2016 Hampshire Thread

[Durhamfootman]

I think Hants will win, and stay up

there.... I've said it.

Durham have been hopeless on the road in the second half of the season. Not sure either that there is any mileage in picking Borthwick or Stoneman... we need to come up with replacements for next season

only downside for Hants is that England will probably insist on Durham picking Wood and Stokes

[haggishants]

Clearer version of my permutations table. (Not including a WvL tie ... but best not go down that road!)

[captaincolly]

[

image | +

]


Clearer version of my permutations table. (Not including a WvL tie ... but best not go down that road!)

Good work!

[westoelad]

I think Hants will win, and stay up

there.... I've said it.

Durham have been hopeless on the road in the second half of the season. Not sure either that there is any mileage in picking Borthwick or Stoneman... we need to come up with replacements for next season

only downside for Hants is that England will probably insist on Durham picking Wood and Stokes

Our lot are probably away this weekend on a boozy farewell party for our 2 deserters so imagine the state the likes of Stokes will be in on Tuesday. I'd like Hants to escape despite their poaching one of our youngsters because I'd prefer Warks to be relegated. It'd give us at least a year's reprieve from our nemesis.

[st_brendy]

The things which are either 99% or 100% certain are:

- Hants defeat relegates us (99% - in theory Warks could get zero points, whilst we get a maximum bonus point defeat. Yeah right)
- Lancs avoiding defeat saves them (99% - good luck Warks making seven points up on Lancs without actually beating them! - increasing to 100% with a win)
- Warks win saves them (100%)

Things which are a whole less certain are:

- Whether a Hants draw saves us (1)
- Whether a Hants win saves us (2)
- Whether Warks can stay up without winning (3)
- Whether Lancs can stay up despite losing (4)

1. For us to stay up with a draw, Warks would have to lose. Before bonus points, that would give Warks a three point head start over us. Finishing on equal points would see us safe, so we would need three more bonus points than them. Tough ask, but not impossible. Especially if Lancs run through them for under 200. (In theory Warks could draw and we could still stay up with a draw, but only if they take zero bonus points and we take all 8. Never going to happen so ignore).

2. Us staying up with a victory is very likely, maybe something in the region of 70% likely?
- A Warks defeat would keep us up.
- A Lancs defeat would keep us up, as long as they don't pick up three more bonus points than us (two more would not be enough, because we'd finish above them on fewest defeats). Given that we've won and they've lost, them picking up three more bonus points would be unlikely but not impossible.
- A draw would see the reverse of above, in that before bonus points it would our turn to have a three point head start over Warks. But because we'd win out on a tie, they would need FOUR extra bonus points than us. A tough ask, given that we've won under this scenario, so have almost certainly picked up three bowling points as a minimum.

3. Yes Warks can, if we lose. Or if we both draw. Or if we draw, they lose, and they win out on bonus points as per 1 above. Or if they draw, we win, and they win out on bonus points as per 2 above.

4. Yes, if we fail to win. If we do though, we'll have a two point head start before bonus points. But because we'd win on a tie, they would need THREE extra bonus points than us. Again, a tough ask if they've lost their match.

[st_brendy]

I think Hants will win, and stay up

there.... I've said it.

Durham have been hopeless on the road in the second half of the season. Not sure either that there is any mileage in picking Borthwick or Stoneman... we need to come up with replacements for next season

only downside for Hants is that England will probably insist on Durham picking Wood and Stokes

That may be so. But we have still only beaten Notts this season. Hardly something to be proud of, even if we have been playing much better cricket in recent weeks (mainly with the bat).

Slightly ironic that it's Warks who are our biggest target, given that one of the reasons why we are where we are is because of the injury which Topley picked up against them on day one (or two?) of the season. (Not that I am blaming Warks for the injury. But it's still the case that our brand new front line bowler hasn't bowled a single ball for us, because of it)

[Making_Splinters]

It's been a slightly odd season with no team at present winning more than 5 games. Compare that with last season where Yorkshire won 11 of their games and even the Bears down in fifth place won 5 games.

[st_brendy]

At the moment we've got four dry days showing on the forecast. But overcast for every single one of them, so it wouldn't be too surprising if some rain did rear it's head at some point.

[Hampshireboi]

Anything been said about the wicket we have produced? I'd have guessed with us almost certainly needing to win to stand a chance of staying up the wicket would be a 'result wicket', especially with lots of potential rain around tomorrow

[budgetmeansbudget]

Anything been said about the wicket we have produced? I'd have guessed with us almost certainly needing to win to stand a chance of staying up the wicket would be a 'result wicket', especially with lots of potential rain around tomorrow

I've said something similar on the CC1 thread.

The weather forecast on BBC suggests okay for tomorrow.

[haggishants]

Nelson strikes.... 111/1 . Good start though.

[budgetmeansbudget]

Borthwick bowled him early in his spell, help for the spinner early on?

Crane is a similar bowler!

[Hampshireboi]

The fact we have played 2 spinners (Dawson and Crane) when Crane hasn't played much of late suggests there will be turn in the wicket. Last thing we want is a flat wicket and to go down because there's not enough time left in the game!

[haggishants]

After 1 session

Hants 116/1
Warks 83/3

Game on...

[budgetmeansbudget]

Adams played on trying to cut a short ball so not really a wicket demonstrating any significant turn.