|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jun 4, 2014 10:48:14 GMT
Glad to see that Cricinfo's reporter at Hove has an eye for the wider cultural values of cricket at Hove link |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jun 4, 2014 11:32:55 GMT
Play due to start at 1.10pm at Hove per website.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2014 11:34:55 GMT
The sun is now breaking through and it's drying rapidly here, 30 or so miles from the ground.
Still plenty of time for Notts to skittle the top order and leave Joyce like Horatio at the bridge again!
on edit: as I feared: while I was writing the above the news breaks that Notts will have something like 72 overs to bowl us out...
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jun 4, 2014 11:53:53 GMT
hhs,
"I sincerely hope that statement doesn't come back to bite you in the bum, s and f..."Oh dear, it was p*ssing down in Hove when I wrote it. No doubt wishful thinking! And now play is due to start at 1.10pm. Goddddd! I better get my bottom cream ready.  PS: The BBC forecast now suggests a playing window of 3 hours this afternoon until rain strikes again at tea. Squeaky bum time ahead. God forbid the ultimate batting collapse. |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jun 4, 2014 13:04:41 GMT
With the greatest of trepidation, I'm delighted that Nash and Wells have put on the first over-50 1st wicket partnership since Joyce and Wells set us on the road to the last win against Warwickshire.
Also that BBC weather predicts heavy rain coming back to the Hove area at 4 pm.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2014 13:41:45 GMT
Century opening stand - exactly what we were asking for, both in terms of runs and character. I hope we can persuade Luke Wells to sign a new contract after media reports that he is unsettled and looking for a county that will give him T20 cricket.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jun 4, 2014 14:16:17 GMT
And now the highest opening stand of the match and of the season, and the second highest stand for any wicet his season.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonfilby on Jun 4, 2014 14:34:09 GMT
At least you've all stopped writing nonsense about Joyce not knowing what he's doing. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonfilby on Jun 4, 2014 14:38:32 GMT
It says a lot about the unfairness of the championship point scoring system that if it rains all day tomorrow Sussex will come out of a game they have been thoroughly outplayed in with just one less point than Notts. You mean a game we would have won if we hadn't been cheated by the weather for the fourth time in seven matches this season? |
|
|
|
Post by jonfilby on Jun 4, 2014 14:40:39 GMT
It says a lot about the unfairness of the championship point scoring system that if it rains all day tomorrow Sussex will come out of a game they have been thoroughly outplayed in with just one less point than Notts. I'd say this is the most important of the many good points raised in the course of this match thread. Notts have out-batted, out-bowled, out-caught, out-fielded and out-thought Sussex, with only Joyce standing between Sussex and an innings-and-plenty defeat. The points system needs major surgery because at the moment it gives far too much reward for mediocrity. This is a classic BM. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2014 14:50:55 GMT
Well since you have chosen to raise the question again, Jon, I still don't know why Joyce put Notts in, given that the last time he invited the opposition to bat at Hove (v Somerset) we lost by an innings. Or after Durham inserted Sussex at Hove three weeks ago and were made to look very foolish as we clobbered a massive 441-5 by close.
If Joyce hadn't atoned for the decison to put Notts in by almost single-handedly saving the follow-on, the likelihood is that Sussex would have suffered a similar result to the Somerset game in this fixture.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jun 4, 2014 14:54:41 GMT
At least you've all stopped writing nonsense about Joyce not knowing what he's doing. Thank you. I don't think that anyone on this thread has suggested that he didn't know what he was doing, as far as I can recall. Several people, including me, have suggested that he and Robinson played too strongly on a theory in the teeth of evidence, particularly in the last few weeks, in opting to bowl first. You may not agree with that, but there have been some arguments presented that really don't deserve to be rubbished without counter arguments being presented, and not just blunt assertions. I can't speak for anyone else on the board, but as a Sussex member, as a lover of cricket, I reserve the right to be critical when the side I have been watching seems to be under-performing, and I think its worth talking about why that might be. It doesn't mean I feel negative about Sussex cricket, far from it, I want to see it strengthen and improve. I'm delighted to have seen Joyce's excellent hundred, and even more pleased in that it was the only solid innings played by a top-order Sussex batsman in the first innings, and saved us from what could have been a very humiliating defeat. Even so, it required further teamwork from Nash and Wells to give us real assurance today, and I would have worried if we had all day to face the Notts attack. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2014 15:04:04 GMT
And since you also raise the question of the points sytem again,Jon, can I refer you to the excellent suggestions for restructuring bonus points on a more nuanced,tiered level put forward by hhsussex, and the arguments advanced for making the incentive for a win over a draw greater than the current 11 pt difference?
The points system as currently constitued often rewards mediocrity in the first innings (you get pts for scoring 200 runs or taking three wkts in 110 overs?) and encourages caution in setting and going for targets in the second innings. The ECB accepts they are struggling to get it right; that's why they keep changing it every other season!
|
|
|
|
Post by mrsdoyle on Jun 4, 2014 15:10:10 GMT
It says a lot about the unfairness of the championship point scoring system that if it rains all day tomorrow Sussex will come out of a game they have been thoroughly outplayed in with just one less point than Notts. You mean a game we would have won if we hadn't been cheated by the weather for the fourth time in seven matches this season? To say, even tongue in cheek, that we would have won this game if not for the weather is pushing it a bit, Notts were only 4 down in their second innings when they declared, no doubt with an eye on the very weather you allude to. I have to say I agree with the majority view that we should have batted first. I was willing it to rain all day but I'm glad now that the sun came out and Sussex's openers had a chance to show their class. |
|
|
|
Post by jonfilby on Jun 4, 2014 15:13:42 GMT
Well since you have chosen to raise the question again, Jon, I still don't know why Joyce put Notts in, given that the last time he invited the opposition to bat at Hove (v Somerset) we lost by an innings. Or after Durham inserted Sussex at Hove three weeks ago and were made to look very foolish as we clobbered a massive 441-5 by close. If Joyce hadn't atoned for the decison to put Notts in by almost single-handedly saving the follow-on, the likelihood is that Sussex would have suffered a similar result to the Somerset game in this fixture. Seriously? Or are you just being a bit of an agent provocateur?
It is literally impossible to bowl a half competent team out on this type of Hove pitch and I hope we would agree we are at least half competent. Even if we had Notts at 65-5 at lunch on Day one as was entirely possible given the way we bowled and the way they batted, a draw was still the most likely outcome.
There has not been a millisecond of the last four days when I thought we might lose this match.
And yes I do hope that the last two matches at Hove will be played on Andy's faster pitches.
|
|
