Final provides talking points
I wonder if a single one-day final ever gave rise to so many talking points as this one.
First, we must congratulate Durham on their first major success. To be put into bat in such helpful conditions and then to post the highest 50 overs score in a final was a great achievement, and it allowed many of us to enjoy our first taste of Phil Mustard’s devastating ability at the top of the order.
His left-handedness is a great benefit, and he also kept wicket very tidily. Since the selectors have chosen one or two horses for courses for the Twenty20 tournament in South Africa, his omission does seem to be an oversight.
The evergreen and charming Ottis Gibson also played a key role in Durham’s victory with wickets off the first two deliveries of the Hampshire innings, and a tremendous burst of hitting.
Having struck a six and a four from his first two balls, he was then on the receiving end of a beamer from Chris Tremlett. This is the second example of this wretched lack of sportsmanship we have seen this month, and while one hopes that this was an accident, most former pace bowlers - me included - will tell you that a beamer delivered at full speed is almost impossible to bowl by mistake.
There is such a huge disparity in length between a normal delivery and a beamer that professionals should not be capable of erring so significantly. I would like to see Sri Sreesanth and Tremlett added to a list of those who have bowled beamers at this level, and then suspended from the game if they ever repeat it.
The experiment enabling players to appeal against an umpire’s decision, meanwhile, was always shortsighted, foolish and destined to fail.
Apart from going against the entire spirit and moral code that cricket holds dear, and entirely contradicting the ECB’s own drive to improve players’ behaviour, the umpires themselves would never accept it. Umpires are a team of their own, and how one of them is expected to show up one of their own is absurd, as well as unkind.
The sight of Mustard hovering by the gate in front of the famous Lord’s pavilion as he attempted to contest his lbw decision - as he was entitled to do - was as unsavoury as it gets, and should ensure that this ridiculous experiment is canned immediately.
The last thought should be this: if it is acceptable for international matches, including the World Cup Final, to be decided in a day by Duckworth/Lewis, why on earth does the ECB still insist on encouraging the desperate anti-climax of taking a final into a second day?
That's certainly the question Durham supporters who missed their side's moment of glory after travelling down on Saturday will be asking.
I agree with the complaints over the second day Aggers. I was at Lord's yesterday supporting Durham, but although I live much closer to london than most of Durham's supporters (about 30 miles) wit the poor weather and with so little cricket remaining, and also knowing that most of the guys I enjoyed the day with yesterday would be back in the north east, I didn't go down today. The match would still have been contested over 82.3 quality overs, and this morning was unnecessary. (although it allowed Plunkett to redeem himself from yesterday...)
I would like to congratulate Durham, and say how much we all enjoyed watching the match yesterday, and I would also like to thank Warne for sending Powell down to the Compton stand to field for a few overs at the end, where he was 'congratulated' by us for his stirling efforts in conceding runs.
Let's hope Durham can continue the success next year!
Complain about this postThe Game was all but over they had gone through 32 overs before moving into the second day, wasn't this the same board that complained about not using world cup reserve days?
Complain about this postA tremendous result for Durham - well done!
Regarding the 2-day final, I have great sympathy for the travelling supporters but I still feel that it's better to play the match in full if at all possible, rather than resorting to Duckworth Lewis.
This is what happens in other major sports, ie tennis and golf. You don't see them stopping the Wimbledon final due to rain, and simply awarding the trophy to the player who is winning. Additionally, the cricket world cup final was widely regarded to be farcical and should never have been reduced to 38 overs per side.
Complain about this postIts always nice to see warney end up on the losing side isnt it! Lovely!
Complain about this postIt's a case of damned if they do and damned if they don't.
Most people thought that it was ridiculous for the World Cup final to be completed the way it was and felt that a game with potentially so much life left in it should have been carried over into the second day - it would have given Sri Lanka a far more sporting chance given that, at the point when it became clear that the Duckworth/Lewis method would decide the game, they had quality batsmen who were forced into playing shots they would not have played had there been a second day available.
If they had known that they would complete their allotted overs, the Sri Lankan batsmen may have been content to allow the run-rate to climb during their World Cup final innings rather than trying to get their noses in front at the end of each over, just in case it was the last.
Prior to being forced into playing more shots than he was comfortable with given the number of overs left, I seem to remember Jayasuriya building an innings that was starting make the Aussies uncomfortable...
Yet, of course, coming back this morning to an empty ground was pretty anti-clamatic given the state of the game.
