County Championship Division 1 Thread 2016

[sussexpob]

Having said that, the way this game has progressed since 11am, it wouldnt shock me in 3 years to find out that a lot of betting money was controlling its outcome.

Middlesex started positive.
They then slowed down.
They then inexplicably batted for 20 overs scoring under 1.5 runs an over at a time their season was on the line
They then smashed 150 off 10 overs when Yorkshire put on a bowler who has never taken a FC wicket, and another poor part timer.
They then declared 10 overs and 50 runs too early

None of this makes a jot of sense. Its like Middlesex stepped out this morning and thought "how can we win Yorkshire the title"

[sussexpob]

Yorkshire lose Lyth

[captaincolly]

Is it still the case that declarations in the final round of matches have to be cleared with the ECB? I remember reading something a few seasons ago where a team wanted to declare but couldn't do it until the umpires consulted and checked with ECB HQ. Something like that.

[budgetmeansbudget]

In view of the concern in cricket about match fixing and illegal actions affecting the result of a game surely contrived results should not be allowed. We accept that there's nothing illegal going on here but it opens up possibilities for such to happen.

It does make a mockery of fixing laws and regulations....

Mo Amir bowls two no balls and gets a year in prison and a 5 year sports ban.....

Yorkshire and Middlesex shake on producing a result that changes the course of a Championship season, and .....

But we don't think that any of this relates to illegal betting do we?

I don't find this morally that offensive, it's the luxury afforded to the top two teams playing each other in the last game of the season. Somerset should have won more games earlier in the season to avoid this.

[sussexpob]

The reason why match fixing is morally offensive is because it compromises the nature of competition. If someone throws no balls on purpose, then they are not trying, and therefore the sport suffers as a result.

Not seeing much difference between purposefully bowling two no balls, and a captain throwing the ball to a bowler with no first class wicket on the orders to bowl terribly to allow a team to declare.

In fact, its the same thing. Artificially not trying your best to produce an unnatural result.

[hopeforthebest]

The worst aspect of this is that it could affect the result of our Div one FL. For instance I have Malan in my team and he clear sacrificed his wicket when he almost certainly was on course for a double hundred.

[sussexpob]

The worst aspect of this is that it could affect the result of our Div one FL. For instance I have Malan in my team and he clear sacrificed his wicket when he almost certainly was on course for a double hundred.

[budgetmeansbudget]

The worst aspect of this is that it could affect the result of our Div one FL. For instance I have Malan in my team and he clear sacrificed his wicket when he almost certainly was on course for a double hundred.

Now that is a serious!

[sussexpob]

Rate up to 6.3.

Its far from easy, but as I said earlier, the luxury with more overs and a bigger target is you can get set and have the odd dudd..... Middlesex need to start taking wickets.

One factor not discussed yet is the possibility that Yorkshire are well under the rate, but Middlesex dont take wickets....

If Yorkshire are 1 down needing a 120 off the last 10 wickets, how much of a toss are Middlesex's bowlers going to be giving.

[sussexpob]

6.5 an over.

Willey esculated up the order no doubt to slog, not showing much intent at the moment.

[Arthur Crabtree]

In fact, its the same thing. Artificially not trying your best to produce an unnatural result.

One is criminal, a betting scam run by gangs. The other is a convention of uncertain ethical justification.

[sussexpob]

Lees goes after 1 run in the last near 3 overs.... Yorkshire slipping

[Aidan11]

2 wickets. Maybe this isn't a foregone conclusion.

[mikesiva]

Three down...this might turn out to be a brilliant declaration. Ballance and Bresnan in.

[sussexpob]

One is criminal, a betting scam run by gangs. The other is a convention of uncertain ethical justification.

How they are viewed and dealt with in society is not really relevant. A women who kills her cheating husband in a crime of passion and another who stabs a random stranger for no reason still take a life. They still commit murder. The motivations are different, one maybe more understandable, but the outcome and result shouldnt become something different based on motive.

The motivations behind why you are fixing the outcome of a game are irrelevant. Fixing is only a crime because legislation is there as a preventative measure. I fail to see how two captains agreeing to fix an outcome of a natural series of events is any different just because they didnt pay to do it.... they are after all not recieveing money, but both trying to win a title that at the time a third party was most likely to win. So there is an advantage or reward being exchanged to do it.

Ok we are talking hypothetical here, but I see no reason why if there is evidence of fixing in this game, the result should be exactly the same as Amir got (if you contend that punishment was right).