How about this one gloves

Instead of Umpires quoting all the obscure rulings in the Book( look at me) they somehow manage to get the basics right like LBW

would be a massive boost for the Cricketers?????????

irongloves you are pathetic in your attempt to denigrate anything to do with umpires. When you were born the doctors obviously slapped your mum.

When will you learn that the umpires and the DDCA are separate entities and that only umpires or former umpires are capable of selecting them to stand in games.

The fact is that those selected to the DDCA Executive are done so through their clubs and allegiances so there would be more bias in the DDCA Executive in having a say on umpires selections.

As you are too thick to comprehend this point logically this will be my last post on this matter.

saw something today that no doubt was considered great tactics by home side but it will kill cricket if it is used by all clubs.

home side wins toss, invites visitors to bat and then ups Mordi ante of 7:2 offside field by persisting with 8:1 offside field for the not-so-slickster, who bowled wide of offstump; lucky to bowl three balls at the stumps in his first spell. the tactics were obviously aimed at negating scoring rate but immedietly took lbw, bowled and perhaps even caught behind out of the equation as the top order bats were too disciplined to play at the ball with three slips and two gullies in place, plus three others in front of the wicket and a solitary fielder at midwicket on legside.

lots of dot balls but the proof was in the pudding: 300 plus at stumps.

stood behind the batsman facing for slickster's second spell and the keeper was standing at least at first slip and even 1.5 slip for some balls before they were delivered! (would the oracle of umps who wrote the book care to enlighten us as to whether there in anything in the rules that empowers umps to call wide for such persistent bowling?)

no more than two fielders are allowed behind square leg to stop bodyline type tactics. time for authoritires to nip this sort of crap in the bud for next season. imagine an 8:1 field in test cricket. it'll kill the game . same could happen with club cricket supporters. it is utter crap.

 

Goochy Poochy, you back from the dead? As I recall, in your last post on Jan 11 you said, "Actually...don't bother replying. I wont be around to read it".   It had such a final ring to it!

Your "utter drivel"is precisely the sort of shallow and uninsightful comment with which you have come to be associated. Catchy throwaway line but lacking any reasoning to back up what may otherwise be considered a valid opinion. But then, you have never been know to articulate anything on here.

That, perhaps, is why you love the limited scope of faecesbook and twittsville. This thread is for people who want to contribute something that can at least be considered by the DDCA honchos and accepted/dismissed as they see fit. You again spectacularly fail to contribute anything worthwhile to the forum, earnest or comedic, and your "utter drivel" comment is itself just that. 

(By the way, love the fact that you could't keep away. Stay on. We may yet agree on something.)    

One tactic I know the DDCA are considering is the 8 men on the boundary at a recent Turf 5 match. Might find that fielding restriction may be changed for 2 day games to limit this practice.

Tks stumpy.

 

stumpy wrote:

---

One tactic I know the DDCA are considering is the 8 men on the boundary at a recent Turf 5 match. Might find that fielding restriction may be changed for 2 day games to limit this practice.

---

 what T5 GAME was it?

I won't hold my breath but another issue for DDCA consideration:

The relevant committee should revisit the points system for players and not just fixate on maximum points for foreign/first class players but also introduce extra points for players poached from other DDCA clubs, especially the strugglers, to play in the poaching club's top two turf sides.

Additional penalty point/s should especially attach to young up-and-coming types (say between the ages of 17 and 23) who may have played all their junior cricket at one club, only to be poached when they are ready to fire at a senior level.

Rather than cannibalising from withing our own comp, clubs will find it more rewarding to look beyond their navels at other metropolitain and country comps, and indeed beyond, as some clubs have already done with success. This will help towards equalising the competition, otherwise certain clubs may find themselves cruelly denied hopes/plans of advancement when their gun young player or players are lured away by another or other ddca clubs.

Great idea ironbrains. Lets get as many overseas/non ddca players as we can. Then we will have no kids ready to fire. Great wind up.          

Great wind up insofar as getting TGO to respond the way I knew you would. The DDCA is already taking care of overseas players through the points system, but its a great leap to contend that "Then we will have no kids ready to fire".

Rich clubs such as yours enticing the likes of Armitage and Staude and attempting to get Nathan King last year (and Slick before that) is really what is stopping kids from firing at the clubs that have nurtured them. Oh I forgot: they did fire for Springy, though.

Your club hasn't done too badly either with overseas and non DDCA players, and in that regard good luck and we all look forward to the results of your next trip to Sri Lanka. Clubs need to think more outside the square as one small club has done, rather than grabbing youngsters off other struggling clubs. The club I refer to kept all its junior championship winning players who went on to win a T1 premiership under an overseas General, much like you returning from Hallam to be TGO at Harold Rd.

The AFL has tried to do the same with its equalisation scheme.