, quite rightly, be reported to the KCL for improper conduct because all other teams would have played their games within the rules (and spirit of them).
    No, that's not right.  You could have declared at, say, 45 overs (maybe 160 runs), and knowing that you only had 16 overs from 7pm would have known that Sandwich would have had c31 overs to get the runs or for you to bowl them out. They would never have had the full 50 overs as there wasn't time for that to be bowled. If no result was reached then it would have been incomplete anyway. 
  • Pedro45 said:
    No, that's not right.  You could have declared at, say, 45 overs (maybe 160 runs), and knowing that you only had 16 overs from 7pm would have known that Sandwich would have had c31 overs to get the runs or for you to bowl them out. They would never have had the full 50 overs as there wasn't time for that to be bowled. If no result was reached then it would have been incomplete anyway. 
    I stand corrected so far as the rules are concerned.

    A declaration was unlikely to happen given that, using the example of 45 overs, Bexley were 151-6. If Sandwich had got off to a flyer in the Power Play (say 50-1 off 6) then they would have been in the driving seat and if they had lost a couple of wickets for not very many in that time then they could just have shut up shop. Not many sides at this level are bowled out inside 31 overs especially one like Sandwich who are unbeaten this season.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!