SA Footy

Posted: **Wed Oct 27, 2021 5:38 pm**

bloods08 wrote:Just looking for others thoughts on this.

In A2 Gepps Cross v Fulham, Gepps had bowled 79 overs by 5.48 and were ready to bowl their 80th, when Fulham declared meaning Gepps had to bat for 1 over. Previously if a team got bowled out or declared after 5.30, the opposition didn’t have to bat. In my opinion this should not be happening as it doesn’t encourage teams to get through their overs quickly. If Gepps had gone the other way and bowled slowly they get fined or lose points. What makes it worse is that one of the umpires (who has been umpiring in the league for years) didn’t know the by law had changed as he doesn’t have Facebook.

What Fulham did was within the rules, but I feel is not within the spirit of the game. Just looking for others opinions.

Yeah poor form IMO.
If they were bowled out, different story.
I'd be spewing if I was the opening bowler when the skip says you've got 1 over after potentially sitting around for 4 1/2 hours.

The umpiring comment astounds me?
These guys get paid decent money so surely keep up with bylaw changes.
Not having Facebook excuse is bloody laughable.

Posted: **Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:15 pm**

Did they get a wicket in the one over?

Posted: **Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:38 pm**

bloods08 wrote:Just looking for others thoughts on this.

In A2 Gepps Cross v Fulham, Gepps had bowled 79 overs by 5.48 and were ready to bowl their 80th, when Fulham declared meaning Gepps had to bat for 1 over. Previously if a team got bowled out or declared after 5.30, the opposition didn’t have to bat. In my opinion this should not be happening as it doesn’t encourage teams to get through their overs quickly. If Gepps had gone the other way and bowled slowly they get fined or lose points. What makes it worse is that one of the umpires (who has been umpiring in the league for years) didn’t know the by law had changed as he doesn’t have Facebook.

What Fulham did was within the rules, but I feel is not within the spirit of the game. Just looking for others opinions.

Nope fair play to Fulham. Show intent that they want to play aggressive cricket and win.

Posted: **Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:51 pm**

Don't you lose two overs for an innings changeover?

Posted: **Wed Oct 27, 2021 8:35 pm**

It’s a garbage rule. Heyzer needs to step in and actually do something.
Absolutely zero incentive to bowl your overs quickly.
80 overs per day. 3 over change over.

Posted: **Wed Oct 27, 2021 9:35 pm**

Tony Clifton wrote:Don't you lose two overs for an innings changeover?

No, at any change of innings, the number of overs remaining is recalculated. Playing time left until 6.00pm divided by 3.5 then rounded up = overs remaining.. So with a 10 minute changeover you are effectively losing 3 overs.

Posted: **Wed Oct 27, 2021 9:54 pm**

helicopterking wrote:It’s a garbage rule. Heyzer needs to step in and actually do something.
Absolutely zero incentive to bowl your overs quickly.
80 overs per day. 3 over change over.

The problem with this is that you may end up with some late finishes. I don't think the current rule presents a major issue.

Posted: **Thu Oct 28, 2021 6:04 am**

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:
helicopterking wrote:It’s a garbage rule. Heyzer needs to step in and actually do something.
Absolutely zero incentive to bowl your overs quickly.
80 overs per day. 3 over change over.

The problem with this is that you may end up with some late finishes. I don't think the current rule presents a major issue.

You’re right. I doubt many players want to play later than they have to. Especially if across the other side of town.
Why it’s not a major issue, little benefit in actually bowling your overs quickly.

Posted: **Thu Oct 28, 2021 10:06 am**

bloods08 wrote:Just looking for others thoughts on this.

In A2 Gepps Cross v Fulham, Gepps had bowled 79 overs by 5.48 and were ready to bowl their 80th, when Fulham declared meaning Gepps had to bat for 1 over. Previously if a team got bowled out or declared after 5.30, the opposition didn’t have to bat. In my opinion this should not be happening as it doesn’t encourage teams to get through their overs quickly. If Gepps had gone the other way and bowled slowly they get fined or lose points. What makes it worse is that one of the umpires (who has been umpiring in the league for years) didn’t know the by law had changed as he doesn’t have Facebook.

What Fulham did was within the rules, but I feel is not within the spirit of the game. Just looking for others opinions.

The bylaw hasn't changed.
This has always been the case.
The bylaw was clarified as a lot of clubs didn't understand it, but it has always been the case that you can declare between 5:30 and 5:50 to sneak in one or a few overs.

The '6-over rule' allows a team that bowls the opposition out, or completes their 80 overs, the reward of being able to decline to bat if there are 6 overs or less. It is a reward, not a right.

If you haven't bowled the side out, or completed your overs, you are required to bat under the laws of cricket, simple as that.

Posted: **Thu Oct 28, 2021 10:08 am**

tigerpie wrote:
bloods08 wrote:Just looking for others thoughts on this.

In A2 Gepps Cross v Fulham, Gepps had bowled 79 overs by 5.48 and were ready to bowl their 80th, when Fulham declared meaning Gepps had to bat for 1 over. Previously if a team got bowled out or declared after 5.30, the opposition didn’t have to bat. In my opinion this should not be happening as it doesn’t encourage teams to get through their overs quickly. If Gepps had gone the other way and bowled slowly they get fined or lose points. What makes it worse is that one of the umpires (who has been umpiring in the league for years) didn’t know the by law had changed as he doesn’t have Facebook.

What Fulham did was within the rules, but I feel is not within the spirit of the game. Just looking for others opinions.

Yeah poor form IMO.
If they were bowled out, different story.
I'd be spewing if I was the opening bowler when the skip says you've got 1 over after potentially sitting around for 4 1/2 hours.