But Duckworth/Lewis always seems an unsatisfactory way to end a game. At least with the resumption this morning the game was decided emphatically.
So perhaps the ICC and ECB need a more subtle rule, one which would need extremely careful fine tuning, one which dictates whether to employ the Duckworth/Lewis method or whether to complete the following day, depending on the state of the game.
Of course, the umpires and the players always need to know what rules they are playing to so any such rule would not always fit the situation perfectly. But it might be preferable.
Why not say that if three fifths of the chasing side's innings are completed the game should be decided on the Duckworth/Lewis method. If not, it should go to a second day to give both teams a fair chance of deciding the game in the normal way.
Of course, each team would have to decide which course to take during the 25th-29th overs if the weather was an obvious factor. Should they play for the second day or for a Duckworth/Lewis result and the risks that entails.
I don't think that would be a bad thing. It would have made the closing overs of yesterday's play far more interesting!
Complain about this postCongratulations Durham.
How many people were in attendences for the 2nd day?
Complain about this postHello Michael Atherton,
Please call for Tremlet to be banned for bowling a beamer at Otis Gibson.
If you do not it will you will expose yourself.
Complain about this postFrom what I remember, after the farce of the World Cup final having to be decided on the day as the ICC had not allocated a second day to it, you were commenting on how silly it was and that the ICC had been shortsighted and foolish as it allowed the final to be ruined.
Now I see that less than 6 months later, you have changed your tune.
Some consistency please, Mr Agnew.
Complain about this postCongratulations to Durham, and what a splendid game. But can someone please explain why the BBC failed to provide any television coverage of the Friends Provident final - not even a highlights programme? Apart from the inevitable diet of football, BBC television coverage this weekend has featured several other sports (eg, badminton, rugby and show-jumping) but not cricket. Whatever the reasons, I cannot see how the BBC (with its public service obligation) can continue to justify its discrimination against cricket. Nor can I remotely conceive of a situation where the FA Cup Final [football's equivalent] would not be televised.
Complain about this postAs regards the beamer
Does Tiger Woods hit a very wayward drive?
Do footballers knock a penalty 5 feet over the bar?
Do bowlers spray it so far wide that it is taken by 2nd slip?
Pressure does strange things to you and professional or not Chris Tremlett could easily have bowled that by accident.
Complain about this postSuppose it makes more headlines if you think he did it on purpose.
Durham put INTO bat? Shame on you Aggers! I pity the poor creature. Durham's a big place.
Complain about this postI attended the match on Saturday and like many left as soon after the players walked off. It was fairly likely that there would be no more play for the day.
I understand play was not called off until 18 44 - some considerable time after that.
The suggestion is that a decision should have been made at the same time that Durham had won. Why? There was a further day allocated for completion of the match.
It is unsatisfactory when a match does not run it's full course in the allotted time but there have been that many more at the ground at 18 44 to witness the presentation than were in the ground when Hampshire's final wicket fell on Sunday?
Supposing the outcome had been less easy to predict when rain stopped play on Saturday Would the supporters of both teams been content with a decision to use the D/L method?
How do you justify the irritable assertion that ECB shouild sort this out? The present arrangements are fine by me.
Harry Ball
Complain about this postMr Thomas...
They did not have the rights to show any highlights...
Now weather they should try and get some is a different matter.
Complain about this postGreig, as someone who has performed at the top level, I'd suggest that Aggers knows a thing or two about bowling. I believe Paul Allott and Michael Holding have said the very same thing. I don't think it's headline seeking at all and shows consistency when the same people castigated Sreesanth for bowling a beamer.
Complain about this postI think it was deplorable that the ECB allowed both sides to wear identical pyjamas for a final. It made it extremely difficult to tell who was batting and who was fielding.
As others have said, the decision about the extra day was a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. Yes, it is fair for both sides to know that they have fifty overs available. On the other hand, the certainty of a result on the day and the opportunity to celebrate with supporters who have travelled from distance for a special day out is very important too. On this occasion they made the wrong decision, quite clearly, but they have to be consistent with other days when it will not be as clear-cut. Then again, would the Hampshire batsmen have started their innings in the same way, with the same result, had they known a DL decision was likely?
Complain about this postI bet that if was decided by D/L after first day the comments would have been why did the ECB not schedule a second day!
Complain about this postReference comment #9 I do just wonder what sort of service the BBC wwould offer if indeed they were allowed to put their license fee at the same rate as Sky charge for watching cricket.
If we are to encourage the best youngsters into the game of cricket then it needs to be more widely available on TV than the Sky fee allows.
