
SaintPowelly wrote: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?
Taylor and Naik scored 85* in 116 balls to deny Surrey.
Centuryclub wrote:Come on Hampshire!
A win is a win is a win but hopefully it'll be a good clean win (if we make it).
The Solent commenatators have been very quiet (unless I've missed it) about the behaviour of certain players, especially Wheater & Coles, but the cricket press has certainly not & one comment was that it was Warne-like at its worst!
Mind you England could do with a bit more steel in limited overs cricket!
A win before tea would be nice - a Notts type collapse (except for Read as usual) would suit me very nicely.
budgetmeansbudget wrote:Centuryclub wrote:Come on Hampshire!
A win is a win is a win but hopefully it'll be a good clean win (if we make it).
The Solent commenatators have been very quiet (unless I've missed it) about the behaviour of certain players, especially Wheater & Coles, but the cricket press has certainly not & one comment was that it was Warne-like at its worst!
Mind you England could do with a bit more steel in limited overs cricket!
A win before tea would be nice - a Notts type collapse (except for Read as usual) would suit me very nicely.
Whats been occurring?
I only realised the other day that Hants had banned Wheater for 2 games, what were the reasons?
SaintPowelly wrote:budgetmeansbudget wrote:Centuryclub wrote:Come on Hampshire!
A win is a win is a win but hopefully it'll be a good clean win (if we make it).
The Solent commenatators have been very quiet (unless I've missed it) about the behaviour of certain players, especially Wheater & Coles, but the cricket press has certainly not & one comment was that it was Warne-like at its worst!
Mind you England could do with a bit more steel in limited overs cricket!
A win before tea would be nice - a Notts type collapse (except for Read as usual) would suit me very nicely.
Whats been occurring?
I only realised the other day that Hants had banned Wheater for 2 games, what were the reasons?
Hants didn't ban him, the ECB did, for abusing an umpire...he collect 6 points ( or whatever the amount is )
Centuryclub wrote:Coles has also been a naughty boy apparently.The Cricket Paper a couple of weeks ago had a letter from a former player/umpire/groundsman/etc who said the attitude of Coles against Fabian Cowdrey (?) after Coles had dismissed him was the worst provocation/behaviour he had ever seen in 60 years in the game.
I read somewhere else that Coles & Kent did not part on good terms?
haggishants wrote:http://www.ageasbowl.com/news/Adam-Wheater-Suspended-and-Matt-Coles-Penalised-under-ECB-Discipline-Code
budgetmeansbudget wrote:Centuryclub wrote:Coles has also been a naughty boy apparently.The Cricket Paper a couple of weeks ago had a letter from a former player/umpire/groundsman/etc who said the attitude of Coles against Fabian Cowdrey (?) after Coles had dismissed him was the worst provocation/behaviour he had ever seen in 60 years in the game.
I read somewhere else that Coles & Kent did not part on good terms?
I guess the name Cowdrey is the epitome of Kent cricket and if Coles didn't leave on good terms with Kent cricket he would be a most likely candidate for abuse. Perhaps something along the lines of it doesn't matter how good you are if your names Cowdrey you play for Kent.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests