One wicket to get Worcs 15 in front
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/scorecard/ECKO41333
Come on Glammy
Printable View
One wicket to get Worcs 15 in front
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/scorecard/ECKO41333
Come on Glammy
Won by 9 wickets.
Probably a bit early to talking about a renaissance but there certainly seems to be a bit of spirit in the squad of late.
Well done Glammy, now let's see if Wales can't upset the odds too :thumbup:
A terrific performance.Thats 6 wins and 6 defeats this season
Another slow innings they may make 300
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/scorecard/ECKO41336
Well played Selman
Not looking good. 76 ahead with 3 wickets left. If we could get around 150 that could maybe snatch a draw.
After winning the toss and batting, 295 was a poor score and could have been worse but for the tail.
We'll do well to get a draw from this
Still 3 wkts left and 97 in front can Ingram and the tail scrape another 100 together to give us a chance of a draw. Disappointing after our previous couple of games
Durham need 157 to win from 41 overs.
49-0
I just noticed that Cooke isn't playing. He's not injured again is he?
There's nothing on the GLAMMY site :shrug:
Durham 27 runs from their 1st championship win of the season
All over.
Durham win by 9 wickets. They didn't hang around!
Could have been tight if de Lange was able to hang around for a while longer with Ingram, or if Hogan had been able to blast a tail score and taken the lead up near 200. Or if the threatened rain.... Ifs, buts and maybes.
Let's face it, it's a right royal hiding!
Hopefully only a minor blip on our road to recovery :thumbup:
After some promising displays in both one day and four day cricket, this was back to square one with a vengeance. To be honest, the bowling effort doesn't look good (it seems to me that Salter is slowly converting himself into a batting all rounder), but, as usual, it's the batting which looks more problematical. However, whereas, usually, Glamorgan are bowled out for something like two hundred in fifty overs, this time they batted so feebly and without purpose that, despite batting two hundred and eleven overs in the match, they were still very comfortably beaten in a game where some play was lost due to rain - the batting on the first day in particular was a text book example of how not to play on a flat pitch.
Suppose this is the best place to put this. I see England have just lost in their Women's World Cup game with India (four run outs as they chased 282 for victory) - is it me, or have they got quite a lot worse since they went full time and started receiving so much more sponsorship money?
Derbyshire at the SWALEC
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/scorecard/ECKO413
Slow start by Derbyshire
Watched quite a bit of yesterday's play on the Glamorgan website and, after looking a very flat pitch in the first session, there always seemed to be something there for the bowlers after that. I don't think 288 is a bad score, but Derbyshire's attack doesn't look as good as Glamorgan's on paper, so the opportunity is there to get a decent lead if our batting has one of it's good days - however, having seen the forecast for tomorrow, it looks like it will be a three day game, so it's hard to see us winning from here.
Here we go looks like another collapse
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/scorecard/ECKO41340
Watching the live feed now that pink ball don't half look bright.
184-6. Still 104 behind.
Surely we can't be the side that loses to Derbyshire. That would be so embarrassing.
They managed to be the first side to lose to Durham :frown:
237-9. Poor stuff and again the rate of scoring is at a snails pace
Derby 126-8
160 all out
212 to win