The Cricket Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
I'd be very careful about throwing the ball to Turner. Because whilst he will often bowl good overs, he does have that one horror over in him. And in a 6 over chase, one horror over could be match-defining.

If we even get to the 5 over mark, that is...
Well we have to use 5 bowlers. Wood, Currie, Howell are certs. I'd be reluctant to use Daws TBH.
 
Well we have to use 5 bowlers. Wood, Currie, Howell are certs. I'd be reluctant to use Daws TBH.

Not with less than 10 overs.

The only rule when bowling less than 10 overs is that no-one can more than two. So we could use just three bowlers if we want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tomw24
Not with less than 10 overs.

The only rule when bowling less than 10 overs is that no-one can more than two. So we could use just three bowlers if we want.
Ah Ok, that changes things then. Wood 2, Currie 2 and 2 from the others then I would say.
 
I'm the opposite with Dawson. Depending on the match-up, I'd be open to him bowling an over (or two).
 
I'm assuming a wet ball has resulted in Mills bowling two high full-tosses and duly being removed from Sussex's bowling innings after less than one over. In theory that should be very helpful for Essex. But I'm guessing the rain might come back there at some point, and potentially no-result the match anyway.

As I suspected.

Essex finally perform, and yet the rain prevents a certain four points.
 
One more good over should be enough. Because something in the region of 65 to 68 from 4 overs would be very tough.