ATCA

[Trader]

Mark Hanson must be incredibly fit, only 7 boundaries and a 6 out of his 500+ runs for the season.

Haha, yeah those lazy SOBs at Pooraka do the bare minimum when it comes to entering scores into MyCricket.

[Senor Moto Gadili]

Now you're testing my memory...

1 - Cuconuts, M
2 - Gabb (wk)
3 - Hanson
4 - Overall
5 - Bailey
6 - Behrendt
7 - Fox
8 - Eranga
9 - Pickford
10 - Clayfield
11 - Carey
12 - Fonseka

If Gabb selected as WK, how does Fonseka get in?

[Trader]

Now you're testing my memory...

1 - Cuconuts, M
2 - Gabb (wk)
3 - Hanson
4 - Overall
5 - Bailey
6 - Behrendt
7 - Fox
8 - Eranga
9 - Pickford
10 - Clayfield
11 - Carey
12 - Fonseka

If Gabb selected as WK, how does Fonseka get in?

I wouldn't have picked him and I recon Jamie Barnes would have a clear claim for that spot.

I suspect they picked the team of the year on the assumption that he would win keeper of the year and then Gabb piped him for that role and they were too lazy to reselect the team.

[Sonofbrowny25]

The fact an allrounder wins the medal yet doesn't win all round performance of the year is beyond me

[Trader]

The fact an allrounder wins the medal yet doesn't win all round performance of the year is beyond me

I can accept the umpire voted award (medal) having a different winner to the league appointed award (all rounder of the year).
Fox simply didn't have anyone taking votes off him.

But I'm not sure Eranga should have won the all rounder award anyway.

Fox - 440 runs at (at 54.88), 13 wickets (at 32.08). (medal)
Eranga - 280 runs (at 28.2), 24 wickets (at 16.71). (all rounder award)
Clayfield - 250 runs (at 35.43), 28 wickets (at 13.46).

I'd have given it to Clayfield, 4 extra wickets is worth more than 30 runs IMO. Clayfield also has better batting and bowling averages than Eranga.

But I did notice they put up Eranga's fielding award when they announced him as the all rounder, perhaps they were trying to help justify his selection!

[Sonofbrowny25]

The fact an allrounder wins the medal yet doesn't win all round performance of the year is beyond me

I can accept the umpire voted award (medal) having a different winner to the league appointed award (all rounder of the year).
Fox simply didn't have anyone taking votes off him.

But I'm not sure Eranga should have won the all rounder award anyway.

Fox - 440 runs at (at 54.88), 13 wickets (at 32.08). (medal)
Eranga - 280 runs (at 28.2), 24 wickets (at 16.71). (all rounder award)
Clayfield - 250 runs (at 35.43), 28 wickets (at 13.46).

I'd have given it to Clayfield, 4 extra wickets is worth more than 30 runs IMO. Clayfield also has better batting and bowling averages than Eranga.

But I did notice they put up Eranga's fielding award when they announced him as the all rounder, perhaps they were trying to help justify his selection!

Clayfield also hit a ton and Eranga i think had a Highscore of 58. again little things i think are just a touch off,
Even the fielding award got me. he is a super fielder and you don't take on his arm, but (being a little bias) Ruhode is elite and i think it was mentioned on here earlier this season. he was incredible all year.

Again though all still have their reasons to win the award. i think Clayfield stat wise was the stand out all year. hundred, 8fa and 2nd in bowling i think he would have been a deserving winner or at least tied for it.

[Senor Moto Gadili]

The fact an allrounder wins the medal yet doesn't win all round performance of the year is beyond me

I'm not sure you can classify yourself as an allrounder if you only take 13 wickets. I reckon 250 runs and 20 wickets is the minimum standard.

[Sonofbrowny25]

The fact an allrounder wins the medal yet doesn't win all round performance of the year is beyond me

I'm not sure you can classify yourself as an allrounder if you only take 13 wickets. I reckon 250 runs and 20 wickets is the minimum standard.

so we are saying he won it more as a batter who bowls?

he bats 4 and opens the bowling that to me still is allrounder and his batting was just stronger this season.

[Senor Moto Gadili]

The fact an allrounder wins the medal yet doesn't win all round performance of the year is beyond me

I'm not sure you can classify yourself as an allrounder if you only take 13 wickets. I reckon 250 runs and 20 wickets is the minimum standard.

so we are saying he won it more as a batter who bowls?

he bats 4 and opens the bowling that to me still is allrounder and his batting was just stronger this season.

We are talking about the best allrounder, which is based on overall performance with bat, ball and in the field. Fox falls short because he only took 13 wickets. I would have rated Eranga, Clayfield, Barnes and Pickford ahead of Fox as the best allrounder.

