Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Top Contributors
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Game's just about done I reckon. Only 49 overs possible today, Victoria batted right throughout day three and only lost two wickets for the whole's day play. Matthew Wade was out hit wicket off Laughlin after swinging too hard and then collecting his stumps with the bat. Laughlin then removed Damien Wright with the very next ball with an inswinger that came back in late and took off stump.

Vics are 8/423 at stumps, White is there on 84 and McKay is not out on four. Symonds is still the best bowler for Queensland with 3/48.

The forecast isn't promising for the remaining two days with showers expected on Monday and also Tuesday so Victoria are most certainly in the box seat as they only need a draw to win the Sheffield Shield.
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Tassietigersrule;336489 said:
Yes.
Having not conceded a single point all season in this comp and losing the 20 and 50 over finals, Victoria have it all to lose here if they do fail.
Can't see it happening a third time around.
Click to expand...
While admittedly weather has conspired against Queensland in this final, just imagine if it didn't.
Queensland would have cost themselves any slim, remote chance they had with their missed opportunities in this match.
This match looks a near certainty to be a draw. Victoria have this in the bag and there is no way that they could let this one slip through their fingers, weather or no weather.
Bowling form of Symonds is one of the few highlights here for the Bulls to take out of this match.
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Vics were bowled out for 510, White scored 136 with McKay making 39 not out. Symonds and Hopes were the wicket-takers taking their totals to four and three respectively.

In reply, Queensland are 0/30 at lunch, Ryan Broad has done the bulk of the scoring with 20 runs.

This game is all but over unfortunately, the rain has ruined what could have been a decent match.
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Ljp86;337179 said:
Vics were bowled out for 510, White scored 136 with McKay making 39 not out. Symonds and Hopes were the wicket-takers taking their totals to four and three respectively.

In reply, Queensland are 0/30 at lunch, Ryan Broad has done the bulk of the scoring with 20 runs.

This game is all but over unfortunately, the rain has ruined what could have been a decent match.
Click to expand...

Interesting you say it "could have been a decent match". You could say that about any game (as commentators usually do). But a Shield Final ... let's just say there haven't been too many memorable ones. A few farcical ones perhaps - such is the way they are set up and the wickets that are accordingly prepared. I can't really come up with a solution except maybe to abandon the concept of a final and go back to the way it was when the competition leader was awarded the Shield.
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Sober Symonds;337196 said:
Interesting you say it "could have been a decent match". You could say that about any game (as commentators usually do). But a Shield Final ... let's just say there haven't been too many memorable ones. A few farcical ones perhaps - such is the way they are set up and the wickets that are accordingly prepared. I can't really come up with a solution except maybe to abandon the concept of a final and go back to the way it was when the competition leader was awarded the Shield.
Click to expand...

Having a final is a must in my opinion. Australian sports don't operate on the fact that whoever finishes on top of the ladder is therefore the winner. It has never been like that and I don't think it ever should be like that as I think that would be unfair to the teams sitting in second or third who are a chance to maybe win the competition.

Another flaw with that theory is of course quotient/net run rate. Is a team really deserving of a premiership because they scored at 0.02 runs per over more than their opposition or because they took six more wickets than second place? No, I don't believe so and I don't think it accurately depicts which side was better. Having a final is a fitting end to determine who is actually the champion.

As for the Shield final, the concept heavily favours the home side as they only need to draw the game to win the Shield. With the rain this game has had, it has only given Queensland three and a half days to win the game outright, which is going to be near on impossible for any side, even the Vics. Perhaps the final should be a six-day affair to try and eliminate teams playing for draws. Another alternative would be to make the match a "timeless" one, where both teams play until a result is reached. However, that could see sides play all week if the pitch served up is a road. But, it would make the contest a lot fairer and would put more emphasis on playing attacking cricket rather then playing for stumps.

As for this game, Victoria are going to win the Sheffield Shield and they may do so without winning via the draw. Queensland have collapsed to be 7/166. Shane Harwood removed Ryan Broad and Martin Love within three overs of each other to start the rot and it has been all downhill from there for Queensland with regular losses of wickets. Shane Watson and Andrew Symonds both failed falling to victim to Nannes and McKay respectively with both only just getting into double figures. Clint McKay has three wickets while Harwood and Nannes have two for the Vics in what has been a pretty good bowling effort so far.

