Forum

Ryan
Fair comment, however the issue of the sub fielder was brought up yesterday by your batsmen not by anyone in Dundrum. I see you aren't being drawn into the debate over the incident involving the run out attempt that hit the out-going batsman.
However i was responding to another earlier post and wont get drawn into anymore discussion on yesterdays match other than to say, it was a good game and was well fought by both teams. Well done to your groundsman on providing a decent wicket in difficult circumstances.

I find the comments from "Stevie Max" rather interesting and feel compelled to reply. The refusal of a fielding substitute issue has rumbled on since the game at the Meadow and it is disappointing it has been mentioned on here yet again as yesterdays game passed off fairly amicably considering.

I also find it rich the sportsmanship of the Armagh team being questioned after letting a team field with ten, after seeing a key player sustain a injury during the game certainly not in the Spirit of the Game in my opinion.

As for Armagh not chasing the total after being reduced to 66 for 6 with a weakened team the lower order were trying to salvage a bit of pride and try enjoy their last game of the season, I know I enjoyed my little bat at the end.

Nice to meet Jeff from the forum and hope he enjoyed his trip to the Mall after 20+ since his last game there!

Re Stevie Max

I understand that all at Dundrum are bound to be disappointed following (unconfirmed) relegation, particularly given the margins, however I'm not sure that your post is entirely fair on Armagh. I actually think they handled themselves very well after the sub 'incident'- which in my opinion was very unsporting on Dundrum's part. As a result there was bound to be some bad feeling between the two teams and I'm sure that the chance of relegating Dundrum was inspiration for the Armagh players (I'm sure they probably fielded a much stronger side than would have been the case in other circumstances), however I seriously doubt that any player would deliberately throw a ball to hit a batsman= if he had it would have been dealt with by the Umpires. In considering your point about talk in the field- if memory serves me correct Dundrum aren't shy of a bit of sledging (while being great craic off the field). Personally I look forward to playing Armagh (at their lovely ground) and Dundrum in section 3 next year- I'm sure both sides will be right up there again- at the end of the day at our level its only about having some friendly competition on a Saturday, lets not take ourselves too seriously!

Reply to Keen to know the facts...?
Not sure about the scorecards not being submitted, but Dundrum CC always submit theirs. There was a bit of needle regarding the substitute, but the fact is this, and Sam Alexander will confirm it. The umpire is the only person who can authorise the substitute, if a captain asks for one, they have to go to the umpire. He has the final say and only then can the club offer to give a sub fielder. Sam confirmed this to me yesterday before the match began.
Yes, you are correct, they actually admitted on the field that if they were offered a sub fielder the last time, then they may have played this game differently. They didn't use those words but in essence that was what was meant. I know, i heard what was said. At the end of the day, Armagh were there to do a job, and they done it. I must admit, that as a captain, I would have done all I could to win the game firstly, but secondly, i would have had the relegation of the opposing team in mind as well. They didn't win the game on or off the field and as a fielding side have much to learn as far as sportsmanship is concerned. When a man hits his pad with the bat, he was asked why he didn't walk? WHy would you? And why would you hit the player with the ball after he was bowled, and claim that they thought that he was going for a quick run? Good Luck in Section 3 to Armagh 'cos you're gonna need it.

it would be nice too why as why the section two teams have stopped submitting result scorecards?also my friend said he watched Muckamore bowl 47 extras in 23.4 overs? and unless i heard it wrong Armagh didnt try too win their game at home too dundrum but simply batted 34 overs too make sure that dundrum didnt bowl them out for 87 (91 allout) not worrying about winning but making sure that they got ther own back by taking Dundrum down with them by 4 runs on run rate as theres alleged needle over a declined subsititute, so section two had lots of talking even on the last day, maybe not the best way too play cricket but sometimes the mistakes come back too bite you. maybe both clubs would like too let us know the facts?? think best way too fine a club for not fullfilling a fixture is fine them at least 8points as if 1 minute can cost cisn 1point & honours then Lurgan have got of very lightly! roll on next year .