[Punter707]

Eranga has played international cricket - Says enough doesn't it.
He has been a very good player for SPOC but he wasn't in the best 12 this season. Simple.

[Reilly]

Bit of rain around where I am today and obviously a little more forecast for tonight/tomorrow morning. Could make things interesting tomorrow. Might throw some doubt into the minds of some captains as to what to do if they win the toss...

[Sonofbrowny25]

The fact an allrounder wins the medal yet doesn't win all round performance of the year is beyond me

I'm not sure you can classify yourself as an allrounder if you only take 13 wickets. I reckon 250 runs and 20 wickets is the minimum standard.

so we are saying he won it more as a batter who bowls?

he bats 4 and opens the bowling that to me still is allrounder and his batting was just stronger this season.

We are talking about the best allrounder, which is based on overall performance with bat, ball and in the field. Fox falls short because he only took 13 wickets. I would have rated Eranga, Clayfield, Barnes and Pickford ahead of Fox as the best allrounder.

100% agree with that.

[Sonofbrowny25]

Eranga has played international cricket - Says enough doesn't it.
He has been a very good player for SPOC but he wasn't in the best 12 this season. Simple.

and when he wants to turn it on he does!

[Senor Moto Gadili]

Big weekend of cricket ..... all the best to those teams playing in Grand Finals. I hope the weather doesn't play a part.
In A1 the two best teams will face off, but I think it's a massive home ground advantage for Para Hills. They bat very deep which allows their top order to play their shots. Flinders Park have done exceptionally well coming up from A2 last year and covering the loss of Taylor through injury, but I think their only chance is to bat first and post a competitive score of 250+. I'm tipping a comfortable win for the Hornets.
In A2 the minor premiers Goodwood miss out, so it's Woodville South v Port Districts and a premiership and promotion is up for grabs. Port Districts must be pinching themselves. Two weeks ago playing finals was almost a remote chance, but they managed to play week 2 against Payneham and snuck into 4th spot on the back of 100 run 9th wicket partnership. Then last week they chase down Goodwood's total of 213 after being 5 for 122. They are on a roll so I'm tipping them to get up in a close 1.
In A3, it's Unley v Gepps Cross. Unley have been top all year and only lost the one game. They have a very well balanced side. Gepps Cross are similar to Port Districts in that they were able to sneak into the top 4 after beating Trinity outright in the final round, when all their opponents were washed out. They then caused a massive upset by beating Golden Grove. I think Unley will be too strong.
Good luck to all those involved.

[Trader]

Interesting to see that last year Gepps Cross were due to be relegated from A3 and PAOC were set to be promoted from B1.
ATCA sensed it wasn't a good move for either club, and after agreements from all parties, the teams remained in their previous grades.

Gepps Cross are playing in an A3 grand final and PAOC picked up the wooden spoon in B1.
Imagine how lopsided their seasons would have been if they did swap grades last year!

Props to Heyzer for getting this one right!

[tigerpie]

Para Hill's must've bowled well or were Flinders pk chucked in on a wetty?
Anyone know?
All out 65 in 45 overs looks bad.

[no_remorse28]

Para Hill's must've bowled well or were Flinders pk chucked in on a wetty?
Anyone know?
All out 65 in 45 overs looks bad.

mccard and Carey bowled amongst well together in partnership.
Pitch was well covered and rock hard, started late because of wet surrounds. was an incredible bowling and fielding effort.

A lot of loose shots cost Flinders Parks wickets. Hence the 6 catches by the wk

[Senor Moto Gadili]

Para Hill's must've bowled well or were Flinders pk chucked in on a wetty?
Anyone know?
All out 65 in 45 overs looks bad.

mccard and Carey bowled amongst well together in partnership.
Pitch was well covered and rock hard, started late because of wet surrounds. was an incredible bowling and fielding effort.

A lot of loose shots cost Flinders Parks wickets. Hence the 6 catches by the wk

So, why did you dob them in if the pitch was so good?

[tigerpie]

Para Hill's must've bowled well or were Flinders pk chucked in on a wetty?
Anyone know?
All out 65 in 45 overs looks bad.

mccard and Carey bowled amongst well together in partnership.
Pitch was well covered and rock hard, started late because of wet surrounds. was an incredible bowling and fielding effort.

A lot of loose shots cost Flinders Parks wickets. Hence the 6 catches by the wk

So, why did you dob them in if the pitch was so good?

Good question, especially a grand final with wet surrounds.
Hard to keep the ball dry.
Ballsy decision on a rock hard pitch.

[no_remorse28]

Backed our bowling, was the captain's gut feel and we backed his instinct