Nick Wright previews this weekend's clash between York City Knights and Hull FC
Alex Reid looks at whether the once ever-present appearance of English clubs in the later stages of the Champions League is set to become a thing of the past
Craig Dobson looks at QPR's decision to sack Neil Warnock and replace him with Mark Hughes
James Tompkinson reviews an excellent pre-season victory for the York City Knights against Yorkshire rivals Leeds Rhinos
Written by Sean Martin
It was important that the 1st team displayed their bouncebackability after a disappointing Roses game and a seemingly placid wicket proffered the opportune moment to post a big score when skipper Hudson asked the opposition to field.
It was a cautious start with the early season wicket staying low and slow, and Vanner and T. Hudson were both dropped early on. However probability prevailed and Vanner was caught and bowled, meaning he only troubled the scorer with his inane boundary banter rather than bountiful runs.
The wicket proved increasingly problematic to score quickly and Walsh fell shortly after Vanner. Hiley and T.Hudson steadied the ship playing maturely before T. Hudson was bowled by a shooter which one player described as “utterly ridiculous”.
Hiley resisted for a while before being caught and Townson and Henry failed to make impressions. At 80 for 5 York were in trouble and the alarm bells rang. However they were saved by the bell as the ‘stylish’ strokeplay of Nick Hudson (61), well supported by Emmerson (38*), bought York up to a competitive 202.
Huddersfield started well scoring quickly as the wicket seem to become more docile and batting seemed like a stroll in the proverbial park. However the introduction of Emmerson provided a breakthrough and consistent pressure but the decision to inject Jonty into the action cannot be praised ‘Hiley’ enough. He roared in from the top end making not just the batsmen but the stumps shiver at his absolute ‘wheels’, as he took 4-37 bringing York on top of the game.
Unfortunately York’s fielding was school boyish in parts as they shelled catches at key points in the game. The frustration was visible for the tempestuous skipper, and Huddersfield crept back in to the game needing 100 off the last 20 overs with 3 wickets in hand. The re-introduction of Martin brought the break through and Huddersfield folded with him and T.Hudson then sharing the final two wickets dismissing Huddersfield well short of their target.
It was a capable performance from the 1sts with many positives in all disciplines of the game. Emmerson, Hiley and N. Hudson performed impressively and others will have to learn from either their mistakes in the field or their lack of sun cream application. However greater consistency will be required to defeat the tougher opponents of Sheffield Hallam and Leeds.
Cringeworthy opening.
Having heard that the uni 2's and 3's cancelled matches due to lack of players willing to play, the 'clique' at the top of the uni cricket might want to try and attract some college players who play week in week out for their colleges and perform to a higher degree than probably both uni 2's and 3's. Certain selection choices are also extremely dubious with batsmen in the 2's being unlikely to bat in the top 5 for college, bowlers at college level not even featuring in the uni sides and WK's keeping for the 2's and 3's at uni level but not their colleges. Is it any wonder that cricket at York is so weak? The team builds itself round two quality players in Hudson and Vanner (even if the former is a bit of a penis) and think when they do muster up a win, they are up there with the 'big sports on campus' like Rugby and Hockey. A look into the college game and acting less like immortals might do uni cricket the world of good!
College sport is there as a feeder system for university sport and undoubtedly should be used by the University team to uncover some talent who do not play within the University set up. However it would be highly unfair on those who have practiced with the uni team, week in, week out from the beginning of the autumn term if their places begin to be taken by a college player who had one good knock and is instantly placed into one of the Uni teams. There are better cricketers on campus than some of those in the uni teams,but captains are forced to choose from who they have turn up, not from college cricketers who would prefer to play college level than university level.
I think a 'college barbarians' cricket team could give uni 1's a run for their money without a doubt. The problem is that for one reason or another, the link is just not there between uni and college and therefore the idea that the latter acts as a feeder system, is completely useless. There are people that are making runs for college cricket, bowling well etc that are just completely oblivious to the uni side and the captain(s) must take the responsibility for that.