It is the only way I can watch cricket so I am obliged to subscribe - but there are many I am sure who just can not afford it
john
Complain about this postIan
So how is it that other professionals, including cricketers makes horrendous mistakes that they would never normally make. What they are saying then is that EVERY beamer is on purpose.
Complain about this postJust because they have played at the highest level doesnt mean we cant disagree with their opinion
The BBC should definitely be making an attempt to show the big cricket matches to the masses - as happens with football and rugby. Also, they would provide far better coverage. Sky's insistance of placing the scoreboard in the bottom left of the screen is the least of their flaws.
But i find it extremely frustrating that various independent enquiries continue to deny the BBC the funds they need to provide a total public service.
Complain about this postAt the end of the day, very few cricket supporters care about the FP trophy. Thats sad. But its obvious why - television (i.e. the BBC) doesn't, so as its not part of the national heritage (place alongside that, Test Cricket, some England football games, some Scotland, Wales and NI games, some international rugby games, major golf tournaments, the list goes on..) we shouldnt worry about it. After all, we as a British nation have always been head over heels in love with badminton, speedway, horse dancing, ice skating, 5000m, who can sing in any rubbish musical etc... So, stop complaining. We have wonderful programming to look forward to.
Complain about this postEvening all,
I was standing eating a burger behind the media centre when the innings commenced, right under the stand containing the Durham support. A huge roar went up - could only mean one thing, yep, confirmed moments later on the big screen. Not great we said, but it happens, then another roar, more hysterical, yeah, but that's a replay isn't it ? isn't it ? I said to the sea of faces, some with a burger in the middle, some open mouthed, all looking like rabbits in the headlights........
Complain about this postIn reply to "sweetalkinguy" (post #15) who complained that he could not tell tell which side was batting due to the similar team colours:
The players in the batting team were probably the ones waving cricket bats about!!
Complain about this postI Must admit that it looked very bad for the game of cricket to play out a major final in front of thousands of empty seats today.
Complain about this postNot a great advert for the sport at all in a year of cricket farces.
"Worse still the farcical final, which could have been played over two days, remember, was an embarrassment to anyone associated with cricket."
Jonathan Agnew, 29th April '07, after the World Cup final.
Complain about this postAs a Hampshire supporter who has seen all our five finals may I open by congratulating Durham for being the best (at times only) side. I'm sorry for their supporters who had to go home - it's a wonderful feeling to see your team actually lift the trophy and their supporters were terrific all day and deserved that thrill.
One other comment about D/L and 2nd days. I sat at Lord's with people who have been watching county cricket for decades. Not for the first time this year there was some uncertainty about how many overs of the second innings constitutes a match. Most of us thought 10 overs but a few 20. So we checked the Programme - nothing. So we checked the Scorecard - again nothing.
Given the complex and almost always different rules for every cricket competition (international and domestic) it could be quite clever to let spectators know what they are, especially for the big games which attract 'casual' fans - or would that just be too sensible?
Complain about this postMaybe there should be a Duckworth/Lewis method for matches that spread in to 2 days to allow for one of the sides (maybe) having to re-start their innings.
Complain about this postThat should help to make things a little more complicated for everyone.
I totally agree Aggers - the 2nd day was a waste of time. As an exiled son of Durham I was fortunate enough to be able to follow up witnessing the excellent 1st day with being able to go along to the 2nd day.
Unfortunately, as we know, thousands of others weren't able to do the same. In fact, even though I live down here I missed today's cricket and only just managed to make the presentation (thanks Radio5Live weatherwoman - "There'll be no play here before 2pm"!).
I drove like a dervish from Surrey at 12.10pm when I heard play was about to start and managed to pull up outside Lords just as the last wicket fell. However I would like to pass on heartfelt thanks to the Lords security staff for ensuring the safety of the ground as my sons (8 & 6) and I arrived, firstly informed us that the game was over and then insisted we produce our tickets and then have our bags checked as we tried to dash through to at least witness the trophy presentation. Thankfully we were able to do this.
However, the whole achievement of the occaison was undoubtedly diminished by the empty stands and I think the appropriate authorities must take the obvious decision and apply D/L after 20 overs.
I really feel sorry for all those Durham fans who had to return home on Saturday without seeing the trophy raised and I only hope that the thought that the game was well and truly won was of some consolation to them as they made their way home.
Finally, well done Ottis on the MOM award but my chief suspect was Colonel Mustard, in the Long Room, aggressively wielding a piece of willow (and the victim was Ms Warne!)
