What on earth happened at Sussex last night?

[The Large One]

From what I can gather, we needed 8 runs off the last 2 overs with 6 wickets in hand in order to beat Nottinghamshire last night. Somehow we managed to contrive to tie the match; the last man out off the last ball with the scores level. More quality batting down the order then.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Essentially Chris Adams happened. Needing 6 off something like 14 balls, he goes for the heroic 6 to try and win the game and promptly gets caught. Rather than playing the role of a responsible Captain guiding the team home with the runs needed he plays like a twat and then the tail end completely capitulates.

 

[Gazwag]

Essentially Chris Adams happened. Needing 6 off something like 14 balls, he goes for the heroic 6 to try and win the game and promptly gets caught. Rather than playing the role of a responsible Captain guiding the team home with the runs needed he plays like a twat and then the tail end completely capitulates.

I think that's a bit harsh, he did score 93 runs in 98 balls and we still had 4 wickets and 2 overs left when he was out

 

[Uncle Buck]

I think that's a bit harsh, he did score 93 runs in 98 balls and we still had 4 wickets and 2 overs left when he was out

Not harsh, he is the Captain and a top order batsman and in that situation it his job to bring the side home. The shot he got out to was completely stupid in that situation. He is an expirenced pro and should know better.

 

[Albionite83]

Sussex pluck a tie from the jaws of victory.

 

[West Hoathly Seagull]

I think my signature is totally appropriate. Too much

 

[The Large One]

Not harsh, he is the Captain and a top order batsman and in that situation it his job to bring the side home. The shot he got out to was completely stupid in that situation. He is an expirenced pro and should know better.

To blame the one person who put us in a winning position is harsh and unfair. Cricket is a TEAM game, and there was plenty of batting and deliveries left to win the game comfortably.

It’s a bit like solely blaming Danny Cullip after he has had an excellent game, when the Albion have drawn.

 

[CHAPPERS]

To blame the one person who put us in a winning position is harsh and unfair. Cricket is a TEAM game, and there was plenty of batting and deliveries left to win the game comfortably.

If what happened, happened then Adams has to take a fair proportion of the blame. You DON'T hole out trying to win the game in one blow in that situation.

 

[Uncle Buck]

To blame the one person who put us in a winning position is harsh and unfair. Cricket is a TEAM game, and there was plenty of batting and deliveries left to win the game comfortably.

It’s a bit like solely blaming Danny Cullip after he has had an excellent game, when the Albion have drawn.

He is the expirenced pro and the Captain, there was no need to hit out like he did, he had over 2 overs to get 6 runs, so yes I do blame the entire end of the game on him.

It is a team game and his actions were for personal glory not the team and because of that shot, it led to a collapse and the dropping of 2 points.

 

[Albionite83]

Was it inept?

 

[The Large One]

We know about his flamboyance and sense of personal glory. He was probably of a mindset which said 'if I am out, there are still four wickets available'. There is no way he would tried to have hole out if there was only one or two wickets in hand. He has a sense of faith and trust in his team - it is one of his roles as captain.

True, a more sensible approach to winning the game would have been better. But those four wickets for five runs cannot be blamed on him. They should be blamed on the batsmen in question, who should all have their own sense of responsibility. It's not as though Robin Martin-Jenkins, Mushy and Kirtley are so inexperienced that they are not capable of scoring six runs between them.

The main thing counting against him is that his trust in the lower batting order does unfortunately appear to be mis-placed.

 

[Uncle Buck]

We know about his flamboyance and sense of personal glory. He was probably of a mindset which said 'if I am out, there are still four wickets available'. There is no way he would tried to have hole out if there was only one or two wickets in hand. He has a sense of faith and trust in his team - it is one of his roles as captain.

True, a more sensible approach to winning the game would have been better. But those four wickets for five runs cannot be blamed on him. They should be blamed on the batsmen in question, who should all have their own sense of responsibility. It's not as though Robin Martin-Jenkins, Mushy and Kirtley are so inexperienced that they are not capable of scoring six runs between them.

The main thing counting against him is that his trust in the lower batting order does unfortunately appear to be mis-placed.

Sorry but as Captain he must know how iffy we are at one day cricket and his actions cost us.

 

[The Large One]

FFS - his AND the rest of the team.

 

[Uncle Buck]

FFS - his AND the rest of the team.

Well as the top order had done the business for once and yes he had got us into a position to be able to win the game, but then he plays a twatish shot. Puts the pressure on the tailenders, who are not in the team for their batting and heh presto, you end up with the situation we were in.

What caused this, trying a big shot, when a run every other ball would have seen us home, so he is the one to blame.

 

[Seagulltonian]

Was it inept?

Well, at least it wasn't inert

 

[Gazwag]

Well as the top order had done the business for once and yes he had got us into a position to be able to win the game, but then he plays a twatish shot. Puts the pressure on the tailenders, who are not in the team for their batting and heh presto, you end up with the situation we were in.

What caused this, trying a big shot, when a run every other ball would have seen us home, so he is the one to blame.

Maybe the tail enders are not in the team to score runs but they are there to bowl the other team out. They only took 4 wickets and conceded at nearly 6 an over and gave away 11 no balls and wides.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Maybe the tail enders are not in the team to score runs but they are there to bowl the other team out. They only took 4 wickets and conceded at nearly 6 an over and gave away 11 no balls and wides.

Totally agree that the bowling was a shambles, however to get to a winning position and then blow it by playing a twatish shot trying to get the heroic 6 to win the game, the blame still has to stay with Adams.

End of.

 

[keitho54]

I am with Uncle Buck on this.

Adams' role in that situation was to ensure victory not go for glory with the big hit. And it is not the first time he has done it! I suspect that if he had still had the chance for his 100 he would have been a little more careful. I acknowledge that he (with his partners) had put Sussex in with a chance to win but giving a wicket away gave a psychological advantage to the opposition and they exploited it to the full.

Boring game cricket isn't it!!

 

[The Large One]

By that, you imply that it is no-one else's responsibility to try and secure a victory. Is this your point?

Remind me never to play cricket with you lot. Your sense of finger-pointing is shameful. The one person either batting or bowling to achieve any sense of respectability for Sussex is the one to blame for the defeat?

Of course the tail-enders are there to score runs, even if not that many, otherwise why would they come out to bat? To make up the numbers?

I am rather glad he played some 'twattish' shots for his 93. No-one else appeared capable of doing that. "Sorry lads, I know I scored 93 and only left the rest of you to score six runs, but it's all my fault for being so egocentric and twattish in trying to win the game for us; it's just that none of you lot seemed interested..."

 

[The Mole]

You should be pleased to get a tie against the form team of the moment!!

OK, I'll come clean, my footballing allegiances are in Sussex, but my criketing ones are firmly with Notts.