29 overs remain today although there's only 80 mins of play left so I don't think they'll get them in. I'd say Victoria would be keen to enforce the follow-on should they get the opportunity and try and win the game outright.
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Queensland were bowled out for 200 and Victoria have elected to bat again. Draw here we come.
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Vics are 1/82 at stumps. Rogers the wicket to fall for 42, bowled by Cutting. Jewell not out on 31, Hodge on 7.

Lead is 392, Vics will probably want 500 before they send Queensland in again.
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

A bit sore from the Victorians to go for a draw, because they know if they give Bulls challenge, Bulls would probably go off and pull of a upset..not the first time they would have done it even and for god's sake, why can't Cameron White bat that good for Australia? Jesus, flukey or what? Well done to James Hopes on that bowling, kept it under 3 per over and has improved into a great bowler.
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Mousey;337372 said:
Great post. I agree 100%.
Click to expand...

the way QLD batted today, they may still win outright. bit poor not to enforce though, being so far in front. still good for the shield to come home not matter how.
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Your right but I don't think Cam will give them enough time to bowl them out. They'll get to 500, declare and give them 2 sessions. You never know though.
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Ljp86;337254 said:
Having a final is a must in my opinion.

I don't understand your logic, LJP. "Australian sports don't operate on the fact that whoever finishes on top of the ladder is therefore the winner. It has never been like that and I don't think it ever should be like that ..." What do you say to the fact that for 90 years that is EXACTLY how the Sheffield Shield operated? I'm not ruling a final out completely, but many of the most respected competitions in the world decide their champion team by who finished on top of the ladder after each has played eachother twice - home and away. Second place, third place, stiff! Final or no final, there is only one winner. No point arguing about semantics. A final to give them "one more chance"? How about a best of three series to give them another in case the toss is influential. How about a final four system. How about the top team wins!?!

"Is a team really deserving of a premiership because they scored at 0.02 runs per over more than their opposition or because they took six more wickets than second place?" Are you saying that is what occurred this season? If so, I'll take your word for it. But clutch at straws as much as you like, Victoria won all their games, did not concede a point, and finished far and away the leaders of the competition after all was said and done.

I don't believe run rates have ever been a factor in deciding who is the champion team. I don't see how that is a "flaw". You can throw up any obscure stat to justify how another team deserved to be given credit for something or other. The points system is fair.

"Having a final is a fitting end to determine who is actually the champion." Is it? That is my argument. The final isn't fair, it is more like a formality, and does nothing to prove one side better than the other for the season. What about international tours this time of year? One state could be missing 1/2 dozen players, the other unaffected. Where does your definition of "fair" start and end?

"Perhaps the final should be a six-day affair ... make the match a "timeless" one ... play until a result is reached ... would make the contest a lot fairer and would put more emphasis on playing attacking cricket". Please! Don't you think these things have been considered time and again over the 130-odd years Tests and First Class cricket have been the showpiece of our game? Proven: Longer matches do not encourage more attacking cricket. A line has to be drawn, LJP. Let's not get too far-fetched here.

The final was introduced in 1981-82 in response to dwindling crowds in the face of the new one-day phenomenon. Perhaps it's purpose has been lost, and it has become an irrelevant fixture - taking into account the result trend and all that goes into it.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Sober Symonds;337442 said:
I don't understand your logic, LJP. "Australian sports don't operate on the fact that whoever finishes on top of the ladder is therefore the winner. It has never been like that and I don't think it ever should be like that ..." What do you say to the fact that for 90 years that is EXACTLY how the Sheffield Shield operated? I'm not ruling a final out completely, but many of the most respected competitions in the world decide their champion team by who finished on top of the ladder after each has played eachother twice - home and away. Second place, third place, stiff! Final or no final, there is only one winner. No point arguing about semantics. A final to give them "one more chance"? How about a best of three series to give them another in case the toss is influential. How about a final four system. How about the top team wins!?!
Click to expand...

How many other sports in Australia have systems where the top team is deemed to be the champion? I would say very few if any at all. Some respected competitions may follow the same process but that doesn't mean we have to, nor should we. I can't imagine the AFL or the NRL doing the same thing.

Sure, the Sheffield Shield followed the same system for years and years but it was eventually changed which you've pointed out below. However, that was more than 25 years ago and was changed in order to gauge more interest. Perhaps the followers of the Shield would have liked to see the top two sides play each other in a final rather than just give the trophy to the top side.

Sober Symonds said:
Are you saying that is what occurred this season? If so, I'll take your word for it. But clutch at straws as much as you like, Victoria won all their games, did not concede a point, and finished far and away the leaders of the competition after all was said and done.
Click to expand...

