South Division 10/11

Top Contributors
re: South Division 10/11

Southern Son;389476 said:
Interesting progress score in the MHSOB vs Chelsea game... Melb High winning the toss and batting 1st, declare after 40 overs (8/244). Chelsea 4/161 in reply...

It's 5th vs 6th and with possibly 4th spot up for grabs with an outright result, could there have been a captain's agreement before the start of play?
Click to expand...

if it's within the rules it's exactly what the 2 teams should do... great system this bonus points

so which team will face the 1st ball next week Qball?
 
re: South Division 10/11

Don't worry Chelsea will be doing everything possible to manipulate the rules.....just hope for the sake of the fianls that neither side makes it because they both don't deserve it! How can u make it after losing 5 games- pathetic system.
 
re: South Division 10/11

bonus points must go;389543 said:
if it's within the rules it's exactly what the 2 teams should do... great system this bonus points

so which team will face the 1st ball next week Qball?
Click to expand...
If you guys at Brighton don't like the system, maybe go to an isolated competition like the CMCA which is located in a little pocket of the Melbourne suburban area.
 
re: South Division 10/11

Nothing to do with CMCA or VTCA sledge. Brighton are in the 4 best teams in the comp but quite possibly could miss the finals by 2 teams manipulating the system. Sides that aren't good enought to make the finals in their own right! Neither beat Brighton.
 
re: South Division 10/11

If you bowl well you wont have to worry about the other game. The VTCA MUST revert to a one day game in the last round to stop this crap.
 
re: South Division 10/11

bonus points must go;389543 said:
if it's within the rules it's exactly what the 2 teams should do... great system this bonus points

so which team will face the 1st ball next week Qball?
Click to expand...

sorry don't follow your rant...BPMG
 
re: South Division 10/11

If the captains ageed on 40 overs each then High School would bat i'd guess.244 in 40 overs is some going even on a postage stamp.
Kev by all accounts both captains agreed for drinks to be brought on at any stage on saturday but to be told we were behind the over rate time and time again by the umpires on a 33 + day taking into account the painstaking ritual we had to watch after every ball by certain batsmen was pathetic.
 
re: South Division 10/11

pdog pizza's;389547 said:
Don't worry Chelsea will be doing everything possible to manipulate the rules.....just hope for the sake of the fianls that neither side makes it because they both don't deserve it! How can u make it after losing 5 games- pathetic system.
Click to expand...

Hardly think it is a manipulation of the rules. Regardless of whether there was an agreement or not, both teams' only chance of playing finals was to win outright and rely on Brighton losing - therefore their own tactics had to be agressive to force a two innings result.

If this is the case, you don't need an agreement, both teams would have been playing the exact same way.

Villani tonned up off about 70 balls.
 
re: South Division 10/11

Brighton could knock off Bentleigh anyway.

Did well Brighton, 8-167 became 9-251 with Jewell deserving a 100.

His last 3 scoring shots were 6, 6 & 2, with the 2 being cut off on the boundary on the last ball of the day.

As for the Chelsea/MHSOB game, it probably isn't fair for Brighton, but while it's in the rules, congrats to the captains for doing whatever they can to give their teams the best chance to play finals.

It doesn't happen too often, you need a situation where 5th plays 6th in the last round, or at least two teams with in points range, for this sort of result to happen.
 
re: South Division 10/11

Northern $uper$tars;389616 said:
Brighton could knock off Bentleigh anyway.

Did well Brighton, 8-167 became 9-251 with Jewell deserving a 100.

His last 3 scoring shots were 6, 6 & 2, with the 2 being cut off on the boundary on the last ball of the day.

As for the Chelsea/MHSOB game, it probably isn't fair for Brighton, but while it's in the rules, congrats to the captains for doing whatever they can to give their teams the best chance to play finals.

It doesn't happen too often, you need a situation where 5th plays 6th in the last round, or at least two teams with in points range, for this sort of result to happen.
Click to expand...

Unlucky.

Brighton did only beat Melbourne High by 5 runs in the last over... after the ball hit the helmet behind the keeper earlier in the day. Would hardly call that convincing.

If it was 5th vs 9th and the same tactics were used, then there would be an issue.

And from looking at the scores, only one team is playing for the outright win anyway, and that is not that team that approached the opposition with the idea... 140 off 40 overs on a small ground is hardly looking like they want to win outright.
 
re: South Division 10/11

Vicious and Well Directed;389617 said:
Unlucky.
If it was 5th vs 9th and the same tactics were used, then there would be an issue.
Click to expand...

