Onions Brings Tears to our Eyes .
By Lower Pav
July 30 2012
LOWER PAV REPORTS ON A DEVASTATING DEFEAT ON A MATCH WE DOMINATED. THIS IS A PAINFUL READ.
SHORT BUT NOT SWEET.
Unfortunately it fell to me to do the report for the brief 3rd days play. For obvious reasons my report is short and also because I find it painful to dwell on it too much.
The Middlesex diehards gathered at the ground for the 3rd days play. In no particular order those present were. Spillage, Beefy, Ken, Big Harv, Diamond and myself.
We all tried to be optimistic but in truth the damage had been done yesterday. However we still had a reasonable chance.
At the start of play we were 58 for 5. Simpson 10 Roland- Jones 15 and we needed 60 more runs with time of course not being an issue.
Durham had an attacking field,with 3 slips and a gulley The first over bowled by Rushworth was a maiden and the second over bowled by the very impressive Onions saw a very loud appeal for LBW turned down.
There was then a brief stoppage for rain. We returned and then calamity. Simpson out caught behind by Richardson bowled Onions for 10 and we were 58 for 6.
At last after 14 balls we are off the mark with a nick by Roland-Jones for 4 and bit by bit we staggered to 71 for 6 and there was another big LBW appeal from Onions bowling to Berg and not out was the verdict.
However another wicket looked imminent and so it proved when Berg was out to a strange looking shot shot, caught behind by Collingwood off the bowling of Rushworth. We were now 71 for 7 and still needing 47 runs.
Rayner then hit a lovely shot for 4 and a leg glance for 2 and we were 79 for 7. More runs followed and then controversy.
Rayner seemed with the naked eye to be caught behind off Onions but the umpire was adament and gave not out. Another very big LBW shout, same players involved and once again not out was the decision.
We got to 98 and just 20 runs were needed. At this point I really did feel that we could actually do this and then in truth it was all over. Roland-Jones out for 34 caught behind by Richardson off that man Onions.
I have to say that this Richardson looked very impressive indeed. In truth that was the end. Rayner was bowled by Stokes for 11 and we were 98 for 9 and 20 runs behind and finally our resistance was over when Murtagh was caught behind by Richardson off Stokes for 3 and we were beaten by 15 runs.
I have to say I did not see the first day. However in my opinion from what I saw it was a very difficult wicket, uneven bounce and the ball moving about and swinging all over the place. However taking all that into consideration, the fact was we needed just 118 to win at the start of our 2nd innings and over 2 days to get them. There were some poor shots and we seemed confused whether we should show aggression or grind it out and in the end we did neither.
To put it simply. We had in large part dominated this game and we lost when we should have won.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012:08:01:05:01:12 by The Diamond ruled ok.
Well done LP on manging to capture the mess!!!
I said when I was watching Onions during the pre-match warm-up on Day 1 that he didn't look like someone who was about to play his first game back after an injury lay-off. I know the pitch was helpful, but what a performance! If I was an England selector, his would be the first name on my team sheet for the next Test.
I agree with you about Richardson too. I looked him up on Cricinfo, and this was only his 8th first class match. He's only averaging 18 with the bat so far though, and in this day and age he'll have to improve significantly on that if he's going to even make it in county cricket, let alone challenge for an England place.