North A & B

[sniper]

Re: North A & B

alrightly then. Tipping I know a little bit If you think winning 5 innings in a row against the two most proven sides is that simple then maybe your the one playing C2. We will worry about making the finals first then we are as good a chance as anyone.

Selma. Semi final: each team bats only once (thats 1 innings)
Grand final: each team may only bat once again, probably twice (thats 2 innings (max), of which you only need to win the second innings to win the game) Sounds like you've got more to worry about than making finals. Good luck anyhow matey, any team thats come this far deserves a shot.

 

[Guru14]

Re: North A & B

Question for all, when comparing wickets to runs what is the quivalent. I go with the theory that a wicket is worth 20 runs thus 5 wockets is worth a ton. Most people go with the theory that a 7 for is equivalent to a ton. In the middle of doing the votes for grade medals & some different thoughts could be handy?????

2time in my time 5 wickets has always been the same as getting a ton. I don't understand clubs that recognise 7 instead of 5. many people would suggest 5 is the equal to 50 but if we use that 100 would be equal to getting all 10. 7 fa is spot on the points system recognises sides making 20 runs to one wicket as you get 2 points a wicket but 5 wickets is the same as making 50 in their eyes for individuals. many different scenarios but I think if you take 5 as a bowler it's similiar to making 100 as a bat.

 

[Sober Symonds]

Re: North A & B

The game has changed enough in the past few seasons to warrant a review of this formula. In the good ol' days of softer wickets and green outfields, surely runs were worth more than they are now that things have swung round so much more in batsmen's favour. Perhaps 0.25 for every wicket ... what do you think?
Traditionally, I have thought getting 5-for might be as valuable as a century, but I think you would find only now might they realistically be considered to be on a par. At First Class level they could be compared maybe, but at local level statistics would clearly demonstrate 5 wicket haul would be far more common than tons. A player scoring 100 runs would occur about as frequently as one taking 7 wickets, so I think that's a fair comparison at this level.
Again, 5-for is a good effort, but it can be fluked sometimes by running through the tail in the space of about 3 overs, when even slogging a hundred could never be that quick & easy.

 

[JP Duminy]

Re: North A & B

2time in my time 5 wickets has always been the same as getting a ton. I don't understand clubs that recognise 7 instead of 5. many people would suggest 5 is the equal to 50 but if we use that 100 would be equal to getting all 10. 7 fa is spot on the points system recognises sides making 20 runs to one wicket as you get 2 points a wicket but 5 wickets is the same as making 50 in their eyes for individuals. many different scenarios but I think if you take 5 as a bowler it's similiar to making 100 as a bat.

I agree that 5 wickets is equal to 100 runs. When you watch international cricket for batsmen the stats come up with 50's and 100's and for the bowling it is 5 W/I and 10 W/M so i don't understand why everyone is making a bigger deal than it should be. I think its pretty self explanitory!!!

So can anyone confirm how many teams are meant to be going down from Nth A and how many are going up??

 

[sniper]

Re: North A & B

To add to the confusion, surely a top order batsmans wicket is worth more than a no11's wicket. There are bowlers in our comp (genreally opening bowlers) that get 2 or 3 top order wickets every game. The medium pacers and spinners tend to get the middle and lower order wickets. Maybe the opening bowler will return to finish off the tail, but essentially he specialises in removing top order bats.
If we were to break it down, maybe any top 5 batsmans' wicket could be worth 30 runs; nos 5-8= 20 and the rest = 10. Complicated but it would embrace quality rather than just reflect sheer mass.
ie. bowler 1 removes 3 top 5 bats and 1 tailender = 100 (3x30 +1x10) 4wkts
ie. bowler 2 removes 1 top 5 bat, a middle order bat and 3 tailenders = 80 (1x30 + 1x20 + 3x10) 5 wkts
In this case bowler 1 is of more value to his team by removing 3 of the more dangerous batsmen of the oposing side even though bowler 2 got more scalps. Thoughts?