Congratulations to my team on a good weekend and another successful year, and also to CSNI on a great season. Stephen Dyer’s ton at The Green on Saturday was superb batting under pressure. Their emergence at the top has been refreshing for the NCU competitions and hopefully others will continue to get stronger and challenge for trophies.
Everyone winter well and keep up to date with the inevitable transfer gossip on this forum!
Shieldsy

Guys, I like to have a pop at the NCU as much as the next man, but I really can’t see them at any fault for Civil Service being docked a point. CSNI bowled slowly and the umpires reported them, are they supposed to turn a blind eye?
They are not the first team to be punished this way, didn’t Holywood receive the same treatment a year or two ago?
I would agree that some of the rules are a bit dated but the majority are ok. In this instance, Civil Service knew the rule and what would happen if they broke it, so I think they should accept the facts. They can’t really appeal on the grounds that it seems a bit harsh!
Well done North Down and CSNI on a great league race in 2008.

John W,
We think it is correct as Jeff, Michael and Rodney were on the 'phone nearly all day long, and they as well as Michael should be thanked. Jeffs phone bill must be enormous. If it transpires that all books, etc are checked and Dundrum are found to be safe, I would, personally, feel disappointed that my club was saved from relegation due to a technicality. Although to be honest at this moment in time, I would take anything. We all care for the game and in particular the club we represent every saturday. So relegation is hard to take on the field, being saved from it off the field is not what we really want either but then a lot of teams have gained points from not playing. Even though I am 2nd XI Captain, I've played in the last three games for our 1sts and I have loved every minute of it, even the dropped catch in Downpatrick, and I can tell you no-one is feeling the hurt of relegation more than myself. Credit has to go to Holywood for their performances at the weekend against Saintfield and Muckamore and to Saintfield for their's earlier on in the season which got them off of a flyer of a start......

Jeff

Is that official, where did you hear that from. I thought it was still unclear until everything is checked. Too close to call at the moment

With dundrum getting relegated by 4 runs it shows potentially how important the game was when lurgan so cheaply folded to holywood. Would this have affected the overall run rate? Prob not, will the NCU come down hard on lurgan for this? Again prob not but they dam well should!!

just out of interest who stayed up between dundrum and saintfield??

I assume saintfield on net run rate?

dundrum were relegated yesterday by aprox just four runs but i would like too thank Micheal Taylor for his excellent help on sunday on providing them with details on net run rate (think we tortured him ).His dedication was fantastic so again micheal from Rodney & myself thank you .

to stevy work

teams actions on the field backed up my comments didn,t they stevy.

I feel that the recent controversies over the "rules" should really be put into context - and let me state that I am in no way defending the powers that be - they are capable of doing so effectively. However we should examine how we have arrived at the present situation. A rule has been drawn up and APPROVED AT THE AGM to cover an event that has usually occurred in the past or to prevent one arising in the future. Some clubs have examined these rules more closely than the Mastriict Agreement was ever considered!! I suggest that in view of the amount of maoney currently sloshing around the Premier League - and some of the "telephone figures" being talked about for the transfer of players would confirm this - I suggest that a fee of £500 should accompany an appeal - refundable on a successful result

Vanburn
It's a pity that after such a poor season in terms of weather that North Down and Civil Service should be seperated in such a manner as they made every attempt to sort the league out on the pitch. They have been the two outstanding teams by far. But the rule/law was in the book since the last AGM and seems like quite a time before that. I think umpires take into consideration lost balls,drink breaks etc but 3 hours 15 minutes seems far mor than ample to bowl 50 overs. Even allowing them all to have run ups like you had in your prime. If the Union and that after all is the clubs including Civil Service don't support the umpires in upholding their own bye laws then surely we will find ourselves with less umpires.
The two umpires in question are probably two of the most respected and experienced in the whole country. Surely if we start question their standing in the game we have no chance of recruiting new umpires. I personally went on PLO'H's one night crash course with a view of helping out but don't mind in admitting that I "chickened out " when I thought of all the responsibilities. Far easier to sit on the sidelines and sup a pint or two. I don't think any true cricket lover wants to see this run and run.