Specsavers Championship, June 9, 2017
News from the grounds, supporter views and our unrivalled live county scores service
-
-
I personally think reversing the toss rule would resolve the draw issue, give the visiting team the choice to bat or toss should in theory discourage roads, wouldn't encourage spin at all though and would encourage dibbly dobblers......basically whatever choice is made there are draw backs. ah, Yorks can bollox -
-
WICKET: Yorkshire 86/4 (36.3 ov, won the toss) v Somerset
PSP Handscomb lbw b J Overton 25 (73) Partnership: 4 (2.5 ov)
J Overton 7.3-2-17-2 JA Leaning 2* (12) -
WICKET: Gloucestershire 77/4 (35.4 ov) v Notts
GL van Buuren b Hutton 0 (1) Partnership: 0 (0.1 ov)
BA Hutton 4.4-1-17-2 GH Roderick 5* (16) -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
The Oval used to have a reputation for producing incredibly hard, fast, bouncy pitches which made for very good cricket (especially when the Windies were bowling on them). But almost nowhere in world cricket is like that now apart maybe from Perth. I think it's because there's not much variation now -- all pitches are laid using the same loam or whatever and there's only so much you can do to change how they will play.
-
WICKET: Gloucestershire 77/3 (35.3 ov) v Notts
CT Bancroft c †Read b Hutton 37 (96) Partnership: 10 (4.3 ov)
BA Hutton 4.3-1-17-1 GH Roderick 5* (16) -
-
-
i guess where i am coming from is that if groundsmen were obliged to provide better pitches for spin, the counties would naturally be encouraged to find and promote spinners. If the pitch took spin, the spinners would get to bowl, if not, then the seamers do the work. -
Middlesex don't control the pitch at Lords, personally I think it holds them back having a main home ground that is very hard to get a positive result on. I do think the ECB needs to start looking at ground that without the weather playing a major part have too many draws
-
-
-
-
-
-
@SamInglis - a traditional English pitch used to be a seaming greentop which is not at all conducive to spin. Allowing visiting teams the option to bowl first means that teams would be taking a big risk by producing a greentop for their visitors to make first use off.
-
-
-
WICKET: Worcestershire 109/5 (30 ov) v Glamorgan
RA Whiteley c Donald b van der Gugten 6 (21) Partnership: 26 (6.0 ov)
T van der Gugten 8-3-23-3 OB Cox 59* (67) -
-
-
-
-
Going to get sucked in....do not get sucked in...sod it, I still have reservations over the toss rule mainly as I don't think it solves my biggest bug bear with CCC which is teams producing draw pitches week in week out, yes Middx i'm talking about you, amongst others, if anything I suspect counties now err on the side of caution for fear of being put in on a pitch which will do something for bowlers. I also think it doesn't really factor in that due to CCC being 4 and not 5 days that you have to have a slightly different pitch approach to get a result. Hand on heart, other than Somerset, can we honestly say any county has really embraced it? And even then Somerset are getting angry glances from the ECB about their pitches!
-
I do not rate Compton at all (as a Middlesex fan), Stirling's a great player, especially in limited overs who brings some bowling to the table as well (his spin is underused by Middlesex) and he got an invaluable half century last match, done nothing wrong, Compton's done almost everything wrong this season.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
WICKET: Yorkshire 82/3 (33.4 ov, won the toss) v Somerset
GS Ballance b Leach 19 (50) Partnership: 48 (18.3 ov)
MJ Leach 3.4-0-11-1 PSP Handscomb 24* (68) -
thanks for the various comments. I've read the BBC article and listened to the brief recording and I think i get it but it seems an odd solution. Why not make playing a spinner mandatory for both teams? That way the groundsman would be incentivised to provide the desired conditions.
-
WICKET: Surrey 32/1 (8.4 ov) v Essex
RJ Burns c †Foster b Porter 14 (29) Partnership: 32 (8.4 ov)
JA Porter 4.4-1-17-1 MD Stoneman 15* (23) -
