SA Footy

bulldogproud wrote:

Tony Clifton wrote:West Torrens 6 down in their 2nd dig and 43 runs ahead

However Kelvin Smith still in and potentially Drew and Nielsen available this week? Could be a very interesting finish

I would assume that Drew and Nielsen would not be able to bat, as their replacements have been dismissed.

My assumption was wrong- both are batting today. Has there been a rule change in recent years re this?

bulldogproud wrote:

bulldogproud wrote:

Tony Clifton wrote:West Torrens 6 down in their 2nd dig and 43 runs ahead

However Kelvin Smith still in and potentially Drew and Nielsen available this week? Could be a very interesting finish

I would assume that Drew and Nielsen would not be able to bat, as their replacements have been dismissed.

My assumption was wrong- both are batting today. Has there been a rule change in recent years re this?

If you name the changes before the game anyone can replace anyone

Tony Clifton wrote:

bulldogproud wrote:

bulldogproud wrote:

Tony Clifton wrote:West Torrens 6 down in their 2nd dig and 43 runs ahead

However Kelvin Smith still in and potentially Drew and Nielsen available this week? Could be a very interesting finish

I would assume that Drew and Nielsen would not be able to bat, as their replacements have been dismissed.

My assumption was wrong- both are batting today. Has there been a rule change in recent years re this?

If you name the changes before the game anyone can replace anyone

I didn’t realise these changes neither. I wonder why WT sent in the two tail enders before Drew?

In the past, you needed to name the specific players the incoming players would take the place of: it had to be 'like-for-like' replacements. The change to 'open slather' replacements must have been recent.

bulldogproud wrote:In the past, you needed to name the specific players the incoming players would take the place of: it had to be 'like-for-like' replacements. The change to 'open slather' replacements must have been recent.

If named on the team sheet before the toss, no need for like-for-like - you take the risk on where the game sits if you choose a bowler to replace a bat etc. If applying for a permit, that is where like-for-like is supposed to apply, but clubs always try to justify selections around batting or bowling "all-rounders" making the whole system a bit of a farce. Clubs have been advised to slash all likely replacements on the team sheet but don't think this is being done (hearing some clubs flat-out refusing to do so) - they are also meant to provide a hardcopy team-sheet at the toss which is also being ignored by some. Time for a bit of a crack-down in this IMO.

[quote

I didn’t realise these changes neither. I wonder why WT sent in the two tail enders before Drew?[/quote]

Pretty sure Drew didn't play, another PlayHQ glitch

The Ladder and Run Home - Round 10

Kensington 200 (Wood / Uni / ET)
Port 140 (ND / St / Bye)
West Torrens 120 (Ad / TTG / SD)
University 120 (SD / Kens / ND)

Woodville 100 (Kens / ET / St)
Glenelg 100 (St / Pros / Ad)
TTG 90 (ET / WT / Pros)
Sturt 80 (Glen / Port / Wood)

East Torrens 75 (TTG / Wood / Kens)
Northern Districts 70 (PA / Ad / Uni)
Prospect 55 (Bye / Glen / TTG)
Southern District 30 (Uni / Bye / WT)
Adelaide 10 (WT / ND / Glen)

Kens def WT outright on the back of the 50 over premiership. Strong favourites to go the double.
Port easily defeat Adelaide.
Uni easily defeat Sturt, whose finals hopes look improbable and relegation a real possibility.
Woodville storming home and look the most likely to break into the 4, narrowly missing out on an outright vs Prospect.
Tea Tree Gully dominate Glenelg to keep their finals hopes alive, except for the last wicket partnership of 126!
Northern Districts still a chance to avoid relegation with a win against Southerns.

bulldogproud wrote:In the past, you needed to name the specific players the incoming players would take the place of: it had to be 'like-for-like' replacements. The change to 'open slather' replacements must have been recent.

It's never been like for like changes completely

You can sub a batsman for a bowler if you want, provided that you've named it beforehand. Because you don't know whether you'll be batting or bowling so it can't be manipulated.

Whereas if the change occurs mid-game eg if a Redbacks quick is unexpectedly available then you have to apply for a permit which must be like for like.

Tony Clifton wrote:

bulldogproud wrote:In the past, you needed to name the specific players the incoming players would take the place of: it had to be 'like-for-like' replacements. The change to 'open slather' replacements must have been recent.

It's never been like for like changes completely

You can sub a batsman for a bowler if you want, provided that you've named it beforehand. Because you don't know whether you'll be batting or bowling so it can't be manipulated.

Whereas if the change occurs mid-game eg if a Redbacks quick is unexpectedly available then you have to apply for a permit which must be like for like.

