SaintPowelly wrote:LBW appeal turned down for the hat-trick.
According to the radio we have bowled really well, Leicster HAVEN'T been throwing wickets away.

captaincolly wrote:Should have this wrapped up soon !
sussexpob wrote:SaintPowelly wrote:LBW appeal turned down for the hat-trick.
According to the radio we have bowled really well, Leicster HAVEN'T been throwing wickets away.
Was that Radio Hampshire saying that?
SaintPowelly wrote:sussexpob wrote:SaintPowelly wrote:LBW appeal turned down for the hat-trick.
According to the radio we have bowled really well, Leicster HAVEN'T been throwing wickets away.
Was that Radio Hampshire saying that?
It was the Leicestershire commentator.
sussexpob wrote:SaintPowelly wrote:LBW appeal turned down for the hat-trick.
According to the radio we have bowled really well, Leicster HAVEN'T been throwing wickets away.
Was that Radio Hampshire saying that?

captaincolly wrote:Should have this wrapped up soon !
budgetmeansbudget wrote:captaincolly wrote:Should have this wrapped up soon !
I might be wrong but didn't Leics have a substantial seventh wicket partnership in the second innings of their last game?
mark the hawk wrote:sussexpob wrote:SaintPowelly wrote:LBW appeal turned down for the hat-trick.
According to the radio we have bowled really well, Leicster HAVEN'T been throwing wickets away.
Was that Radio Hampshire saying that?
Local Radio in biased to the local team shock![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests