[Cricket] Sussex CCC - 2023 Season Edition

[Titanic]

Draw. #lucky

 

[A1X]

Got away with one there

 

[Gwylan]

Got away with one there

I agree. We really should have batted for a couple more overs and given them 10/12 more to get - they'd have still gone for them but would have had to take more risks.

Still unbeaten in the CC though

 

[DJ NOBO]

Phew….nearly turned a draw into defeat with that declaration.

Re Harmes. He is laughable with names but he can describe the key moments with enthusiasm and a sense of occasion. Some of the junior commentators sounds like they’re reading the shipping forecast when there’s a boundary/wicket.

 

[Sheebo]

Fantastic match - I’m sure someone said it would be a bore draw on here last night

 

[Mackenzie]

Good game, made more interesting by a well judged declaration.

 

[Sheebo]

Unlikely to get a positive result on day four, expect a bore draw unless there is a sudden clatter of wickets.

Found it

 

[Pevenseagull]

Well that was fun

 

[albionalex]

What a great game that was. Think Worcestershire will be kicking themselves though, they should have had that in the bag from where they were.

 

[albionalex]

You leave him alone. His jovial tones are very appreciated here. He's actually very knowledgeable, but NSC always thinks it can do better.

As regards the declaration, setting a team nearly 400 to win on the last day of the match at 5 an over should always put you in pole position.

The declaration was fine, Sussex response has not been.

In the T20's he didn't know the no-ball rule.

I'm sure he's a nice bloke but his commentary is consistently inaccurate.

 

[The Oldman]

I really enjoyed the 4 days of commentary from Harmsy and Braders. Yes they sometimes get things wrong but they entertained and informed me. I know others disagree.
What a great game of cricket though. Neither team deserved to lose.

 

[DJ NOBO]

In the T20's he didn't know the no-ball rule.

I'm sure he's a nice bloke but his commentary is consistently inaccurate.

“So in comes Nathan McAndrew for the start of the new over and the ball is flicked away by Ali to deep square leg and collected by Nathan McAndrew “

 

[Lincolnshire Seagull]

Great game. The closeness at the end suggests it was a pretty good declaration

 

[DJ NOBO]

Great game. The closeness at the end suggests it was a pretty good declaration

Damn or be damned. Getting ten wickets was always unlikely even with our bolstered attack.
But if we’d killed the game this morning by going on too long, it would have gone down like a sack of potatoes.
There’s no doubt Worcs threw away the win.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

I agree. We really should have batted for a couple more overs and given them 10/12 more to get - they'd have still gone for them but would have had to take more risks.

Still unbeaten in the CC though

Although if they had lost a couple of quick wickets while chasing a stiffer target, they'd probably have just shut up shop.
I'd say that if you've finished 4 runs ahead but 2 wickets short of the win, you probably needed to make more time earlier in the game rather than there being anything particularly wrong with the declaration.

 

[Gwylan]

Damn or be damned. Getting ten wickets was always unlikely even with our bolstered attack.
But if we’d killed the game this morning by going on too long, it would have gone down like a sack of potatoes.
There’s no doubt Worcs threw away the win.

Two more overs and I think it would have a finely tuned declaration. We got away with it as Worcs cocked it up

 

[Eeyore]

Two more overs and I think it would have a finely tuned declaration. We got away with it as Worcs cocked it up

Finely tuned declarations are only ever known in hindsight, mind.

If only Tony could lend us his machine.

 

[keaton]

In the T20's he didn't know the no-ball rule.

But he knows about actual cricket

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Finely tuned declarations are only ever known in hindsight, mind.

If only Tony could lend us his machine.

There's that Brearley line that he's supposed to have used when somebody criticised a decision - "you never know, the alternative could have been worse".
Needing a higher run rate might have freed the Worcestershire batters up and then they coast to the win.
Or they might have just blocked out the day.
Or maybe we might have won, despite needing to take more wickets than we managed in less time.
All of those are possible and wouldn't be surprising with hindsight.
Looking at the scorecard, what stands out to me is that our first innings was both the smallest and slowest in the match, and 5 people passed 40 in it but nobody got more than 76.

 

[Eeyore]

There's that Brearley line that he's supposed to have used when somebody criticised a decision - "you never know, the alternative could have been worse".
Needing a higher run rate might have freed the Worcestershire batters up and then they coast to the win.
Or they might have just blocked out the day.
Or maybe we might have won, despite needing to take more wickets than we managed in less time.
All of those are possible and wouldn't be surprising with hindsight.
Looking at the scorecard, what stands out to me is that our first innings was both the smallest and slowest in the match, and 5 people passed 40 in it but nobody got more than 76.

I'm reading Brearley's latest book 'Turning the pebbles'. I'm getting lost in psychoanalytical matrix at the moment.