In addition; the figures I came up with (runs per batsmans wicket) are quite loose; to gain a more accurate figure we would need to look at an average score of teams throughout the season... so if we played on greentops all season and an average score for the season was 150; then a top order wicket may be worth 20 not 30. On the other hand, if teams were scoring heavily throughout the season 250 ave., we may allocate 40 for a top order wicket.
I believe we should give credit where credit is due and bowlers running through the tail each game shouldn't necessarily overshadow the bowler that may have won the game for his team by removing 2 top order competition gunn bats.

 

[Son of a Gun]

Re: North A & B

Anyone checked out the latest edition of the VTCA's Leading Edge online? What a load of crap. They only put out a few editions each season and this 4 page work of art has a 3 page transcript of an interview with one guy. No coverage at all about team's finals aspirations in north a and b. Another example of what the Association thinks of us!

 

[He who knows best]

Re: North A & B

Anyone checked out the latest edition of the VTCA's Leading Edge online? What a load of crap. They only put out a few editions each season and this 4 page work of art has a 3 page transcript of an interview with one guy. No coverage at all about team's finals aspirations in north a and b. Another example of what the Association thinks of us!

add to that the fact that there is still a question mark over how many teams get relegated and it goes to show you they have ZERO idea on things

3 pages (and more to follow) relating to Scott Porter is rubbish at best

 

[sniper]

Re: North A & B

Not a bad side but some of you blokes get caught up with new guys who have done nothing in this comp. You have to reward solid performances for a couple of years at least. Pizzaro, Shanahan, Windridge done nothing yet.

S. McKay (FU) WK
D. Hackney (EK)
G. Lambeth (WM)
D. Roach (Tulla)
J. Misiti (KP)
A. Manning (FU)
J. Bell (EK)
T. Jeffrey (AH)
D. Zhorodni (Tulla)
S. Brne (whoever)
K. Kambur...... (AH)
12th Bainbridge or Gaymer (PD)
All of these guys have performed consistently. heaps of bowling with 3 seamers, Jeffrey. Bell, Manning & Lambeth to bowl a few overs if necessary. Shame C. Osborne (StBernards) has gone up he would have been a monty and captain.

Manning!???
Goneforplenty-a bit obvious Ashley! I also noticed 90% of your posts under this name are targeted towards bad mouthing your ex CC. skippy skippy skippy

 

[hair of the goat]

Re: North A & B

Pretty spot on with most of that I would reckon, AH to me lack depth and cant win, greenvale to definately play off, who'd of thought they would get smashed outright by the bottom side and then come out and score big runs. They had been written off by a few back then. KP really need to find a bowler to support Blanchett and i think thats there downfall. There batting drops away a fair bit as well. Tulla, well who knows, definately havent got the bowlers to win it, how does the left armer actually get a bowl in the ones let alone open.



You are on the ball mate. That must be why he was picked in the 2s for the last three games! Are you on the selection commitee for Tulla?

 

[demon]

Re: North A & B

Pretty spot on with most of that I would reckon, AH to me lack depth and cant win, greenvale to definately play off, who'd of thought they would get smashed outright by the bottom side and then come out and score big runs. They had been written off by a few back then. KP really need to find a bowler to support Blanchett and i think thats there downfall. There batting drops away a fair bit as well. Tulla, well who knows, definately havent got the bowlers to win it, how does the left armer actually get a bowl in the ones let alone open.



You are on the ball mate. That must be why he was picked in the 2s for the last three games! Are you on the selection commitee for Tulla?

I reckon canary yellow is roachy...hahahaha

 

[WTF!]

