Hampshire v Surrey - Championship cricket returns

It says on the stream - Surrey will face a minimum of 105 overs in total in the innings.

93rd over but I am curious the protocol as to extending beyond the minimum and the time factor.

It's quite clear there is sight for both teams of an end.

It's whenever 16 overs to go was reached + 1 hour or 16 overs (whichever is later). The start of the last hour was 17:24, meaning the earliest we can finish is 18:24 on time (if Hants bowl more than 16 in this last hour), or however long it takes to bowl 16 overs.

RB wrote:It's whenever 16 overs to go was reached + 1 hour or 16 overs (whichever is later). The start of the last hour was 17:24, meaning the earliest we can finish is 18:24 on time (if Hants bowl more than 16 in this last hour), or however long it takes to bowl 16 overs.

Hanging on with fingertips now

Fair bloody play to Hashim Amla and some of the younger lads like Patel for sticking around, but this doesn't excuse how poor both days 2 and 3 were.

Alex! wrote:Fair bloody play to Hashim Amla and some of the younger lads like Patel for sticking around, but this doesn't excuse how poor both days 2 and 3 were.

This might be Surrey's Dunkirk.

Not sure the permutations for the final game next week.

Respects to Amla for his application today, though he should have been caught at short leg in the last session.

Two or three others did ok, though without Amla the game would have been over by lunchtime.

THe underlying problems are no different to the ones we identified yesterday. Lack of depth in the squad, and inability to cope with injuries and the bloody ECB leeches.

What an incredible effort from Amla today,with help from some of the youngsters. Better than a double century he scored earlier in the season in far,far easier conditions. Truly world class!!! Must have survived all day for the loss of just 6 wickets is remarkable. However it’s doesn’t excuse some very poor cricket played by the rest of the team.Looking at the stats,it appears Amla survived as many balls as the rest of the team.

I had thought that Amla was past his best but he has set a brilliant example of how to play proper cricket. It's all very well these players batting at 4+ an over and getting a quick 70 or 80 because they are unable to bat for more than 3 hours(some even less) but if you stay long enough the runs will come or the opposition won't get you out. Maybe Surrey could use him to teach the others how to bat time.

I also believe that too many batsmen are still in T20 mode which doesn't help especially as the fixtures are all over the place.

dougieginn wrote:What an incredible effort from Amla today,with help from some of the youngsters. Better than a double century he scored earlier in the season in far,far easier conditions. Truly world class!!! Must have survived all day for the loss of just 6 wickets is remarkable. However it’s doesn’t excuse some very poor cricket played by the rest of the team.Looking at the stats,it appears Amla survived as many balls as the rest of the team.

Funny game for the stats this one. Plenty of Maiden overs as well.

Immense effort from Amla and yes there does need some consideration for letting things slip so much on day 2 and the catastrophe of day 3

I wonder if anyone has ever batted all day and made fewer runs. A mammoth feat of concentration and self-denial.

I see an airport was playing for Hampshire, the mulleted one having CDG on his sweater.

The schoolboy within me (well, I was feeling hungry) rejoices at the commentator saying "Organ pops up with a wicket"

Olympian2 wrote:

Basileus1453 wrote:Well as long as they manage to stay in for today they should manage a draw.

I'm sure Hampshire will be looking to heap on the pressure and force a follow on.

Seems it's follow on or draw being the most likely results.

Of course, the two aren't mutually exclusive. I can't see us avoiding the f/o but I do hope we manage to avoid defeat  

Never in doubt!

My Wife and i thoroughly enjoyed our first "holiday" for eighteen months! If i knew how i'd post some photos of the virtually empty ground while many were forced to watch from the balcony ,including our friends who came for two days though we were able to swap tickets to get in and out when needed.

I'm so glad Hampshire got exactly what they deserved.What were they thinking of continuing on and on after lunch on day two with the dodgy weather that was forecast? 488 ? Do me a favour.Also on that topic,why did we put them in? The toss should be to decide who bats first in the vast majority of cases including this one.

Another thing that puzzled me was why Virdi (and Burns) elected to take a single for the night watchman.Burns got out soon after when he should have been the non striker.