Howay the lads!
J
Complain about this postGreig,
I'm just suggesting that people who have bowled hundreds or thousands of overs at the top level, dealing with the pressure that goes with it, and who have never made such a mistake, know something of which they speak.
In any case, I certainly have no objections to differences of opinion and I certainly disagree with your implication that the reason it was written was for headline grabbing.
Anyway, I enjoyed the final - shame it wasn't closer and concluded in one day.
Complain about this postSo Aggers was the conclusion to the world cup final acceptable?
It's highly unfortunate when a final goes into a second day,but i feel its important to have the game played out to its conclusion in such an important game.
Complain about this postBefore criticising the BBC for favouritism towards other sports over cricket with regard to quantity of coverage, try finding out what the law is first. FYI - below is an extract from the Broadcasting 1986 so if you want to criticise anyone for lack of cricket coverage on terestrial tv, try our political overlords and those with responsibility for government policy within DCMS.
Some sporting events are classified as listed events which broadly means that they have to be shown on
Complain about this postfree-to-air TV. The listed events legislation divides broadcasters into two categories, essentially free-toair
and pay-TV plus Channel 5 and S4C. There is only one list but the Secretary of State (who draws up
the list) has decreed that there should be two groups within the list that are treated differently. The
objective of the legislation is to ensure that no broadcaster in either category has exclusive rights to the
live broadcasts of the events listed. This criterion is applied to Group A events. For Group B events, the
criterion is modified so that the objective is satisfied if there is adequate and timely secondary coverage
by a broadcaster in the other category. In effect, this means that all the events in the Group B list could
be shown exclusively on pay-TV.
Group A The Olympic Games
The FIFA World Cup Finals Tournament
The FA Cup Final
The Scottish FA Cup Final (in Scotland)
The Grand National
The Derby
The Wimbledon Tennis Finals
The European Football Championship Finals Tournament
The Rugby League Challenge Cup Final
The Rugby World Cup Final
Group B Cricket test matches played in England
Non-finals play in the Wimbledon Tournament
All other matches in the Rugby World Cup Finals Tournament
Six Nations Rugby Tournament matches involving Home Counties
The Commonwealth Games
The World Athletics Championship
The Cricket World Cup—the final, semi-finals and matches involving home nations’
teams
The Ryder Cup
The Open Golf Championship
Post number 7 - why on earth do you want Mike Atherton to expose himself, you filthy beast?
Complain about this postCant agree sorry.
dissapointed in aggers to be fair.
Complain about this posti bowled at, i admit, school level only but know every so often the ball can slip from time to time, perhaps there is a certian level of talent that this error doesn`t afflict but i would like to know if bearders or anyone can name a quick bowler who has never bowled a beamer. as for duckworth/lewis it is still an abysmal way to decide a game of cricket that does not reach 30 overs a side. if 60 overs can be bowled in a day fair enough if 30/30 but as unpredictable as the weather is, you can never determine if this will happen there fore enough time should take place to make sure at least a minimum of overs are bowled as thee can be no no result to a final what can you do
Why do the idiots turn this FP trophy blog into a rant about the BBC's Sports coverage of Cricket.
Complain about this postThey couldnt show these highlights as they dont own the rights to the games, Sky owns the rights, get that through to your minds.
As for who to blame, blame the Government who turned Test Cricket and all into a Grade B listed event, Channel 4 lost out, Sky won, the BBC didnt even bother!
So stop rabbiting on about BBC's coverage of Cricket, they have TMS still..isnt that good enough untill 2010!
Well done to Durham for winning the FP Trophy.
At least Warne didnt win, it wiped the smirk of his face.
Also about the 2 Day final, You aggers told Bhasin that it was a farcial now you call a 2 day final a farcial.
At least TMS got 2 days of ine cricket and Sky had to adjust its schedule!
1. Stick to one opinion Aggers, either 2 days is bad or good, it cant be either depending on whether he game looks won or not.
2. Beamers can and often do occur accidentally. Tremlett certainly looked suprised and sorry enough by the outcome himself. Being professional might mean it happens less, but under pressure, when your trying to eert that little bit extra effort after two poor balls it can happen. Very rare yes, but then despite seeing two in a month I have only really seen two in about 5 years.
3. BBC can not show highlights, they didnt bid enough for them. They have a limited budget which they need to cater for all sports. Dispite some silly statements here it is not the subscription fee (the totalled TV licence payments would be more than total Sky subscriptions) but the inability to sell advertising that holds the beeb back.
