• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

English Domestic Season 2024

Nintendo

Nintendo

Cricketer Of The Year
Chin Music said:
On 247 we always had a thread about the possibility of someone getting 1k runs by the end of May. I note that Alex Davies has 481, Joe Clarke has 480. I guess the 2 games of Kookaburra have given the prospect of this happening a little more opportunity this year, but I think it is still a tough ask.
Click to expand...
Ben Compton did this two Summers back if you include the tour game vs NZ.
 
theegyptian

theegyptian

International Vice-Captain
mackembhoy said:
@Molehill truly one of the worst decisions I've seen given against your lads.

England captain not a fan either.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782415628948643888
Click to expand...
it's not a great one from a theoretical sense for an umpire to be giving often when it's spinning that much (generally outside the line or missing leg) but this isn't that bad a decision imo. Watching frame by frame on nvplay it hits the batsman in front of middle behind the popping crease so there isn't much more distance for the ball to travel. It's probably missing but not by loads. It's a tough one for the umpire because the batsman leg is moving laterally so it's very hard to judge where the ball hits - another reason why he should probably stick with the theory and give it not out.
 
Y

Yeoman

U19 Cricketer
tony p said:
After Joe Clarke & Will Young broke a very old Notts FC batting record, I thought I would check to see other old partnership records.

I went back to all Pre- Second World War partnership records, so any left before 1939.
Only 1 County has no Pre-second world war partnership records left.
I have excluded Durham for obvious reasons.

DERBYSHIRE.
9th wkt, 283, A Warren & J Chapman v Warw Blackwell 1910

ESSEX
7th wkt, 261, J Douglas & J Freeman v Lanc Leyton 1914
9th wkt, 251, J Douglas & S Hare v Derby Leyton 1921

GLAMORGAN
9th wkt, 203x, J Hills & J Clay v Worc Swansea 1929

GLOUCESTERSHIRE
5th wkt, 261, W G Grace & W Moberley v York Cheltenham 1876
6th wkt, 320, G Jessop & J Board v Sussex Hove 1903
7th wkt, 248, W G Grace & E Thomas v Sussex Hove 1896
8th wkt, 239, W Hammond & A Wilson v Lanc Bristol 1938
9th wkt, 193, W G Grace & S Kitcat v Sussex Bristol 1896

HAMPSHIRE
6th wkt, 411, R Poore & E Wynyard v Som Taunton 1899
7th wkt, 325, G Brown & C Abercrombie v Essex Leyton 1913
10th wkt, 192, A Bowell & W Livsey v Worc Bournemouth 1921

KENT
5th wkt, 277, F Woolley & L Ames v New Zealand Canterbury 1929
7th wkt, 248, A Day & E Humphreys v Som Taunton 1908
10th wkt, 235, F Woolley & A Fielder v Worc Stourbridge 1909

LANCASHIRE
1st wkt, 368, A Maclaren & R Spooner v Glos Liverpool 1903
2nd wkt, 371, F Watson & E Tyldesley v Surrey Manchester 1928
6th wkt, 278, J Iddon & H Butterworth v Sussex Manchester 1932
9th wkt, 142, L Poidevin & A Kermode v Sussex Eastbourne 1907
10th wkt, 173, J Briggs & R Pilling v Surrey Liverpool 1885

LEICESTERSHIRE
9th wkt, 160, R Crawford & W Odell v Worc Leicester 1902

MIDDLESEX
2nd wkt, 380, F Tarrant & J W Hearne v Lanc Lords 1914
4th wkt, 325, E Hendren & J W Hearne v Hants Lords 1919
5th wkt, 338, R Lucas & T C O'Brien v Sussex Hove 1895
7th wkt, 271x, E Hendren & F T Mann v Notts Nottingham 1925
8th wkt, 182x, M Doll & H Murrell v Notts Lords 1913
10th wkt, 230, R Nicholls & W Roche v Kent Lords 1899.

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE
Oldest partnership record remaining.
3rd wkt, 320, F Jakeman & L Livingston v South Africa Northampton 1951

NOTTINGHAMSHIRE
4th wkt, 361, A.O.Jones & J.R.Gunn v Essex Leyton 1905.
8th wkt, 220, G Heane & R Winrow v Som Nottingham 1935

SOMERSET
1st wkt, 346, H Hewett & L Palairet v York Taunton 1892

SURREY
1st wkt, 428, J Hobbs & A Sandham v Oxford Univ Oval 1926
2nd wkt, 371, J Hobbs & E Hayes v Hants Oval 1909
4th wkt, 448, R Abel & T Haywood v York Oval 1899
6th wkt, 298, H Harrison & A Sandham v Sussex Oval 1913
9th wkt, 168, E Holmes & E Brooks v Hants Oval 1936
10th wkt, 173, A Ducat & A Sandham v Essex Leyton 1921.

