A forum for Glamorgan CCC fans
User avatar
By Vetchetarian
#27889
Well, I didn't see that coming. 394 all out after yesterday's struggle.
What a knock from Wagg. and a career best by Carey.
All we need now is for Wagg to take 5 wickets today, and glamman will have to eat some crow. :)
exileKT8 liked this
User avatar
By Bucksman
#27890
Vetchetarian wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:59 pm What a knock from Wagg.
All we need now is for Wagg to take 5 wickets today, and glamman will have to eat some crow. :)

Excuse the intrusion! It's surprising he didn't play more in 2018. He's caused my lot a few problems in the past.
By glamman
#27891
Will be very happy if Wagg takes a load of wickets and congratulations to him and Carey.
However it would be better if the batsmen scored these runs and then the bowlers could concentrate on taking wickets. Can only win games by taking 20 wickets relatively cheaply. Better to win one and lose one than draw two. Can only really have one all rounder. Need 4 bowlers who are chosen purely on their bowling and if they score runs then great.
User avatar
By Vetchetarian
#27892
glamman wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 4:17 pm Will be very happy if Wagg takes a load of wickets and congratulations to him and Carey.
However it would be better if the batsmen scored these runs and then the bowlers could concentrate on taking wickets. Can only win games by taking 20 wickets relatively cheaply. Better to win one and lose one than draw two. Can only really have one all rounder. Need 4 bowlers who are chosen purely on their bowling and if they score runs then great.
In an ideal cricketing world it would indeed be far better if batsmen scored the bulk of the runs, but late order runs by the likes of Wagg have often saved the day, and should be applauded.

Re " only really have one all rounder ". If a team were lucky enough to have, say, Ian Botham and Andrew Flintoff on their books, would you pursue that strategy ? Who would you leave out ?
User avatar
By Vetchetarian
#27893
Bucksman wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 3:44 pm
Vetchetarian wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:59 pm What a knock from Wagg.
All we need now is for Wagg to take 5 wickets today, and glamman will have to eat some crow. :)

Excuse the intrusion! It's surprising he didn't play more in 2018. He's caused my lot a few problems in the past.
Your " intrusion " is most welcome. Clearly Wagg isn't everyone's cup of tea, but he's a real combatant. I like him.
By exileKT8
#27894
Yes well done Wagg and Carey, the latter showing once more that he knows how to hold a bat.

Agree with your sentiments Glamman but on the basis of their form at the end of the 50 over Cup and in recent games Wagg and Douthwaite deserve their place.

Win one and lose one will bring more points but if MM is trying to stabilise things first and make us hard to beat, albeit with a cautious lengthy batting line up then good in my book. We have had enough defeats, often heavy in recent seasons. If we can have a Glammy dressing room who are in habit of not losing and at the end of the season Glammy are no longer viewed as an easy rollover by other Counties then for me that is progress.
Vetchetarian liked this
By glamman
#27896
Vetchetarian wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 4:27 pm
glamman wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 4:17 pm Will be very happy if Wagg takes a load of wickets and congratulations to him and Carey.
However it would be better if the batsmen scored these runs and then the bowlers could concentrate on taking wickets. Can only win games by taking 20 wickets relatively cheaply. Better to win one and lose one than draw two. Can only really have one all rounder. Need 4 bowlers who are chosen purely on their bowling and if they score runs then great.
In an ideal cricketing world it would indeed be far better if batsmen scored the bulk of the runs, but late order runs by the likes of Wagg have often saved the day, and should be applauded.

Re " only really have one all rounder ". If a team were lucky enough to have, say, Ian Botham and Andrew Flintoff on their books, would you pursue that strategy ? Who would you leave out ?
You are missing the point. Flintoff and Botham get in the side on their bowling alone irrespective of their runs and therefore both can play. If they weren’t worth their place as bowlers one would have to give way.
By glamman
#27897
Might be a bit early to say “I told you so” but I will anyway.
User avatar
By Vetchetarian
#27898
glamman wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 5:47 pm
Vetchetarian wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 4:27 pm
glamman wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 4:17 pm Will be very happy if Wagg takes a load of wickets and congratulations to him and Carey.
However it would be better if the batsmen scored these runs and then the bowlers could concentrate on taking wickets. Can only win games by taking 20 wickets relatively cheaply. Better to win one and lose one than draw two. Can only really have one all rounder. Need 4 bowlers who are chosen purely on their bowling and if they score runs then great.
In an ideal cricketing world it would indeed be far better if batsmen scored the bulk of the runs, but late order runs by the likes of Wagg have often saved the day, and should be applauded.