Tony, at some stage of my 40 years in Grade cricket, it was 'like for like'. However, that may have been a longgggg time ago (I am a VERY OLD man ). Shark Hunter and you are right though; once they brought in that you had to nominate full changes BEFORE the match, the 'like for like' was dropped.
As an anecdote, I remember when we brought David Hookes in for either Roger Dugan or Kevin Lewis, claiming 'like for like' as David bowled some spin.
Come to think of it, this may be why they got rid of 'like for like'
Cheers

Couple of big games this round for finals and top 8 aspirations
Sturt vs Glenelg
ET vs TTG

Peckers will lose Charlesworth and Weatherly soon, not sure they have the batting depth to cover them. Sayers playing with a slight hamstring injury

Interesting decision by Glenelg to bat first at Sturt given the conditions and Sturt's batting struggles recently. Got Harry Conway in their line up today too.

Bays 6/124 at the moment.

Tony Clifton wrote:Interesting decision by Glenelg to bat first at Sturt given the conditions and Sturt's batting struggles recently. Got Harry Conway in their line up today too.

Bays 6/124 at the moment.

Is Tom Kelly playing for the Redbacks tomorrow? That might've been a good enough reason.

Play finished at Port Adelaide tonight at 6 30pm.
With 4 overs still to be bowled.

Was listening to the chatter from players as they all walked off. The umpires were apparently saying they had had enough of play and by that stage it was already an hour late.

Port scrape past Northern Districts 8 wickets down. Big result.

East Torrens with some crucial wickets vs TTG in a massive game. Gulles 6/120 chasing 206. Will be huge for ET if they can pull it off. Keeps them out of the relegation zone and TTG lose touch with the four.

Southern District and Adelaide fighting to avoid outright losses to Uni and West Torrens respectively

Kensington chase down Woodville's 163 but not without a bit of a struggle. Their batting has been poor despite their ladder position. Is Ross likely to play any more games?

Still baffled by Glenelg choosing to bat yesterday. That decision could cost Glenelg a finals spot and ensure Sturt finish in the top 8. Sliding doors moment for both clubs.

The Ladder and Run Home - Round 11

Kensington 220 1.539 (Uni / ET)
Port 160 1.453 (St / Bye)
West Torrens 150 1.656 (TTG / SD)
University 150 1.347 (Kens / ND)

Woodville 100 1.355 (ET / St)
Glenelg 100 0.960 (Pros / Ad)
Sturt 100 0.922 (Port / Wood)
East Torrens 95 1.215 (Wood / Kens)

TTG 90 0.926 (WT / Pros)
Northern Districts 70 0.850 (Ad / Uni)
Prospect 55 0.709 (Glen / TTG)
Southern District 30 0.564 (Bye / WT)
Adelaide 10 0.472 (ND / Glen)

Is the final 4 decided? Positions 5 to 10 wide open after the weekend’s results!

Aerie wrote:The Ladder and Run Home - Round 11

Kensington 220 1.539 (Uni / ET)
Port 160 1.453 (St / Bye)
West Torrens 150 1.656 (TTG / SD)
University 150 1.347 (Kens / ND)

Woodville 100 1.355 (ET / St)
Glenelg 100 0.960 (Pros / Ad)
Sturt 100 0.922 (Port / Wood)
East Torrens 95 1.215 (Wood / Kens)

TTG 90 0.926 (WT / Pros)
Northern Districts 70 0.850 (Ad / Uni)
Prospect 55 0.709 (Glen / TTG)
Southern District 30 0.564 (Bye / WT)
Adelaide 10 0.472 (ND / Glen)

Is the final 4 decided? Positions 5 to 10 wide open after the weekend’s results!

Yes, final four sewn up. Very unusual with two rounds to play.

Glenelg has two easy games, would need to win both outright (possible) and rely on Uni/WT losing both or Port losing to Sturt (as they have Bye in last round).

Second spot vital also to get home Semi.

With all the Poms flying home tomorrow, makes it even more interesting.

Vital games for relegation are ET vs Woodville, and then potentially an Elimination Final in final round between Sturt and Woodville.

Pengelley x 2 not listed in Buffs first grade side, injured? or something more going on at Glandore?
Have been good servants at the club so hopefully just injured.

Tony Clifton wrote:Port scrape past Northern Districts 8 wickets down. Big result.

East Torrens with some crucial wickets vs TTG in a massive game. Gulles 6/120 chasing 206. Will be huge for ET if they can pull it off. Keeps them out of the relegation zone and TTG lose touch with the four.

Southern District and Adelaide fighting to avoid outright losses to Uni and West Torrens respectively

Kensington chase down Woodville's 163 but not without a bit of a struggle. Their batting has been poor despite their ladder position. Is Ross likely to play any more games?

Still baffled by Glenelg choosing to bat yesterday. That decision could cost Glenelg a finals spot and ensure Sturt finish in the top 8. Sliding doors moment for both clubs.

Named for this round.

Amazing how different the squads look when there are no English players around

Prospect beaten outright in a day can’t recall it ever happening before