Re: North A & B

G'day guys! Interesting happening in the North B last round game of Flemington Vs Moonee Valley. As some may already be aware, last week was washed out due to a broken hose that wet one end of the pitch on the Fri night before the game. The curator then went about trying to rectify the wicket and get it up for the Sat play but with one end wet, had to leave the covers off as we all know, you don't put covers down on a wet deck if you are wanting it to dry. Sat morning rolls around and the wet end is still damp so goes about getting it ready for the next 5 hrs. The wet affected area starts about 2.5m in front of the batting crease stretching back behind the popping crease but is still a touch soft after constant rolling and drying at around 12.30 when the capts and umpire meet to discuss. The umpire hands it over to the capts and they agree to call the game off on the basis of an agreement to play a one dayer next week as the toss would be too crucial. Bear in mind Flem have nothing play for, will miss finals, MV sit 2nd about 3pts behind top and 6+pts in front of 3rd so only a loss will affect them. Everyone agrees and everyone heads home. That night MV put on the website that they won the game due to forfeit by Flem. They also lodge an appeal to the VTCA to claim maximum points based on Flem not having put covers down on Fri night. Appeal is upheld at the VTCA Tribunal during the week with maximum pts given to MV and no game to be played this week! VTCA confirm the hose issue was an accident and that not putting covers down was the correct course of action to take. However because Flem didnt contact the VTCA on Fri night to seek permission to leave covers off, game is forfeited!
Fair enough. By the book, thats what it states but surely some common sense should come into play. Or change the god damn rule.
Secondly, how dodgey from MV and their Fat Captain to have an agreement to play a 1 dayer the next week and then lodge an appeal! If no agreement had been made at 12.30, the players would have waited a couple of hrs until the pitch would have been playable and played a reduced overs game, probably 60-65 overs per side!
Unbelievabley poor on their part and one can only hope that the cricketing gods will get them once again now given they will head into a semi final without match practice the preceding 2 weeks.

 

[2time]

Re: North A & B

G'day guys! Interesting happening in the North B last round game of Flemington Vs Moonee Valley. As some may already be aware, last week was washed out due to a broken hose that wet one end of the pitch on the Fri night before the game. The curator then went about trying to rectify the wicket and get it up for the Sat play but with one end wet, had to leave the covers off as we all know, you don't put covers down on a wet deck if you are wanting it to dry. Sat morning rolls around and the wet end is still damp so goes about getting it ready for the next 5 hrs. The wet affected area starts about 2.5m in front of the batting crease stretching back behind the popping crease but is still a touch soft after constant rolling and drying at around 12.30 when the capts and umpire meet to discuss. The umpire hands it over to the capts and they agree to call the game off on the basis of an agreement to play a one dayer next week as the toss would be too crucial. Bear in mind Flem have nothing play for, will miss finals, MV sit 2nd about 3pts behind top and 6+pts in front of 3rd so only a loss will affect them. Everyone agrees and everyone heads home. That night MV put on the website that they won the game due to forfeit by Flem. They also lodge an appeal to the VTCA to claim maximum points based on Flem not having put covers down on Fri night. Appeal is upheld at the VTCA Tribunal during the week with maximum pts given to MV and no game to be played this week! VTCA confirm the hose issue was an accident and that not putting covers down was the correct course of action to take. However because Flem didnt contact the VTCA on Fri night to seek permission to leave covers off, game is forfeited!
Fair enough. By the book, thats what it states but surely some common sense should come into play. Or change the god damn rule.
Secondly, how dodgey from MV and their Fat Captain to have an agreement to play a 1 dayer the next week and then lodge an appeal! If no agreement had been made at 12.30, the players would have waited a couple of hrs until the pitch would have been playable and played a reduced overs game, probably 60-65 overs per side!
Unbelievabley poor on their part and one can only hope that the cricketing gods will get them once again now given they will head into a semi final without match practice the preceding 2 weeks.

Ordinary effort by the Valley, but the rules were put to all clubs & captains @ the start of the year. They'll get theirs, just a matter of when. We have notified the ground manager a couple of times & boy is that hard work..... when u finally get hold of him.

