Chin Up Didcot !

Despite resting some of their best players, Moreton comfortably dispatched the Didcot IV for the second year running. Johnny & Nic have promised to write their own views on the game, but as they are jumping out of a plane this morning, it may never happen- so here's a summary of why you lost

The Birthday Boy was spitefully run out by Fuz, who later, when the "chips" were down, failed to run fast enough to catch a cold, Howard predictably "dropped the Shield" 'cos the sun was in his eyes, the much hyped "Rent Boys" were useless with the bat & Thompy played no shot to the penultimate ball of the match.

Have I missed anything ?

THE LBW LAW FFS GUYS.

Evening, this post is to inform and educate some members of the squad, take note, even though there are no lbw's on a Thursday night, if you happen to be umpiring during a normal game your stupidity can have serious repercussions, so learn...

Officially:

LAW 36 LEG BEFORE WICKET

1. Out LBW

The striker is out LBW in the circumstances set out below.

(a) The bowler delivers a ball, not being a No ball

and (b) the ball, if it is not intercepted full pitch, pitches in line

between wicket and wicket or on the off side of the

striker's wicket

and (c) the ball not having previously touched his bat, the striker

intercepts the ball, either full pitch or after pitching, with

any part of his person

and (d) the point of impact, even if above the level of the bails

either (i) is between wicket and wicket

or (ii) is either between wicket and wicket or outside

the line of the off stump, if the striker has made

no genuine attempt to play the ball with his bat

and (e) but for the interception, the ball would have hit the

wicket.

2. Interception of the ball

(a) In assessing points (c), (d) and (e) in 1 above, only the first

interception is to be considered.

(b) In assessing point (e) in 1 above, it is to be assumed that the

path of the ball before interception would have continued

after interception, irrespective of whether the ball might have

pitched subsequently or not.

3. Off side of wicket

The off side of the striker's wicket shall be determined by the

striker's stance at the moment the ball comes into play for that

delivery.

Sourced from

http://www.lords.org/data/files/laws_of_cricket_2003-8685.pdf

the MCC and if they don't know the laws...



in easier to understand language:

Simon Hughes:

---

A red graphics strip is superimposed between the stumps to show where the ball pitched, and on which line the ball was travelling when it struck the batsman. The Red Zone is now familiar to TV audiences as part of the Hawk-Eye LBW package.

The three examples below illustrate how the Red Zone helps us to gauge which parts of the LBW law need to be considered if the batsman is struck on the pads in front of, or close to, the wicket.

The first picture shows a right-handed batsman receiving a ball which pitches outside the line (wicket to wicket) of the leg stump. If this happens he cannot be given out.

In the second picture we see a batsman struck on the pad outside the line of the off stump; because he is making a genuine attempt to play the ball then, in the opinion of the umpire, he cannot be given out.

In the third picture, however, there is no escape; if, in the umpire's opinion, the batsman is notmaking a genuine attempt to play the ball when struck outside the line of the off stump and the ball would have gone on the hit the stumps, then the batsman is out.

Copyright material reproduced under license from Macmillan Publishers Ltd. London, England

Copyright © Simon Hughes 2001

http://www.channel4.com/sport/cricket/analyst/misc/ana_14.html

BASICALLY:
unless the ball pitches perfectly (essentially on middle) does not move in either direction and is not too high it's not out.

just because it hits the pads doesn't mean we have to get trigger happy.

Unless you are 100% certain (which should happen about once every 12 years)
IT IS NOT OUT.

the sheer number of variables mean that an lbw at our level is the rarest thing going, not 3 in one game!

sorry for the rant but there were some shockers today so the message of this is:

if you are umpiring: it's NOT OUT ...ever...pretty much.

The Groom's Nightmare

The long awaited rematch with Wallingford Squash Club turned out to be totally different affair from the first game. For a start, we could only muster a X rather than than XI and Wallingford Squash Club are now amalgamated with Hampshire Cricket Academy with a bonus Aussie thrown in. The toss was lost and the Squash went into bat against our second choice opening attack of Jonny and Fuz. Fuzzy's nightmare was about to begin! He tried two overs from either end but even a change of ends couldn't prevent him being carted for 56 runs from his 4 overs.Their first batsman to leave the middle retired on 30 odd then out strode the aussie, after clobbering Jonny for a boundary the bowler got one to jag back and hit his leg stump, his only success. Despite some respectable bowling from Sam Smith and James Price we couldn't prevent them from hammering us for 179! Fuz managed to divert a possible catch into his adam's apple rendering him silent for while and while he went off the field for treatment we took two quick wickets and as soon as he returned they continued the onslaught! Our bowling attack was so depleted that even Bomber got 4 overs. Bomber's trademark appears to be to concede a 6 off the first ball of every over then try to claw it back from there! Interesting. Onto the Batting, not much to say really apart from without Bomber's 37 our humble 89 would have looked a whole lot poorer! Fuz scored 6,4 W. an explosive if not incredibly short innings although he did think he should get credit for keeping up with the run rate albeit for a very brief period of time! Hampshire boy bowled Lockey, Carter and Yaxley out of the sun and our sojourn in the middle soon came to an end. A word though must be said about the Squash captain who always buys us a couple of jugs of beer after the game, other opposition captains take note!