Re " only really have one all rounder ". If a team were lucky enough to have, say, Ian Botham and Andrew Flintoff on their books, would you pursue that strategy ? Who would you leave out ?
You are missing the point. Flintoff and Botham get in the side on their bowling alone irrespective of their runs and therefore both can play. If they weren’t worth their place as bowlers one would have to give way.
Flintoff and Botham were all rounders, and were chosen as such.
By glamman
#27899
Vetchetarian wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:23 pm
glamman wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 5:47 pm
Vetchetarian wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 4:27 pm

In an ideal cricketing world it would indeed be far better if batsmen scored the bulk of the runs, but late order runs by the likes of Wagg have often saved the day, and should be applauded.

Re " only really have one all rounder ". If a team were lucky enough to have, say, Ian Botham and Andrew Flintoff on their books, would you pursue that strategy ? Who would you leave out ?
You are missing the point. Flintoff and Botham get in the side on their bowling alone irrespective of their runs and therefore both can play. If they weren’t worth their place as bowlers one would have to give way.
Flintoff and Botham were all rounders, and were chosen as such.
Are you saying neither were good enough bowlers to get in the team if they could not bat? I think their stats would suggest otherwise. England learnt the hard way in 50 over cricket when they selected bits and pieces players in the 90s. At first class level an “all-rounder” should be good enough to be selected on the basis of one of his skills alone (batting, bowling or keeping). A great all-rounder (Sobers, Kallis) is good enough to be selected on either alone (batting and bowling). You cannot have one of your four main bowlers selected on the basis of his batting rather than his bowling. You have to take 20 wickets!
By glamman
#27900
exileKT8 wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 4:37 pm Yes well done Wagg and Carey, the latter showing once more that he knows how to hold a bat.

Agree with your sentiments Glamman but on the basis of their form at the end of the 50 over Cup and in recent games Wagg and Douthwaite deserve their place.

Win one and lose one will bring more points but if MM is trying to stabilise things first and make us hard to beat, albeit with a cautious lengthy batting line up then good in my book. We have had enough defeats, often heavy in recent seasons. If we can have a Glammy dressing room who are in habit of not losing and at the end of the season Glammy are no longer viewed as an easy rollover by other Counties then for me that is progress.
Do you want them in the team to bat or bowl? I am not sure we are as likely to take the 20 wickets we need cheaply enough without another out and out strike bowler. Morgan is not going to spin us to victory and while Wagg might not go for many he is not a big threat. Douthwaite is too inconsistent but will hopefully improve. I can understand wanting to rest bowlers and the staff have a better idea on their workloads. I note that De Lange bowled for Ammanford on Saturday again. Meschede seems out of favour / injured and Smith is still injured. Obviously the other seamers on the staff are not thought to add anything. With three going up this year I don’t think we are out of contention.
By Nick_Glam
#27901
Well done to Wagg and Carey.

I think generally we would be better off with 3 seamers, but hard to argue with selecting a player who scores a hundred.
User avatar
By Vetchetarian
#27902
glamman wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:03 pm Might be a bit early to say “I told you so” but I will anyway.
Something else you " told " us .

" Do not see much merit to keep playing Wagg in 4 day cricket ".

Thank goodness the powers that be see it a bit differently, albeit at the moment. :)
User avatar
By Vetchetarian
#27903
glamman wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:40 pm
Vetchetarian wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:23 pm
glamman wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2019 5:47 pm

You are missing the point. Flintoff and Botham get in the side on their bowling alone irrespective of their runs and therefore both can play. If they weren’t worth their place as bowlers one would have to give way.
Flintoff and Botham were all rounders, and were chosen as such.
Are you saying neither were good enough bowlers to get in the team if they could not bat? I think their stats would suggest otherwise. England learnt the hard way in 50 over cricket when they selected bits and pieces players in the 90s. At first class level an “all-rounder” should be good enough to be selected on the basis of one of his skills alone (batting, bowling or keeping). A great all-rounder (Sobers, Kallis) is good enough to be selected on either alone (batting and bowling). You cannot have one of your four main bowlers selected on the basis of his batting rather than his bowling. You have to take 20 wickets!
Let me first qualify my position here. I am not talking about the short game, which has different requirements.

My point is that Botham and Flintoff were good enough to get in a team based on their batting and bowling, and could have appeared in the same team.

Back in the day Glam had a plethora of all rounders, viz, Wooller, Watkins, Walker and Pressdee. I no longer have my Wisdens to confirm, but I'm pretty sure that at least 3 of those regularly took the field in the same match. So clearly, if they are good enough in both bowling and batting, they can play together. They could all catch mosquitoes, as well. :)
By glamman
#27904
If this is the best team to take the 20 wickets we need to win without conceding too many runs then everything is right with the world.
Lancashire at Colwyn Bay

Starting to think about who will take the field fo[…]