 

[Guru14]

Re: North A & B

G'day guys! Interesting happening in the North B last round game of Flemington Vs Moonee Valley. As some may already be aware, last week was washed out due to a broken hose that wet one end of the pitch on the Fri night before the game. The curator then went about trying to rectify the wicket and get it up for the Sat play but with one end wet, had to leave the covers off as we all know, you don't put covers down on a wet deck if you are wanting it to dry. Sat morning rolls around and the wet end is still damp so goes about getting it ready for the next 5 hrs. The wet affected area starts about 2.5m in front of the batting crease stretching back behind the popping crease but is still a touch soft after constant rolling and drying at around 12.30 when the capts and umpire meet to discuss. The umpire hands it over to the capts and they agree to call the game off on the basis of an agreement to play a one dayer next week as the toss would be too crucial. Bear in mind Flem have nothing play for, will miss finals, MV sit 2nd about 3pts behind top and 6+pts in front of 3rd so only a loss will affect them. Everyone agrees and everyone heads home. That night MV put on the website that they won the game due to forfeit by Flem. They also lodge an appeal to the VTCA to claim maximum points based on Flem not having put covers down on Fri night. Appeal is upheld at the VTCA Tribunal during the week with maximum pts given to MV and no game to be played this week! VTCA confirm the hose issue was an accident and that not putting covers down was the correct course of action to take. However because Flem didnt contact the VTCA on Fri night to seek permission to leave covers off, game is forfeited!
Fair enough. By the book, thats what it states but surely some common sense should come into play. Or change the god damn rule.
Secondly, how dodgey from MV and their Fat Captain to have an agreement to play a 1 dayer the next week and then lodge an appeal! If no agreement had been made at 12.30, the players would have waited a couple of hrs until the pitch would have been playable and played a reduced overs game, probably 60-65 overs per side!
Unbelievabley poor on their part and one can only hope that the cricketing gods will get them once again now given they will head into a semi final without match practice the preceding 2 weeks.

WTF, by reading your post I feel you are surprised by MV's actions, I for one am not surprised by either the captain's actions or eventually when they sat around having a few jars the actions of both the coach and the committee. It would appear that MV will always be MV and they have never played by the rules, whether it be Saturday's example or payment of players etc. I heard the story last night about the wicket and Flem have been known to leave the preparation of their wocket to the last minute but understand the situation they would have been in. Shows the moronic executive thinking to agree qith their course of action but then award the game based on permission- If the wicket had dried and the game started on time, what would have been the ruling if moonee valley lodge a complaint anyway because covers weren't used. I see there thinking though if they finish top they play the softer semi against Jacana or Crazyburn as they know they won't beat Aber Park to make the granny. Low and underhanded but in the oxford that's the meaning under moonee valley. Fingers crossed Crazyburn won't get their outright and the Valley get the bears and it's season over

 

[Guru14]

Re: North A & B

Ordinary effort by the Valley, but the rules were put to all clubs & captains @ the start of the year. They'll get theirs, just a matter of when. We have notified the ground manager a couple of times & boy is that hard work..... when u finally get hold of him.

2time, there are rules and bad sportsmanship. I wonder what colour they would like their sheep station painted

 

[Red Ink No.8]

Re: North A & B

WTF, by reading your post I feel you are surprised by MV's actions, I for one am not surprised by either the captain's actions or eventually when they sat around having a few jars the actions of both the coach and the committee. It would appear that MV will always be MV and they have never played by the rules, whether it be Saturday's example or payment of players etc. I heard the story last night about the wicket and Flem have been known to leave the preparation of their wocket to the last minute but understand the situation they would have been in. Shows the moronic executive thinking to agree qith their course of action but then award the game based on permission- If the wicket had dried and the game started on time, what would have been the ruling if moonee valley lodge a complaint anyway because covers weren't used. I see there thinking though if they finish top they play the softer semi against Jacana or Crazyburn as they know they won't beat Aber Park to make the granny. Low and underhanded but in the oxford that's the meaning under moonee valley. Fingers crossed Crazyburn won't get their outright and the Valley get the bears and it's season over

Yeah...... look out for Hoppers to hold off for 80 overs this weekend ....