4. Even if they could afford it I wouldnt bother with the FP trophy, or any county cricket to that matter on the beeb. International cricket is the only level where the quality, interest and star players are there to justify spending money and valuable transmission time in the first place. Most fo the County Cricklet on sky this season has been so bad I have turned off even when nothign else of remote interest is on.
Complain about this postYes, the World Cup Final wasn't farcical or anti-climactic at all, was it?
Complain about this postAggers
Complain about this postCompletely agree with you re beamers. Unfortunately nothing will be done until someone is seriously hurt. It would be interesting to compile a ball by ball history that leads to a ball being bowled as a beamer. My guess is that there had been a boundary or a dropped chance or play and miss the previous ball and most times it will have been a tailender facing.
I won't be holding my breath waiting for authorities to do some thing though. The "second" day is another example of cricket being administered by incompetence.
Rgds Steve
Well quite honestly I dont agree with many things that you have mentioned here Agnew.
Complain about this postI have to disagree with a couple of your comments here. First of all regarding the "second day". I do see the point you have made, but it has been clouded by the fact this was such a one sided game, and Hampshire were in something of a "no win" situation going into a second day. Would you still agree that a second day was not a good idea had the game been finely balanced on the Saturday??? Let's say that the D/L situation had the 2 teams very close, but that Durham were considered winners by 2 runs. I think Hampshire fans would have been very happy to be given the second day to try to get past that small deficit and win it. So, on this occasion, i don't think it is fair to criticise the ECB because it is impossible for them to cover all eventualities, and you can't have a rule that changes depending on the state of the game. A rule must be fixed. I also find it hard to believe that a lot of Durham fans had not booked the whole weekend. I certainly would not travel from London to Durham and come back the same day. Also, i am sure the tickets would have been issued with a proviso for a second day.
Complain about this postRegarding the comment about Mustard being a "horses for courses" selection for England. I acknowledge that Jonathon is a much greater cricket expert than myself. I can only say that i am happy that you are not a selector Jonathon!!! The name of who is our best option for wicketkeeper keeps changing with whoever is in form. A few months ago, everybody was suggesting Tim Ambrose, before that it was James Foster or Chris Read back again. Jonathon...you must remember from your own playing days that selectors used to be inconsistent like this and make knee jerk selections. Since the David Graveney era, selection policy has become much more consistent and reliable. Not always perfect of course, and we all think we can do a better job. I am afraid that because Mustard had a good final, you are guilty of throwing his name up immediately as an England contender. Good or bad, Prior is the current holder of that position, and he should stay for a little while yet please.
I am not sure that the beamer from Tremlett was on purpose, and prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt, and i don't think we want to go down the "offenders list" route. It is just not cricket to do that.
Finally, absolutely agree with you about the 3rd umpiring decisions. This is indeed against the spirit of cricket, and i hope the Mustard incident will show this up and make the authorities wthdraw all thoughts of proceeding with this ridiculous idea.
Apart from all that, keep up the good work with TMS!!! Thank you
I've been writing to the ECB for years trying to get some sense out fo them regarding the Sky decision, non-recognition of Welsh players (why not England & Wales rather than England)) and other fiascos, and have not yet made any headway. Given the make-up of the Board I can't see why anybody is surprised when they make silly decisions. Why don't you campaign for a root and branch change in the way cricket is run?
Complain about this postI agree very much with Aggers about beamers however, I would go further. "two strikes and you are out" - and I mean per *season*. As he says, a bowler does not bowl a beamer by mistake whatever he may say. At eighty five to ninety miles per hour a beamer is potentially a lethal delivery which cannot be allowed to pass without sanction. Chidish petty retaliation to being 'smeared all over the park' should not feature in a professional game.
Complain about this postI did not make the journey to Lords.A one day excursion ticket always meant that there was the of possibility of inclement weather and missing the conclusion of the game.So listened to TMS and went to St James Park instead.Hardly missed a ball.As for the wicket keeping issue I would make the following points:
Complain about this postMustard's performance was not a one off.He has performed to this standard throughout the season in one day competitions.
He is a far more accomplished keeper than Prior.His glove work has been consistently good throughout the season in all forms of cricket.
He is a rapidly improving cricketer.
However regard should perhaps be paid to the post match comments of captain Blenkenstein that he is not yet ready for international cricket.Certainly that is the case for his batting in the longer forms of cricket-too hit and miss-literally!Perhaps a winter tour as an understudy.
