Any cricket lovers on here?
Comments
-
BBC weather showing 90% chance of rain all day. Not looking good.0
-
With a lack of breeze needed to shift it.0
-
That doesn't really give the full picture, according to both the BBC and Met Office it should currently be raining but isn't.mrb123 said:BBC weather showing 90% chance of rain all day. Not looking good.
The nature of the weather system we are worried about is its a narrow band of rain, if it sits over us all day (as forecast) it will rain like that for sure. But currently it seems to be a bit further North than what the forecast said so we are just out of the bottom of it and it's dry (I'm maybe 6 miles east of the ground but the blue dot covers it below)
0 -
If the ground was a few miles South it would probably be dry most of the day, till mid-late afternoon... shame really.0
-
So what's your forecast?bobmcstuff said:If the ground was a few miles South it would probably be dry most of the day, till mid-late afternoon... shame really.
0 -
Not great based on the fact it's now raining! Although I'm probably slightly North of the ground as well as East. The radar continues to show us right on the edge of the band of rain and forecast to stay that way as it moves across.TheBigBean said:
So what's your forecast?bobmcstuff said:If the ground was a few miles South it would probably be dry most of the day, till mid-late afternoon... shame really.
It depends how this front moves through, it might improve later in the afternoon.
Such a shame as we really are on the edge of it - if I went out for a ride today down into Cheshire I'd ve pretty sure of having a dry ride.0 -
Tomorrow looks fine, why can't we just have a rain delay day!0
-
It really is touch and go. Showery weather is so annoying. The rain sat here all day yesterday but it’s sunny this morning. The wind seemed lighter than forecast and didn’t blow it over until gone midnight.0
-
It would have made sense to have a reserve day, but they jam the tests in these days.0
-
Joe Root:
"It doesn't get dark here in England until 10pm in the summer, why can't we just play until we bowl the overs? There's been a lot of chat about not bowling the overs. There are so many different ways of trying to find opportunities to get as much play in as possible."
I think if they can play they should play until they've done the overs - that would incentives them a bit. Yesterday it was brighter at 8 than it had been all day beforehand.0 -
I think that might be it now unfortunately - they've not had the inspection as it's started raining again and I don't think it's going to stop.0
-
Well obviously as soon as I said that stopped and looks quite bright.
Unfortunately I think they needed to be on already to take advantage of it. By the time they have done the clean up process it will be raining again.0 -
I'm going on the turbo which probably means they'll restart as soon as I get on
0 -
They said start at 1 but it's raining again- They needed to be already playing to take advantage of that dry spell. I think that's it, it's a draw.0
-
So frustrating as we are still right at the southern edge of this band of rain0
-
I agree with this chap.
People want results not draws and they throw away hours of potential play it's completely illogical. Like I said yesterday it brightened up after close of play and there was an hour or so around 8pm where it was the brightest it had been all day.
0 -
TV though innit plus even on bright days they start querying the light at 7pm for some reason. I never quite understand it when amateur teams will have midweek 20 over matches that don’t start until 6.30 or 7pm.0
-
The tv channel would cope.Pross said:TV though innit plus even on bright days they start querying the light at 7pm for some reason. I never quite understand it when amateur teams will have midweek 20 over matches that don’t start until 6.30 or 7pm.
0 -
Should have had all the matches in the south.0
-
As Atherton pointed out England bowled 23 overs in two hours yesterday whilst they were chasing a win and knowing bad weather was on the way, it's not good enough. They've no right to complain about umpires taking them off if they can't be bothered to make maximum use of the time that they are given.1
-
Only got to 90 overs in Australia's first innings half an hour into day two. If they think another ten overs would have made a difference, it's true, they need to look at themselves.verylonglegs said:As Atherton pointed out England bowled 23 overs in two hours yesterday whilst they were chasing a win and knowing bad weather was on the way, it's not good enough. They've no right to complain about umpires taking them off if they can't be bothered to make maximum use of the time that they are given.
At least yesterday made it clear they were right not to declare.0 -
Australia batters were massively time wasting throughout to be fair - the bowling side doesn't have full control over the speed. Yesterday it was taking Labuschagne 30 seconds to get back in his crease after each ball, he was getting a lot of abuse from the crowd.
Then we had to piss around with the light meter for a bit.0 -
One of my mates is down in wilmslow which is perhaps 10 miles south and its been bone dry...0
-
Let's be fair about it. We've done exactly the same many times before. And we'll do the same again at some point. Possibly not with Stokes as skipper but it'll happen again.bobmcstuff said:Australia batters were massively time wasting throughout to be fair - the bowling side doesn't have full control over the speed. Yesterday it was taking Labuschagne 30 seconds to get back in his crease after each ball, he was getting a lot of abuse from the crowd.
Then we had to piss around with the light meter for a bit.
Apparently most of the outfield is covered in puddles. About time for the umpires to grow a pair and call the ruddy thing off.0 -
As I type it's called off0
-
Not declaring did not result in us winning so where is the logic in your statement?kingstongraham said:
Only got to 90 overs in Australia's first innings half an hour into day two. If they think another ten overs would have made a difference, it's true, they need to look at themselves.verylonglegs said:As Atherton pointed out England bowled 23 overs in two hours yesterday whilst they were chasing a win and knowing bad weather was on the way, it's not good enough. They've no right to complain about umpires taking them off if they can't be bothered to make maximum use of the time that they are given.
At least yesterday made it clear they were right not to declare.
Prioritising a victim surcharge over winning the Ashes is appalling0 -
Did anybody else find YJB’s interview after his 99 incredulous.
He said that he could not be expected to keep wicket properly as he had not been able to train for 9 months. He also found it lovely to be back in the changing room with the support of all his mates.
I love the way Bazball has transformed English cricket but it needs to grow a pair when it comes to selection0 -
Declaring wouldn't have resulted in us winning either - we'd have had runs to chase instead and it'd still have been a washout.surrey_commuter said:
Not declaring did not result in us winning so where is the logic in your statement?kingstongraham said:
Only got to 90 overs in Australia's first innings half an hour into day two. If they think another ten overs would have made a difference, it's true, they need to look at themselves.verylonglegs said:As Atherton pointed out England bowled 23 overs in two hours yesterday whilst they were chasing a win and knowing bad weather was on the way, it's not good enough. They've no right to complain about umpires taking them off if they can't be bothered to make maximum use of the time that they are given.
At least yesterday made it clear they were right not to declare.
Prioritising a victim surcharge over winning the Ashes is appalling
I tend to think not declaring was the right choice since we were adding runs very quickly at that point whereas who knows how quickly we could have scored with our openers in potentially difficult conditions in the 4th.0 -
Sure, there needs to be more penalty for that on both sides, I'd always prefer a result to a rain draw, even if in 2013 I was happy enough to retain the ashes it still felt hollow (but then we won the next game anyway).JimD666 said:
Let's be fair about it. We've done exactly the same many times before. And we'll do the same again at some point. Possibly not with Stokes as skipper but it'll happen again.bobmcstuff said:Australia batters were massively time wasting throughout to be fair - the bowling side doesn't have full control over the speed. Yesterday it was taking Labuschagne 30 seconds to get back in his crease after each ball, he was getting a lot of abuse from the crowd.
Then we had to piss around with the light meter for a bit.
Apparently most of the outfield is covered in puddles. About time for the umpires to grow a pair and call the ruddy thing off.
I think they should just play to the conditions until they've done the 90 overs personally.0 -
In other news the India West Indies game might have been made a lot more interesting by rain... WI might have the chance to force a draw if they can bat it out, as India will have to declare to force a win...0
