.JPG)
.JPG)
After a season largely viewed as a sucessful one, or at least an encouraging one, the silverware cabinet is back empty again.
There was no break in the precedence and no one has yet retained the T20 trophy - the Outlaws' run chase in the quarter-final was very poorly executed against a very mediocre Hampshire bowling line-up but doesn't take this award.
What does take the award is the series of bumbling, mind-boggling mistakes that led to half a Royal London One Day Cup game being lost to the effects of "the weather" on the only day of the season where the sun shone long enough and bright enough to redden the skin on my knees - yes that day at Derby.
Firstly, we have the muddled thinking that we needed a fourth format to be played at all.
Then, there's the perceived need to play all of the one day cup games away from Trent Bridge - most of the other Hundred hosting venues also served as venues for Royal London group games, not in its entirety granted, but for one or two games at least. There was only four games at "home" anyhow.
Then there's the choice of venue, why the heck would we give home advantage away? Yes perhaps use Derby as a neutral venue but not as a home game against Derbyshire - absolute madness. Whoever made that conscience decision needs to re-evaluate their employment role. Perhaps they will be able to find more satisfying employment if they remake the Muppets!
But, to steal the award with their own bungling incompetence we have the Derbyshire groundstaff and the guy on the Derby tannoy who belatedly drip-fed the news of the dereliction of duty performed by the groundsmen only 40 minutes before the scheduled start. Collectively they showed to be ineffectual in hiding leaks and perhaps would be more suited in Boris Johnson's Government.
"It was a leak into the covers."
"A very isolated, heavy shower - no one could have predicted it."
It wasn't a flood of Biblical proportions, a flash flood or a freak of global warming!
Eventually we were told the covers weren't even in place over the rest of the square for the previous night, just over the wicket - crazy!
Match Report from MAG - click or swipe
A three and a half hour delay in which the Three Amigos ran out of their magic blue sawdust and ended up taking their tractor to Carpetrite or some indoor nets to get some mats.
If only there had been someone professionally competent that could have recognised the night's covering error earlier in the morning and not just a few moments before the toss.
Agreed - it was a scandalous situation that should never have happened .
ReplyDeleteWas anyone at Derby reprimanded over the farcial sequence of events ?
Good old cricket
ReplyDeleteWe should only play there in the future as the visiting team.
ReplyDeleteGiven the "friendly" rivalry, it was, as said, a dumb decision to play there for a "home" fixture.
Think if there are not at least 2 RL home matches at Trent Bridge, plus more other membership covered games in July and August (certainly not none in August again) membership numbers could fall off the cliff.
Anyone know what the membership was last year? And how it compares to recent seasons?
ReplyDeleteIs it classified “ commercial “ information giving out annual Member numbers .
ReplyDeleteObviously the pandemic has played havoc with the regular numbers of the latter years.
But what effect has the bizarre home fixture list had on the latest Membership renewals?
From memory I think Notts had a fully paid up Membership of 7000+ recently.
That’s interesting, but since when? I’m sure they used to publish the categories and numbers of members in the annual report.
ReplyDeleteI think they’ll see a drop in membership as collateral damage as long as the tv money and ticket sales from test , t 20 and 100 come in.i may be wrong about all of this and would be interested to see what anyone else knows or thinks.
6000 members according to the recently published general committee role advertisement that has been sent out to members.
DeleteThanks.. I think I remember the membership was said to be north of 7 thousand at one time. Again , i can’t speak with any evidence or certainty.
DeleteWith regard to cricket finances I reckon all the balls are still up in the air .
ReplyDeleteLets hope for a full return to a proper “ full” season in 2022 , with full TB ground access and a return to a policy of pay on the day admittance for the 4 dayers.
Whichever way you look at it , the Membership fees for Notts CCC represent amazing value even allowing for “ home” matches in “distant” parts .
The cost of living seems to be exploding and the Notts membership in 2022 for a Senior is roughly the same price as a meal out for 4 people in a pretty average pub or restaurant!?
On top of which the actual ground itself is a pleasure to be sitting in - Derby and Leicester fans and others must be pretty envious when they see the facilities and views that the Notts spectators enjoy .
Mostly agree with the article. However DCCC later confirmed BOTH teams were willing to start on time but the umpires refused. Ironically the Gross Incompetence Award should go to your team for their lack of performance when the match eventually started. See you again next season xx
ReplyDeleteNo Derbyshire player was seen on that pitch until hours after the scheduled start time of 11AM, whereas at the time of the initial (misleading) announcement at 10.20 the Notts players were going through their warm-up routines. ONLY ONE TEAM WANTED TO PLAY THAT MORNING. We've been here before, water has gone under that bridge and today Notts now find themselves jettisoned into the basement LVC division with the dross after being the best county by any measure other than the one dreamt-up by the ECB in 2021.
DeleteGood points made .
ReplyDeleteWas the covering of the Derby ground left up to the Derby groundstaff - or did The Notts groundstaff also have some jurisdiction as to where the various covers were placed overnight? After all , it was a " home" match for Notts - albeit a strange one.