No, I meant in general terms. Last season's Pura Cup competition saw New South Wales and Victoria finish on 39 points each with the same amount of outright wins (six). Under your system, New South Wales would have won the title as their quotient was 1.680 compared to Victoria's 1.208. Now, what would Victoria have said if the system was changed to a "top team takes all" system for season 07/08? Would there have been a backlash in the media as well as endless crying from the Vics? You bet there would have been. Would they have had a right to? Yes, they would. Why? Because it is almost impossible to determine which team was the better side when they are seperated by 0.472 (or 47.2%) despite having the same number of points and the same number of wins as the team who finished first. A similar situation to this in the future is bound to come up should the system be changed so the top team is determined the champion. I can guarantee the media as well as some of the state's involved would start to speak up if a side won the Shield due to having a marginally better quotient than second place.

My post didn't debate this season's Shield. Victoria have been the best side in the Shieffield Shield all year and have proved so in the final which is what all good sides should do.

Sober Symonds said:
I don't believe run rates have ever been a factor in deciding who is the champion team. I don't see how that is a "flaw". You can throw up any obscure stat to justify how another team deserved to be given credit for something or other. The points system is fair.
Click to expand...

How do you think ladder positions are determined when points are even between two sides? How do you think the right to host last season's final was determined?

Sober Symonds said:
Is it? That is my argument. The final isn't fair, it is more like a formality, and does nothing to prove one side better than the other for the season.
Click to expand...

How is it a formality? Because the team that has been on top all year wins? That's a lame reason to suggest ceasing the existence of a final. If the best team all season wins the final then so be it. They've been the best, they should win the final. End of story. I suppose the AFL should have scrapped the Grand Final for 2008 after Geelong thrashed Port Adelaide by 119 points in 2007 and after West Coast belted Geelong by 80 points in 1994 and after Essendon flogged Melbourne by more than ten goals in 2000 and after Brisbane defeated Collingwood by 50 points in 2003.

Sober Symonds said:
What about international tours this time of year? One state could be missing 1/2 dozen players, the other unaffected. Where does your definition of "fair" start and end?
Click to expand...

Been happening for years. Each individual state has dealt with that for a long time and have gotten used to players who would be walk-up starts in their first eleven being away for most if not all of the year. It is an issue that can't be avoided as players are going to be unavilable for periods at a time over the course of the year. The states have simply had to get over it.

Sober Symonds said:
Please! Don't you think these things have been considered time and again over the 130-odd years Tests and First Class cricket have been the showpiece of our game? Proven: Longer matches do not encourage more attacking cricket. A line has to be drawn, LJP. Let's not get too far-fetched here.
Click to expand...

Really? When was the last time something like this was discussed with regards to the Shield Final or First-Class cricket in general? A longer final would at least get us a result from the game rather than see Victoria block for 166 overs as what they have done in parts during this game.

Sober Symonds said:
The final was introduced in 1981-82 in response to dwindling crowds in the face of the new one-day phenomenon. Perhaps it's purpose has been lost, and it has become an irrelevant fixture - taking into account the result trend and all that goes into it.
Click to expand...

I think you're over-reacting. A few one-sided finals is no reason to scrap the concept.
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Victoria batted for the entire morning session, declaring during lunch at 5/282. Nick Jewell made 75, Brad Hodge 90 and Cameron White 61.

Ben Laughlin and Chris Simpson both took two wickets for the Bulls.

That left Queensland needing to score 593 runs to win from 67 overs. They're 0/1 after one over.
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Why not make the final a 6 day match?
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

QLD 0/134, 32.3 overs left today.

Broad 78* and Love 54*
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Broad made 109 and Love, in his final game, also tonned up (104*).

That's it though and the Vics are crowned Sheffield Shield Champions. Congrats boys!
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

About time we won something.. other than the mickey mouse 20/20 title. could be the start of dynasty if they can shake the chokers tag
 
Re: Sheffield Shield Final: Victoria vs Queensland at Junction Oval

Congrats to Victoria on a well deserved Shield title. Clearly and by far the best team for the 2008/09 year and extremely consistent in all forms, but in particular the 4-day format.
Look to have the goods to dominate for a few years.
Now if only my team got our batting sorted and didn't have any injuries throughout the year, then we might have at least made a final in one of the forms.
Having recruited some bowlers and all-rounders from interstate in the last few years, some batsmen might be on the lookout for next season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top