SUSSEX
1st wkt, 490, E H Bowley & John Langridge v Middx Hove 1933
2nd wkt, 385, E H Bowley & M Tate v Northants Hove 1921
5th wkt, 297 H W Parks & J H Parks v Hants Portsmouth 1937
7th wkt, 344 K Ranjitsinhji & W Newham v Essex Leyton 1902
9th wkt, 178 H W Parks & A Wensley v Derby Horsham 1930

WARWICKSHIRE
3rd wkt, 327, W G Quaife & S Kinneir v Lanc Birmingham 1901
8th wkt, 228, A J Croom & R E S Wyatt v Worc Dudley 1925

WORCESTERSHIRE
1st wkt, 309, F Bowley & H Foster v Derby Derby 1901
5th wkt, 393, E Arnold & W Burns v Warw Birmingham 1909
9th wkt, 181, J A Cuffe & R Burrows v Glos Worcester 1907

YORKSHIRE
1st wkt, 555, H Sutcliffe & P Holmes v Essex Leyton 1932
8th wkt, 292, R Peel & Lord Hawke v Warw Birmingham 1896.

So all these records are at least 85 years old , bar the Northants one.

A lot of famous names here but a few lesser lights too.

Hope you find it interesting, surprised that Middx & Surrey had that many old records still.
Click to expand...
The Oval was notoriously flat in the 20s and 30s.
 
C

Chin Music

State 12th Man
Starfighter said:
If Bosser Martin were around today Rob Key would put him in charge of all the test pitches and get a police es-cort for his ten ton roller.
Click to expand...
That reminds me of Mike Gatting referring to himself as the heavy-roller. Key himself was hardly known for his playing day slimness....
 
wpdavid

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Chin Music said:
Sadly those runs v NZ weren't given FC status so his record doesn't stand in terms of FC runs. I should have clarified that I meant FC runs.
Click to expand...
I wonder why not, unless it was one of those tour games when teams could play more than eleven blokes at various times.

I remember back in 1973 Glen Turner hit 1000+ before the end of May when all of those were for the touring NZ side.
 
C

Chin Music

State 12th Man
wpdavid said:
I wonder why not, unless it was one of those tour games when teams could play more than eleven blokes at various times.

I remember back in 1973 Glen Turner hit 1000+ before the end of May when all of those were for the touring NZ side.
Click to expand...
I am guessing you are right and it was exactly that type of game.
 
ataraxia

ataraxia

International Coach
theegyptian said:
it's not a great one from a theoretical sense for an umpire to be giving often when it's spinning that much (generally outside the line or missing leg) but this isn't that bad a decision imo. Watching frame by frame on nvplay it hits the batsman in front of middle behind the popping crease so there isn't much more distance for the ball to travel. It's probably missing but not by loads. It's a tough one for the umpire because the batsman leg is moving laterally so it's very hard to judge where the ball hits - another reason why he should probably stick with the theory and give it not out.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It looks a lot worse than it is on a cursory look given how far the batter moved to the off-side.
 
C

Chin Music

State 12th Man
HeathDavisSpeed

HeathDavisSpeed

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Hmmm. Just looked at the Essex accounts and if it wasn’t for legal fees regarding the racism allegations (800k over two years), their accounts would be merely lacklustre (losses of about 900k over the period). Still, the auditors have still agreed with the board that Gloucs are a going concern, though the justification is a little flimsy IMO.
 
Y

Yeoman

U19 Cricketer
Given that noticeably increasing income is unlikely, Glos either have to cut expenses considerably (their non-playing staff looks proportionally high) or sell the ground, the value of which is the only think keeping them solvent, and which is not a sustainable long term strategy.

I would though comment their accounts for their clarity. It was especially interesting to see the receipts and expenses for each venue and type of match.
 
Third_Man

Third_Man

U19 Cricketer
Yeoman said:
Given that noticeably increasing income is unlikely, Glos either have to cut expenses considerably (their non-playing staff looks proportionally high) or sell the ground, the value of which is the only think keeping them solvent, and which is not a sustainable long term strategy.

I would though comment their accounts for their clarity. It was especially interesting to see the receipts and expenses for each venue and type of match.
Click to expand...
Are Zafar Gohar and Bancroft playing for free? How bad must Middlesex's position be, without a ground as a fixed asset on their balance sheet for them to not have an overseas this year - although I suspect Du Plooy isn't cheap. Glos have over 2 million payroll expenses for a squad of 29 [and 25 coaching]. Seems high. By comparison in 2022 Lancashire spent 3.4m on (87!) players and coaching staff combined. [Men's playing squad was 28 now down to 25.]
 
Last edited:
Molehill

Molehill

International Captain
Third_Man said:
Are Zafar Gohar and Bancroft playing for free? How bad must Middlesex's position be, without a ground as a fixed asset on their balance sheet for them to not have an overseas this year - although I suspect Du Plooy isn't cheap. Glos have over 2 million payroll expenses for a squad of 29 [and 25 coaching]. Seems high. By comparison in 2022 Lancashire spent 3.4m on (87!) players and coaching staff combined. [Men's playing squad was 28 now down to 25.]
Click to expand...
How can you have almost as many coaches as players? Are some part time? Are some actually players re-defined?

If a cull does come in the CC in the near future, it's starting to become a little more obvious which Counties will be cast adrift.
 
Molehill

Molehill

International Captain
That's some bowling attack Surrey have put out today. Hants in trouble at 68-6 and Steel hasn't even had a bowl yet. Roach, Worrall, Atkinson and Clark all getting in before him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top