As for the beamer, the timing was a bit suspicious.
Referals? Surely some entrepreneur will now develope helmets with built in earpieces so that dressing room verdicts can be relayed to batsman as soon as replays are viewed.Or is that being ridiculous?
Just like to add my voice to those pointing out that after the world cup final, Aggers was asking why it wasn't played over two days. He also asked why reserve days weren't being used when matches were reduced to, in some cases, just 22 overs a side.
Complain about this postCongratulatiosn Durham, a well deserved victory. And for a man with a smirk Warne immediatley congratulated Blenkenstein following his (Warne's) dismissal. He was magnanimous in his speech at the presentation ceremony.
I believe the match was correctly given a reserve and as David Ingram point # 38 said it was only due to the one sidedness that brings this decision into question.
Certainly on the Saturday at 18:44 there were very few fans left so using D/L would not have helped the Durham fans witness the presentation.
Dave Allen is right the playing conditions should have been printed in the programme especially as the annoucement that play could be extended to 20:00 was late in being announced, long after many fans had departed.
The Sunday was advertised as being the reserve day on the tickets and on posters outside the ground. Given the weather this year it was prudent to stay over. Nonetheless it was a shame for the Durham fans that only a few hundred witnessed Blenkenstein lifting the trophy.
The experiment of contesting decisions has to be scrapped, the fans hate it, the umpires hate it and the players hate it.
Complain about this postHow can it be a 'One Day Final' if it is going to be played over TWO days??
The ECB are authoritarian and arrogant,with those two attributes there is no capacity for commonsense.
Complain about this postRe comment # 27, Colonel Mustard never faced Ms Warne. Warne didn't bowl until the 20th over long after Mustard had departed.
Complain about this postSorry Aggers but the Hans Lashermann method of deciding cricket games is a farce...just look at Derbys vs Surrey yesterday what an absolute sham of a cricket game....Surrey knew the rain was acoming in big spade loads and just had to be above the required rate...easy peesy for them...tough on Derbys...no it puts me right off the "game"...and yes you have to pay to watch this stuff...no wonder the game is on the wane...I say get rid of Hans and have reserve days or replay games...that is what the spectator wants but of course that is not really on for the powers given their tv contracts...is it???
Complain about this postNobody would have been complaining if it was a closer game
Complain about this postInteresting that Aggers does not like the appeal system.
If Warne had used it when Chanderpaul was plumb lbw to Tremlett when on about 17, would the outcome have been any different?
I've no problem with umpires being left to get on with it providing they are held accountable if they get it consistently wrong.
Ian Howell in the recent Test series for example should be sitting in the opticians chair rather than standing in another match after his decisions against both England and India.
Often it's not technology undermining the umpires, it's bad performances. If players can be dropped for a string of bad performances then so should officials. In the meantime, let technology defend the players from poor umpiring and defend good umpires from the poor judgement of observers (such as me!).
Complain about this postAbsolutely right about the second day Aggers...
What a joke as everyone left the ground knowing Durham had won but with the ECB's witless decision meaning that Durham collected their first trophy in front of a smattering of people on Sunday morning rather than the vociferous thousands who had made their way down from God's county for the day! Absolute rubbish!
Fabulous day of cricket though... Great knocks from "Colonel", Coetzer, Chanderpaul and Benkenstein, and what can we say aboyut Durham's favourite adopted Bajan - Ottis was class!!!
Congratulations to Geoff Cook and all of the team; ECB, hang your heads for taking the edge off an historic day in Durham cricketing history.
Complain about this post"a beamer delivered at full speed is almost impossible to bowl by mistake"
Agreed, and with the point that those who bowl deliberate beamers should get a warning and then a suspension. But it did look to me like Tremlett was attempting a slower ball off his middle finger and slipped. It certainly didn't come through at full pace. Plus Gibson didn't seem to mind at all.
Complain about this postFor those complaining about Aggers' comments on beamers, perhaps you should check more carefully what he actually said before commenting. He said " ... a beamer delivered *at full speed* is almost impossible to bowl by mistake".
Of course a ball can slip from a bowler's hand or he can make a mistake, but in those circumstances the ball simply does not come out of the hand at those speeds.
I am happy to bow to the knowledge and experience of Aggers and other, more highly respected, fast bowlers on this issue rather than the opinions of anonymous blog commenters.