The umpiring comment astounds me?
These guys get paid decent money so surely keep up with bylaw changes.
Not having Facebook excuse is bloody laughable.

The quality of umpires in ATCA at the moment is not in line with the pay they demand.

I get the comment that if you don't pay good money people won't do it, but at the moment we are paying money for people who aren't up to scratch.
I'd be very comfortable if all grades went to self umpired given what we are seeing.

Posted: **Thu Oct 28, 2021 10:38 am**

bloods08 wrote:Just looking for others thoughts on this.

In A2 Gepps Cross v Fulham, Gepps had bowled 79 overs by 5.48 and were ready to bowl their 80th, when Fulham declared meaning Gepps had to bat for 1 over. Previously if a team got bowled out or declared after 5.30, the opposition didn’t have to bat. In my opinion this should not be happening as it doesn’t encourage teams to get through their overs quickly. If Gepps had gone the other way and bowled slowly they get fined or lose points. What makes it worse is that one of the umpires (who has been umpiring in the league for years) didn’t know the by law had changed as he doesn’t have Facebook.

What Fulham did was within the rules, but I feel is not within the spirit of the game. Just looking for others opinions.

Fair enough IMO, if Fulham thought they had enough runs on the board then all good, it was sunny still at 6pm and as an opening bowler I would've loved to give it all for one over, they've given themselves two less overs to score off than what they've given Gepps.

Personally, when you have a dude out in the middle still on 40 odd I would've told him to go the slap and try to eek out another 16 runs at least, 244 is hardly a massive score.

Posted: **Thu Oct 28, 2021 10:54 am**

Lightning McQueen wrote:Personally, when you have a dude out in the middle still on 400 odd I would've told him to go the slap and try to eek out another 16 runs at least, 244 is hardly a massive score.

**** dont ask much do ya :lol:

Posted: **Thu Oct 28, 2021 11:13 am**

The Bedge wrote:
Lightning McQueen wrote:Personally, when you have a dude out in the middle still on 400 odd I would've told him to go the slap and try to eek out another 16 runs at least, 244 is hardly a massive score.

**** dont ask much do ya

pwned!!

Posted: **Fri Oct 29, 2021 9:28 am**

With the weather worse than it was 2 weeks ago you would presume an announcement will follow today in relation to tomorrow uncovered grounds again.

Posted: **Fri Oct 29, 2021 10:24 am**

the smokey wrote:With the weather worse than it was 2 weeks ago you would presume an announcement will follow today in relation to tomorrow uncovered grounds again.

How many grounds don't cover their pitches? Most or not many?

Posted: **Fri Oct 29, 2021 10:29 am**

Barkeroo wrote:
the smokey wrote:With the weather worse than it was 2 weeks ago you would presume an announcement will follow today in relation to tomorrow uncovered grounds again.

How many grounds don't cover their pitches? Most or not many?

Hardly any. It used to be a requirement to play A1 to have them.

Think only 2 clubs have them for a 2nd ground too.

Posted: **Fri Oct 29, 2021 10:34 am**

the smokey wrote:With the weather worse than it was 2 weeks ago you would presume an announcement will follow today in relation to tomorrow uncovered grounds again.

Our U12s cancelled tonight. So far 1 game played from 4 rounds. Lad is going stir crazy.

Posted: **Fri Oct 29, 2021 11:18 am**

the smokey wrote:With the weather worse than it was 2 weeks ago you would presume an announcement will follow today in relation to tomorrow uncovered grounds again.

2 weeks ago there was 30mm of rain that fell in the early hours of friday morning.
this week we got 10mm, which fell in two halves, being lunchtime thursday and then roughly 8pm thursday evening.

Not sure I agree that this week is worse than 2 weeks ago.

How many runs are you guys chasing this week? haha

Posted: **Fri Oct 29, 2021 12:09 pm**

Trader wrote:
the smokey wrote:With the weather worse than it was 2 weeks ago you would presume an announcement will follow today in relation to tomorrow uncovered grounds again.

2 weeks ago there was 30mm of rain that fell in the early hours of friday morning.
this week we got 10mm, which fell in two halves, being lunchtime thursday and then roughly 8pm thursday evening.

Not sure I agree that this week is worse than 2 weeks ago.

How many runs are you guys chasing this week? haha

Hahaha..... not chasing runs I can promise that. 10mL is being very light in a lot of areas quite a few had substantially more yesterday let alone overnight as well. i personally think day 2 of a game should very rarely be called off by the association.

Posted: **Fri Oct 29, 2021 12:48 pm**

the smokey wrote:
Trader wrote:
the smokey wrote:With the weather worse than it was 2 weeks ago you would presume an announcement will follow today in relation to tomorrow uncovered grounds again.

2 weeks ago there was 30mm of rain that fell in the early hours of friday morning.
this week we got 10mm, which fell in two halves, being lunchtime thursday and then roughly 8pm thursday evening.

Not sure I agree that this week is worse than 2 weeks ago.

How many runs are you guys chasing this week? haha

Hahaha..... not chasing runs I can promise that. 10mL is being very light in a lot of areas quite a few had substantially more yesterday let alone overnight as well. i personally think day 2 of a game should very rarely be called off by the association.

So play on a wet wicket, then the juniors and women play on a minefield of dents next day?
Or your opening bowlers can only bowl 1/2 pace?
Its gotta be fit for play regardless of what week it is.

I've had an umpire standing in a puddle/pond on the next pitch over saying play will start in 15 minutes.
The pitch was nowhere near ready for play. And that was day 1 of a 2 dayer!

SA Footy

ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA

Re: ATCA