In fairness to Simon above, he has a point. Direbyshire completely outplayed us on the day, irrespective of the circumstances of the reduced game from memory on the day was it 27 overs I think. The lad Wood played out of his skin and our bowling, particularly at the death was shocking. As a Notts fan don't normally stick up for Direby, but they were without an entire top 6 batting unit. I think, Godleman, Reece, Madsen and DuPloy were all absent and their overseas I think Ben McDermott also missing. Granted we were without an entire team but our reserves are of better quality than Direby's and we still had a decent smattering of first team players playing the game. Despite the result I thought it was one of the most memorable days cricket in the whole season and enjoyed it still due to the strange circumstances involved on the day.
ReplyDeleteYou're missing the point. Derbyshire were much less likely to beat the Notts Second XI if the game was a full 50 overs - lacking their only batsmen of any sort of quality, them batting for a whole 50 overs would have been a tall order. So somehow they needed to reduce the match to something nearer a T20. The weather was set fair, so what could they do?
ReplyDeleteWe all saw the farce of that morning. If it had happened at an Hundred game with all ECB eyes looking then the three groundstaffers would have been strung-up on poles outside on Nottingham Road. As it was, the Match Referee was a homer and so they were allowed to get away with mugging Notts' youngsters without sanctions.
Yes it was memorable.
So Arthur what you are basically saying is that Notts were stitched up for that game ?Derby used a deliberate ploy to reduce the game from its full allocation of 50 overs to a more " lottery" type game of say 20/30 overs?
ReplyDeleteWell it turned out to be a memorable encounter for all the wrong reasons from a Notts point of view.
Plus its created some extra ill feeling between the two clubs.
Surely a lesson has been learnt and Notts can never again have a "home" match at Derby.
Hence winning the award, shared across the 3 dipsticks employed at DCCC as groundstaff and the blinded by the Hundred NCCC person(s) that thought DCCC would be able to suitably host a NCCC home fixture. Whilst the award is being shared out - the Match Referee, Devon Malcolm, who proved as much use as a wet paper bag who clearly underplayed the incompetence angle of it all in any report, if you believe nothing underhand had gone on.
DeleteNo I'm not missing the point at all. I was spouting on the train to the game I really hoped we batted first as my worry was that Direby could not bat anywhere near the 50 overs with their main batting unit being so depleted and although wanting a Notts victory didn't want a game that was all wrapped up about 230 pm. Look at how they were struggling in other formats, Matt Critchley was literally carrying their batting who was also missing due to the Hundred. I also muted on the day to all and sundry that could they even have tried to engineer a reduced over contest ? I cannot honestly think this was the case as it would be just too difficult a task to be precise and it could easily lead to an abandonment(not the worst result for them again you could cynically argue). My argument is our bowling was so awful on the day I think we would have lost regardless of the amount of overs. We were just downright poor on the day and their lad Wood had a day out. How often will he repeat an innings like that in his career. I thought at the time Direby should receive stiff sanctions irrespective of the circumstances involved. It's surely inexcusable for a pro groundstaff in this country of unpredictable wet weather to make such a huge oversight. There needs to be a deterrent to stop any other County making this error or worst still, even contemplating such a repeat if they were desperate for a result or even a no result.
ReplyDeleteSome good arguments and reasoning expressed on this thorny subject. We're Notts robbed ? Notts had an off day at exactly the wrong time. It happens. If that particular game was replayed a dozen times I reckon on all known form on the day ,that Notts would win nine of them . The whole episode has left a slightly bad taste in the mouths of many Notts members and travelling spectators.
ReplyDeleteWho would have thought it could rain unexpectedly overnight in England!!??
DCCC use 3 separate weather forecasters. Not one of the three predicted ANY rain overnight. That aside DCCC couldn't beat an egg or carpet all season. We won due to a one-off innings from Tom Wood and some dross NCCC bowling. You lost because you were second best on the day. Strange but true.
DeletePlease don't rewrite history Simon. Yes we lost but we lost because the remnants of our squad just wasn't equipped for a glorified T20 game - 11 players lost to the 100 - our entire T20 squad. So how could Derbyshire win - answer shorten the game. We discussed this in the stands whilst watching the farce of the morning's proceedings - an unprovable, deliberate act. I'm not sure which 3 weather forecasters DCCC use but the Met Office, Meteo (who the BBC use) and whatever Samsung use on Androids all forecast localised showers in our region for the evening prior to the game. Ilkeston, West Hallam and Oakwood all had rain so why wouldn't the Racecourse. Well it did but some incompetents failed to cover the square prior to a game - the 3 probable "forecasters" that you refer to Simon. Tom Wood chanced his arm and it came off on the day (not his arm!).
DeleteHandbags at dawn is the best way to sort this one out!?
ReplyDeleteWe will probably never really know if Notts were stitched up on the day .
I suppose every now and then David beats Goliath?
Was this just one of those days and the Gods were on Derbys side for a few hours?