Why would 9th agree to that though? Unless they were trying to avoid relegation. But if that was the case, surely 5th would back themselves to knock off a "relegation" team outright without these sort of contrived results.

But I agree, I think a one dayer in the last round is the way to go.
 
re: South Division 10/11

Northern $uper$tars;389618 said:
Why would 9th agree to that though? Unless they were trying to avoid relegation. But if that was the case, surely 5th would back themselves to knock off a "relegation" team outright without these sort of contrived results.

But I agree, I think a one dayer in the last round is the way to go.
Click to expand...

The point is that if both teams are equally incentivised to chase an outright, you don't really need an agreement, they would be playing with those tactics anyway.
 
re: South Division 10/11

Vicious and Well Directed;389603 said:
Hardly think it is a manipulation of the rules. Regardless of whether there was an agreement or not, both teams' only chance of playing finals was to win outright and rely on Brighton losing - therefore their own tactics had to be agressive to force a two innings result.

If this is the case, you don't need an agreement, both teams would have been playing the exact same way.

Villani tonned up off about 70 balls.
Click to expand...

Yep they really had to push for outright this game sitting 10 points out of the 4. makes good sense.

why not do it every game? even if only half the opposing skippers agree to play a 40 over 2 innings game, u only need 5 wins & you would have enough points to make the finals. I plan to offer each skipper the option of a 40 over 2 inning game next year... hope most take me up on it!
 
re: South Division 10/11

Qball;389552 said:
sorry don't follow your rant...BPMG
Click to expand...

Qball The agreement would b for Chelsea to declare over night so Melb high will b batting 1st ball on sat, won't they?

However chelsea seemed not to go too hard for the win so maybe they r not going to declare??? 4/160 off 40 seems an unusual score for a team that knew they would be bowling 1st ball next week & chasing a total...
 
re: South Division 10/11

bonus points must go;389648 said:
Qball The agreement would b for Chelsea to declare over night so Melb high will b batting 1st ball on sat, won't they?

However chelsea seemed not to go too hard for the win so maybe they r not going to declare??? 4/160 off 40 seems an unusual score for a team that knew they would be bowling 1st ball next week & chasing a total...
Click to expand...

Sorry was tired when doing this.. long day in the Sun on the Saturday got to me... to be honest Im not bothered...as long as Port dont win it!
 
re: South Division 10/11

douche;389640 said:
I heared one of them got a nasty one
Click to expand...

really? Gee that would be a first in local cricket getting a bad call... 1 out of 10 for the top side vs bottom hardly means the difference surely?
 
re: South Division 10/11

Northern $uper$tars;389616 said:
Brighton could knock off Bentleigh anyway.

Did well Brighton, 8-167 became 9-251 with Jewell deserving a 100.

His last 3 scoring shots were 6, 6 & 2, with the 2 being cut off on the boundary on the last ball of the day.

As for the Chelsea/MHSOB game, it probably isn't fair for Brighton, but while it's in the rules, congrats to the captains for doing whatever they can to give their teams the best chance to play finals.

It doesn't happen too often, you need a situation where 5th plays 6th in the last round, or at least two teams with in points range, for this sort of result to happen.
Click to expand...


Not necessarily. You just need a lower placed side who doesn't give a shite... Was playing a last round match at Turner Rd a couple of seasons ago, with a Sth C1 or 2 game between Middle Park and I think Dingley being played on the back oval nearby. It bucketed down around tea time and whilst it was clearly to wet to finish off on the 2 front ovals, the game on the back oval went on...

Dingley were near last on the ladder, couldn't give a toss and just wanted to get off, but Middle Park were dead keen for an outright for the finals. There were obviously no umpires to adjudicate on the conditions so Middle Park dug their heels in to stay on. From memory they only needed a 100 or so for the outright, so Dingley just went out there, bowled 8 or 9 overs of lollipops (the ball would have stuck in the wicket had the bowlers tried to land them!) and allowed the MP batsmen to despatch every 2nd ball to or over the fence to complete the outright!

Whilst I know this sort of farce wouldn't happen in the higher divs, it does highlight the issue of contrived outrights in the last round. I'm sure we can all think of a season when an outright has been achieved in the last round to elevate a side into the finals.

From memory I think the VTCA has said previously in a meeting that it's too hard to have a one-dayer in the last round. Something about the fixturing system they use (which is also the reason why we have 2 one-dayers after xmas)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top