Complain about this postAggers, are you in favour of the two day final option or not - didn't you call for the two day final in an interview after the WC earlier this year. Both the WC and FP finals had anti-climatic finishes - however completion of the match (if even it is over two days) is the correct way of doing it. I do feel for the Durham fans that were unable to savour the moment.
Complain about this postI think the decision to allow the final to go into a second day was ludicrous. Fans such as myself had travelled a long way and spent vast amounts of money to attend this match, and because of having to travel home again, we were denied the chance to see the end of the match.
The rule which allows this shows complete disregard for travelling fans, and I believe that fans will be less likely to attend finals in the future when they know there is a chance they will not be able to see the game through to its conclusion.
Complain about this postI agree with the comments over the complete nonsense of using the reserve day for a maximum of 17.3 overs that were remaining.
I was at Lord's on Saturday supporting Hampshire, but totally accept that we were completely outplayed by the better team on the day and that Durham deserved the victory. As such, their fans who had made the long trip south should also have been rewarded by being able to see their team lift the first ever first-class trophy.
It is my belief that the reserve day is there in case a significant part of the game is rained off, for example if it rains all day or if not enough of the second innings is played to produce a Duckworth/Lewis result. It's not there to ensure that 100 overs are bowled, but to ensure that a fair amount of cricket is staged for the benefit of both the teams and the supporters.
We had faced 32 overs, which in any other circumstances would be comfortably enough to call a result on. Saturday shouldn't have been any different, and it made Sunday a complete farce with a few hundred people in the ground to see Dale Benkenstein lift the trophy.
Another own goal by the ECB, I'm afraid.
Complain about this postThere are three major differences between the world cup final and the FP final:
1: In the world cup they went BACK to play even though it was too dark to see. If they had finished the match and said Australia had won when they first went off there would have been no uproar! Here was different as they didnt finish even though they could have done. Aggers only commented that it was unfortunate for the fans. (at the world cup it was a shambles)
2: The world cup was horrendously organised from the very beginning at the final was just the tip of the ice-berg.
3: The WC Final was closer and a more prestigeous event with people tuning in worldwide. with all due respect the FP trophy is only important in england and even then probably now the 3rd most important trophy.
Complain about this postOk so maybe Hampshire had blown it on the first day but surely it would have been better to finish the game. I for one would not liked to see it go down to D/L, I'd rather have seen Durham win it the proper way so I congratulate the ECB for using the reserve day
Of course this does not withdraw the fact that it was an excellent victory for Durham
Complain about this postInteresting comments one and all (except for the bloke who wants Atherton to expose himself ... strange man) ... my tuppence worth, beamers are for cowards and Gibson responded the best way - by taking wickets, something trembler didn't manage... I'm glad the match went to the 2nd day as that way Hampshire had 50 overs to score the required runs rather than some dodgy mathematical formula deciding anything ... and let's be honest here, while spectators are extremely important to the game, the game itself is surely the most important thing ... if it needs 2 days for a conclusion it gets 2 days ... And by the way, Durham fans can sing (even if they speak a weird dialect!) whereas Hampshire fans can only swear and moan ... i'm a neutral but know who i'll support next time ...
Complain about this postAs a Hampshire fan, as disappointing as it is, all I can say is the best team won. I agree with most of what Aggers has said but I would replace D/L with something based on runs per over combined with wickets lost. I can explain in detail but not on here.
The only other comment I would make is, I couldn't fathom why Hampshire changed the batting order.
Complain about this postThe umpires' appeal has worked in tennis and I do not see why is should not in cricket.It is silly when all the viewers can see a decision is wrong that it cannot be corrected.
Complain about this postAggers was going on about it at great length on TMS. No doubt he was saying the same about the introduction of third umpires.
Derrick, I'm with Aggers. The appeal (i.e. challenge) system is a shocking idea and should be dropped from cricket and all sports worldwide - including tennis.
To say it has "worked" in tennis means merely that it has provided cheap thrills for those who are more interested in the drama of the sport than than the sport itself (probably about 80% of an average Wimbledon crowd).
No system which provides players a mechanism to challenge the officials should ever be permitted. Worse still, the tennis system has inherited a quota system from American football, where the whole ghastly business inevitably started. This conveys an even more insidious message - i.e. that it is not important to get to get ALL decisons right - only the ones the PLAYERS think important.
Refereeing/umpiring should not be a matter of tactics.