 

[ROY G BIV]

Re: North A & B

WTF, by reading your post I feel you are surprised by MV's actions, I for one am not surprised by either the captain's actions or eventually when they sat around having a few jars the actions of both the coach and the committee. It would appear that MV will always be MV and they have never played by the rules, whether it be Saturday's example or payment of players etc. I heard the story last night about the wicket and Flem have been known to leave the preparation of their wocket to the last minute but understand the situation they would have been in. Shows the moronic executive thinking to agree qith their course of action but then award the game based on permission- If the wicket had dried and the game started on time, what would have been the ruling if moonee valley lodge a complaint anyway because covers weren't used. I see there thinking though if they finish top they play the softer semi against Jacana or Crazyburn as they know they won't beat Aber Park to make the granny. Low and underhanded but in the oxford that's the meaning under moonee valley. Fingers crossed Crazyburn won't get their outright and the Valley get the bears and it's season over

Guru14...i vaguely remember APark being in NTH A few years back. Do u know when was the last time(if ever) they were in Nth A.

Are u the pres?

 

[Snagglepuss]

Re: North A & B

Sounds pretty ordinary on the Valleys behalf. But I think it won't matter to them, they don't have the cattle to go all the way. Either Werribee or Aber Park are capable of rolling them whenever they come across them. Valleys havent got the bowling to do enough damage.
I would personally like to see a WC V AP GF but it might not happen if the Burn get an outright which will then put MV ontop. That is unless WC can pull out an outright against Seabrook, something they might have had a chance with but for Edrich not playing this round!
Guru-you seem to know the Bears pretty well, do they have enough runs left in the rooms to get past Jacana? The import, Riggio (is he run out or not?) and Fidler are good enough bats but Jacana just keep on pulling it out when needed.

 

[Guru14]

Re: North A & B

Sounds pretty ordinary on the Valleys behalf. But I think it won't matter to them, they don't have the cattle to go all the way. Either Werribee or Aber Park are capable of rolling them whenever they come across them. Valleys havent got the bowling to do enough damage.
I would personally like to see a WC V AP GF but it might not happen if the Burn get an outright which will then put MV ontop. That is unless WC can pull out an outright against Seabrook, something they might have had a chance with but for Edrich not playing this round!
Guru-you seem to know the Bears pretty well, do they have enough runs left in the rooms to get past Jacana? The import, Riggio (is he run out or not?) and Fidler are good enough bats but Jacana just keep on pulling it out when needed.

Snagglepuss, I would think they should get home, their import is a gun and when I saw he was still in I thought they would ok. Riggio still in and Fidler has been good for them. should be batting 4 or 5 but cruising doen the order. Apparently they were cruising and lost a couple late in the day which really put them back. bennett apparently was throwing them pretty quick!

 

[Guru14]

Re: North A & B

Guru14...i vaguely remember APark being in NTH A few years back. Do u know when was the last time(if ever) they were in Nth A.

Are u the pres?

It would have been many years back as they haven't played in a granny for about 20 years, and no mate definately not the Pres! Just a keen on looker

 

[Pants Off]

Re: North A & B

It seems common sense did not prevail here and the rules comittee have ruled in favour of MV. I'm sure the other 3 teams in the final 4 would not be happy since MV have been gifted a win here? Well down MV as you dont really deseve to hold top spot but hey some teams would do anything to win hey? I can understand why the rules commitee made the decison but this is not a black and white case. From what i have heard the Flem captain and MV captain had a gentlemens agreement to play a one dayer the following week. Obvioulsy MV does not really belive they can win a flag as they need to be "handed" points in order to get the best possible results. Either way it great to see they didnt play the game in the spirit of cricket and have gone down the mugs lane. Even if they win the flag it wont really count, will it?