Our "next door neighbour" in the hotel was a lovely old chap who played for Glamorgan.He told me about this game and reeled off the Surrey team no problem,from 1957! W.G.(Billy) Davies.He got Tom Clark out and Tony Lock got him twice.

http://static.espncricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1950S/1957/ENG_LOCAL/CC/SURREY_GLAM_CC_11-13MAY1957.html

It was OK to go in their crowded restaurant and wait ages for a burger at 15 quid  a throw but not safe to go in a virtually empty ground.Entire blocks were empty and others had 1 or 2 in.

Badges wrote:It was OK to go in their crowded restaurant and wait ages for a burger at 15 quid  a throw but not safe to go in a virtually empty ground.Entire blocks were empty and others had 1 or 2 in.

Yes and I  saw the vast empty stands on the live stream, and I was wavering money at them for 3 x 4 day tickets for this game, but no because of "government restrictions applicable to the ground" Obviously they don't apply to the £15 burger! Well it's fine to have Wimbledon 75% full and over 60,000 at Wembley (well done England) but absolute health and safety nonsense as regards to cricket.

The Bowl? Attractive ground, but stuck in the middle of nowhere with a shit show administration.

Badges wrote:My Wife and i thoroughly enjoyed our first "holiday" for eighteen months! If i knew how i'd post some photos of the virtually empty ground while many were forced to watch from the balcony ,including our friends who came for two days though we were able to swap tickets to get in and out when needed.

I'm so glad Hampshire got exactly what they deserved.What were they thinking of continuing on and on after lunch on day two with the dodgy weather that was forecast? 488 ? Do me a favour.Also on that topic,why did we put them in? The toss should be to decide who bats first in the vast majority of cases including this one.

Another thing that puzzled me was why Virdi (and Burns) elected to take a single for the night watchman.Burns got out soon after when he should have been the non striker.

Our "next door neighbour" in the hotel was a lovely old chap who played for Glamorgan.He told me about this game and reeled off the Surrey team no problem,from 1957! W.G.(Billy) Davies.He got Tom Clark out and Tony Lock got him twice.

http://static.espncricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1950S/1957/ENG_LOCAL/CC/SURREY_GLAM_CC_11-13MAY1957.html

Looking at the table, Hampshire's first priority would surely have been to ensure that Surrey did not win, with wining themselves being a nice potential bonus, thus they batted Surrey out of the match. I doubt that they seriously started thinking a win was on until the Surrey wickets started tumbling.

Badges wrote:My Wife and i thoroughly enjoyed our first "holiday" for eighteen months! If i knew how i'd post some photos of the virtually empty ground while many were forced to watch from the balcony ,including our friends who came for two days though we were able to swap tickets to get in and out when needed.

I'm so glad Hampshire got exactly what they deserved.What were they thinking of continuing on and on after lunch on day two with the dodgy weather that was forecast? 488 ? Do me a favour.Also on that topic,why did we put them in? The toss should be to decide who bats first in the vast majority of cases including this one.

Another thing that puzzled me was why Virdi (and Burns) elected to take a single for the night watchman.Burns got out soon after when he should have been the non striker.

Our "next door neighbour" in the hotel was a lovely old chap who played for Glamorgan.He told me about this game and reeled off the Surrey team no problem,from 1957! W.G.(Billy) Davies.He got Tom Clark out and Tony Lock got him twice.

http://static.espncricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1950S/1957/ENG_LOCAL/CC/SURREY_GLAM_CC_11-13MAY1957.html

It was rather surreal to see The Peter May Boys' banner dangling from a hotel balcony overlooking the pitch, along with a few others in support of both teams.

The decision to bowl first was the obvious one given the overcast conditions on the first day and the forecast of a brighter second day. The reason it failed was that Jamieson broke down almost immediately. Had he been fit, it is reasonable to have assumed we might have bowled them out for something like 200-220 late on Day 1 and enjoyed the conditions the late-order Hampshire batsmen benefitted from for most of Monday.

Good point about posting photos - does anyone know if it is possible to do that on this site, and if so how to do it?

In the first hour yesterday 14 overs were bowled and the Hampshire 12th man went on SEVENTEEN times.

A Glos/Middlesex draw would still mean we can get top two, right? But still mathematically nigh on impossible?

Forget it Mate.

Middle are making a real fight of it! Come on the Middle!

Its the hope that gets you in the end

Middx have gone from 241-4 after 118.2 overs to 241-8 at the end of the 121st over

I'm hoping for a trip to Northants or Essex.......................

Leicester could overtake us next week.

If they do then they'll deserve it.