Complain about this postCongratulations to Durham on a fabulous performance. Having passed Wembley on the train and been reminded of so many disappointments, it was great to 'see' a north-east team lift some silverware, even if we didn't actually do that. It was an amazing performance and heart-warming to see supporters from Tees-side to Northumberland united behind their team. It was a wonderful experience to visit Lords, not least to realise that the tales of their ever helpful stewards were so accurate as we were held up from entering the ground even though the bowling was from the other end and misdirected to our seats three times.
Complain about this postNow for the Double!
Re post 45. Errrr..... Paul - it wasn't meant to be taken literally. Lady Warne put us in and Colonel Mustard let him have it with both barrels (and yes, before you reply, I know I'm mixing my metaphors having alreay suggested that the 'murder weapon' was a willow!) Cheers, John.
Complain about this postwere you not the same man who said in his coloumn that the world cup final should have gone into a 2nd day ?
Complain about this postIt's very much a case of six of one, half a dozen of the other. I think reserve days are a good idea, and fair. However, I do agree with your point. Most people wouldn't, or couldn't, travel down on the Saturday then the Sunday. Sadly this 'hottest year ever' has been a bit of a wash out.
Congratulations to Durham, and bad luck to Hampshire.
With regards to your comments on beamers, and the experiment enabling players to appeal, I think you are absolutely correct. The umpire's decision is final. If he or she gives you out, then you are out. Some days you'll get a bad decision, other days you'll get a good decision.
Incidentally why are beamers allowed?
Complain about this postI think a beamer should mean a days sin bin. Its a dangerous killer ball that is all most impossible to pick up until the last moment.
In wet conditions it is possible with a wet ball, but at the first class level, covered wickets, towels, ball inspections, this should not come into the equation.
Aggers as you know a bowler might bowl 1-2 in his career. So we need to get tough on beamers.
I'm not a great fan of Duckworth Lewis. It like the natural result of the game, 11 against 11 until the duel is over.
Complain about this postI disagree with your views on appealing against the umpire's decisions. We have seen extremely poor decisions in the recent past. And, if I maight borrow your logic regarding beamers being bowled deliberately, the umpires standing 22 yards in front of the batsman can not genuinely make such mistakes. We have seen such matters not long ago when Pakistan were here.
Complain about this postYes, you do have a point. Umpires are a clan. They will not let down their own fellow members. We have seen that too in the past. The solution to that has been talked about by Michael Holding. He insists that the appeal should be made to an independent body. And, Michael went on to say, that if an umpire continues to make many mistakes, he should be removed.
Nasser Hussein objects to the use of modern technology and appeals etc. on the grounds that eventually it will reduce the umpires to the simple task of counting the balls and holding on to the sweaters and caps of bowlers. Perhaps most of them are just capable of that only.
In response to post number 15 what confusion there must be for "sweetalkinguy" when he's watching a Test match when all the players are in whites.
Complain about this postin response to the comment about the similar colour pyjamas being worn and not being able to tell who was batting-was it not obvious by the fact they were holding bats and the fiieders weren't!!
Complain about this postI do take Aggers' point about rain precluding the Duckworth/Lewis method being used to conclude a match.
Would Aggers support a method, such as Duckworth/Lewis, to have enabled a result when England were so cruelly denied victory in the recent Lords test against India? The anti-climax of a draw after 5 days of hard cricket, when one team were so clearly in a winning position seems comparable with his view on concluding a one-day match in an appropriate manner.
Any thoughts???
Complain about this postDear Jonathan
I could not agree more with your comments about our dear friends duckworth -lewis. This was my first Lords final and having enjoyed a freezing day of banter with Hampshire supporters, was denied my victory celebration by 38 minutes(thats all it took to end the game of Sunday). The rain was heavy and contstant at 5-45. The decision could easily have been taken to use Duckworth -Lewis had it been available and we could have had a party in the rain with several thousand supporters enjoying the triumph. Additionally- Crawley was out by a mile! Mustard was unlucky but it was not outrageous, Otis Gibson has the biggest smile in Cricket and Ill swear that KP walked when hit on the pad!
Complain about this postThere is much talk about Wicket Keeper choice based on Batting ability, but surely the first priority should always be ability to keep wicket. Afterall, when was Monte chosen for his fielding prowess or Pieterson for his spin attack! It seems to me that during the wicket keeper discusion, evrybody overlooks one simple fact. For every catch dropped, the wicket keeper then needs to score the equivalent number of runs subsequently scored by the dropped batsman just to get back to posative territory. So if the chosen keeper drops Tendulker on 20 and he then scores 100, the keeper needs to score 80 runs before he has contributed to his teams total. It would have been better to take the catch!
Complain about this post