.JPG)
c/o of MAG
P | W | L | D | Bat | Bowl | Pen | Pts | Avge | |
Nottinghamshire | 14 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 34 | 41 | 0 | 219 | 15.64 |
Lancashire | 14 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 29 | 34 | 0 | 207 | 14.78 |
Essex | 14 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 24 | 38 | 0 | 206 | 14.71 |
Warwickshire | 14 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 23 | 35 | 1 | 201 | 14.35 |
Hampshire | 14 | 6 | 3 | 5 | 24 | 38 | 0 | 198 | 14.14 |
Gloucestershire | 14 | 8 | 4 | 2 | 18 | 33 | 0 | 195 | 13.92 |
Yorkshire | 14 | 6 | 3 | 5 | 18 | 35 | 0 | 189 | 13.50 |
Durham | 13 | 4 | 3 | 6 | 24 | 39 | 3 | 172 | 13.23 |
Kent | 14 | 4 | 3 | 7 | 22 | 38 | 0 | 180 | 12.85 |
Surrey | 13 | 2 | 3 | 8 | 25 | 29 | 0 | 150 | 11.53 |
Northamptonshire | 14 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 32 | 0 | 161 | 11.50 |
Somerset | 14 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 29 | 37 | 9 | 161 | 11.50 |
Worcestershire | 14 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 29 | 33 | 0 | 158 | 11.28 |
Leicestershire | 14 | 3 | 6 | 5 | 31 | 35 | 0 | 154 | 11.00 |
Middlesex | 14 | 5 | 8 | 1 | 22 | 42 | 1 | 151 | 10.78 |
Glamorgan | 14 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 26 | 36 | 0 | 150 | 10.71 |
Derbyshire | 14 | 1 | 7 | 6 | 18 | 33 | 1 | 114 | 8.14 |
Sussex | 14 | 1 | 9 | 4 | 30 | 34 | 0 | 112 | 8.00 |
Well done MAG, That table illustrates what we all knew to be the REAL championship table, One without the ridiculous situation whereby the team that won the group in the first stage is somehow penalised with a points deficit to the team that finished second to them.
ReplyDeleteSurely it would have made sense for no points from the matchs between the group winners to be included in the championship stage of the competition.
But thats enough about whats happened, It won't change anything, The record books will still say that Warwickshire won the CC
Even if we all know its a hollow victory!
Yes, a total disgrace really IMHO. Classic case of the administrators not thinking thie situation through. I guess they wanted it more even when all counties played their final 4 games not realising someone, us unfortunately, would be completely stitched up by the ridiculous ruling. The only thing you can say in Warwickshires defence is a) it's not their fault b) they actually lost one game fewer than we did and c) we knew the ramifications and rules when we lost to them twice, so you could say it's our fault if you're being incredibly harsh. But no other sport, apart from cricket, would you finish 4th and be the champions. Plus our reward for winning it in real terms may also be to be placed back into Div2 as surely you have to go back to the 2019 finishing positions if the counties decide the conference system has shot its bolt now covid(hopefull) has subsided. Imagine the uproar and riots in Football if Manchester Utd won the Premier League after 38 games, only to be denied as they lost to say, Leeds Utd both home and away. Personally, I'm more gutted that we lost out on the BWT final by a whopping 0.5 of a point as the lads deserved some recognition for such a brilliant effort in red ball cricket. However as people heard me spouting at the game last week, when we last won the County Championship back in 2010 look at the final table standings so what comes round always goes round again if you wait long enough ?
ReplyDeleteFair point about a return to the standings at the end of the 2019 season Stonewall, Notts finished that season relegated and in all fairness deserved to go down.
ReplyDeleteBut that was the Notts 2019 version, I think its fair to say that Notts 2021 style would not spend long in division 2.
Which should please the likes of Somerset, Lancashire and Yorkshire in the season Notts (hopefully) are away..
It won’t happen, but why not wind the county championship back 20 odd years for next year ,have 1 division of 18 ,then divide back into two divisions based on next years standings for 2023?
ReplyDeleteMind you , taking the positive, it’s something that we are talking about the system this year robbing us , rather than the position of the club in many recent championship efforts.