SA Footy

In round 1, Rocco Calabria and Jeff Walker both played their 400th games for Pooraka. In round 2, Neil Dollery plays his 400th game for the Ingle Farm District Cricket Club. Well done to all three ...... that's a lot of Saturday afternoons.

Pooraka vs Walkerville this week! Will be a fiery contest. Hope the pooraka boys have their heads pulled in. Potentially an upset!

Port Pirie Power wrote:Pooraka vs Walkerville this week! Will be a fiery contest. Hope the pooraka boys have their heads pulled in. Potentially an upset!

Bailey must've, just brought up his 100 in the 35th over. 3/165

How does Damian Miller go? Ex Walkerville, has been cleared to Mallala

Interesting game at Caterer on the weekend.
Fulham were 7/77 with 6 of the 7 given out LBW, before their 8 and 9 put on 151 to dig them out of trouble before losing the last 3/3 to post 231.
In reply SPOC are 5/52 with a bit of work to do.

Trader wrote:Interesting game at Caterer on the weekend.
Fulham were 7/77 with 6 of the 7 given out LBW, before their 8 and 9 put on 151 to dig them out of trouble before losing the last 3/3 to post 231.
In reply SPOC are 5/52 with a bit of work to do.

Genuine LBW's or questionable?

Would have been frustrating for the fielding captain....

Interesting pitch at Payneham on the weekend. After about the 4th ball that genuinely rolled (1 being an LBW) the umpires met in the middle and came to the decision that if a players gets out to one of these deliveries they will call it a dead ball.
Hopefully when they rip up the pitch after Christmas they can produce a half decent deck.
Para Hills 209 v Payneham 4/27 at stumps.

heater31 wrote:

Trader wrote:Fulham were 7/77 with 6 of the 7 given out LBW

Genuine LBW's or questionable?

Lets just say there's a reason those umps are doing B1 games.

Interesting to look through some stats.
From the start of test cricket, through to 2015, LBW averages 144 of every 1000 dismissals.

Not to say turf cricketers are anything like test match batsmen, but the bowlers aren't exactly nipping the ball back off the seam all that often either, the bats don't get in behind the ball, etc. But for the sake of comparison, it's an easy to use, long term data set the gives a rough indication of the number of LBWs that could be expected in a game of cricket.

Looking at B1 (lowest grade with supplied umpires) games over the 2016/17 year, where an umpire was appointed, LBW accounted for 183 of 866 wickets, or 211 per 1000 dismissals, some 47% higher than would be expected.

Add in the fact that test umpires with years of training should be more confident projecting the direction of the ball than a lower grade turf umpire who can't see properly or hear much, and should be leaning on the side of not out when in doubt, it very clear that the bottom end turf umpires are VERY trigger happy.

Harry49 wrote:Interesting pitch at Payneham on the weekend. After about the 4th ball that genuinely rolled (1 being an LBW) the umpires met in the middle and came to the decision that if a players gets out to one of these deliveries they will call it a dead ball.
Hopefully when they rip up the pitch after Christmas they can produce a half decent deck.
Para Hills 209 v Payneham 4/27 at stumps.

Good little money spinner that one for the club.

I understand they've "projected" the cost at $90,000, hit up the office of rec and sport for half (45k), then hit the council up half of the remainder, and indicated they would put the remaining $22,500 in themselves.

$67,500 coming in, and a number of clubs who have relaid the same size square for between 30 and 40k over the last 5 years.

I hear there is a bit of a shortage of black clay at the moment, but even still, can't see the price climbing above 50.

How will it be a money spinner? If the ORS and council have committed to a percentage of the cost, it doesn't mean PNU will keep the remainder budgeted for - just means those parties will invest a lower %?

So if it's 50k, 25k from ORS, 12.5k from PAE and 12.5k from PNU?

Just means they're saving themselves a bit of money, but not actually making anything from it, unless i'm mistaken?

The Bedge wrote:How will it be a money spinner? If the ORS and council have committed to a percentage of the cost, it doesn't mean PNU will keep the remainder budgeted for - just means those parties will invest a lower %?

So if it's 50k, 25k from ORS, 12.5k from PAE and 12.5k from PNU?

Just means they're saving themselves a bit of money, but not actually making anything from it, unless i'm mistaken?

The ORS will stick to giving them half, yes, but ORS also allows you to include "in kind costs" which are very easy to pump up.
The Council (NPSP) once it budgets funds has no desire for the change back.

I suspect it will come in at 40k, ORS will hand over 30 based on "juiced figures and the Council will still chip in their 22,500, simply because they are too lazy to chase up the change.

Yeah fair enough, that actually makes a lot of sense haha!

heater31 wrote:

Trader wrote:Interesting game at Caterer on the weekend.
Fulham were 7/77 with 6 of the 7 given out LBW, before their 8 and 9 put on 151 to dig them out of trouble before losing the last 3/3 to post 231.
In reply SPOC are 5/52 with a bit of work to do.

Genuine LBW's or questionable?

Would have been frustrating for the fielding captain....

We had a trigger finger as well. I'm sure he almost went up with the bowler at one point!
Couldn't hear ball hitting bat, then pad either. Calling leg byes on leg glances that clearly came off the bat.
Sometimes its better umpiring yourself!

The Bedge wrote:How will it be a money spinner? If the ORS and council have committed to a percentage of the cost, it doesn't mean PNU will keep the remainder budgeted for - just means those parties will invest a lower %?

So if it's 50k, 25k from ORS, 12.5k from PAE and 12.5k from PNU?

Just means they're saving themselves a bit of money, but not actually making anything from it, unless i'm mistaken?

PCC, not PNU. Very, very, very different entities.

jo172 wrote:PCC, not PNU. Very, very, very different entities.

Eh same same you know what I mean

Ingle Farm can take the plastic spades and sand castle making buckets this Saturday.
Why would a council top dress an oval this time of year half way through a cricket match ?
Unbelievable.

Computer Crashed wrote:Ingle Farm can take the plastic spades and sand castle making buckets this Saturday.
Why would a council top dress an oval this time of year half way through a cricket match ?
Unbelievable.

Oops. Ridiculous!

tigerpie wrote:

Computer Crashed wrote:Ingle Farm can take the plastic spades and sand castle making buckets this Saturday.
Why would a council top dress an oval this time of year half way through a cricket match ?
Unbelievable.

Oops. Ridiculous!

whoever is batting this week would be fuming... especially if they are chasing 200+

Top dressing doesn't slow the outfield down as much as you'd think. Long, lush grass makes for a slow outfield. Also a top dressed outfield hacks the ball in no time.

Tony Clifton wrote:Top dressing doesn't slow the outfield down as much as you'd think. Long, lush grass makes for a slow outfield. Also a top dressed outfield hacks the ball in no time.

You have got to be kidding surely.