What a load of rubbish you are spouting. There are lots of reasons why people might opt to play college cricket instead of university cricket and the captains cannot be blamed for individuals choices. The degree of commitment required to play university level should be and is higher and some people do not want to/cannot spare that time. This is not the captain's fault, but a constant problem that faces all major sports at university. There are people that played college hockey/rugby that would make it into university sides, but choose to partake in other sports or their degrees and it is obviously a problem that effects cricket as well.
To a degree, I agree with Desmond. Ultimately, the choice whether or not to play uni cricket/rugby/football rests with the individual concerned. However I rarely hear about uni seconds and thirds games in football or rugby being cancelled because of a lack of player turnout. Maybe that's something to do with me not being on one of those two mailing lists. Nevertheless it is somewhat dissapointing that the uni cricket team cannot send out 3 teams, even 2 when such talent is available at the college level. Colleges manage to turn out 2 elevens weekly... Whilst the blame cannot lay with the captains in its entirety, it should be their role to sell that 'upper level' of cricket to aspiring college cricketers and that I cannot help feeling has clearly not been achieved. My point is that whilst this is a problem not exclusive to cricket by any means, high college tunrnout in the game combined with 2 teams having to pull out of fixtures does suggest there is a disproportionate problem present in the cricket system. Still, well done on the Huddersfield result!
I would like to thank the author of point 2 (who presumably also wrote points 3 and 4) for bringing to attention the vital role that college cricket plays in feeding the Universtity teams with players (and for providing an environment for people to play and enjoy cricket!). However, I feel that they are misguided and ill-informed on a couple of points that I wish to clarify.
College cricket plays a very important role in the University cricket set up and, for example, in the recent 1st team BUSA game against Sheffield Hallam 3 of the 11 playeys fielded, Tom Henry, Jonty Hiley and Ed Murrils, were discovered through the college set up rather than through University nets. (As a contrast it might be of interest to examine the clubs that you raise such as football, hockey and rugby and their incorporation of college players into the university teams.) To suggest therefore that performance in College Cricket is ignored by the "'clique' at the top of university cricket" and that the "feeder system" is broken becomes rather hard to substantiate. The club have been actively trying to incorporate players who have performed at college level into the side. There have been some issues with this, as Desmond suggests playing cricket for the University is often time consuming and some people are not prepared to commit to that. Furthermore whilst we do our best, and I fully acknowledge that we may not do enough the University teams do try to keep as close an eye on college cricket as we can through umpiring, participation and watching the games there are games that we do miss and some players may slip through the net. A 'college barbarians' fixture seems an ideal way to rectify this situation and should you wish to put forward a side I am sure that the University would be willing to put forward a team and have a look at those players that may have slipped through the net.
Moving away from the college system which I agree is an important issue I would like to state that it is in no way necessary or constructive to label players as a 'penis'. Furthermore you seem to be almost randomly attacking the club as being an elitist clique that consider themselves to be immortals, who are claiming to be a big club. Re-reading the article I am struggling to find any of this. To me it reads like any other write up of a university fixture. If you can point it out to me I would greatly appreciate it. You also attempt to drag in issues relating to the 2nds vs 3rds game which are again entirely unrelated to the article in question. Unfortunately the game was cancelled. The reason for this cancellation was that the game was to take place between two sides within the club. The reason for this is that the first team were playing a match on the same afternoon against Leeds that would decide the winner decide the of the BUSA league. Unfortunately, due to exams, several first team players were unavailable for selection and therefore replacements had to be called up to play for the first team. Two of these players were the 2nd team captain and vice captain. It was felt that considering the importance of the game within the club it would be better to reschedule it and play it with full strength sides rather than compete in a less than full strength match.
I apologise for the length of the reply but I felt it was important to address all the issues raised.
Nick Hudson
Cricket Club President
I would like to back up Nick's statement in regards to this -especially as it is now being referred to on the college barbarians facebook group.
When I started playing in 2003 for the Uni side there was no link up between the two at all. The Uni team looked down upon and didn't play college cricket. The best example here is Rob Wood - who despite scoring around 10 50's in his first 2 seasons in college 1's, the Uni attitude was that it was only college cricket and he wouldn't make the Uni 2's. In fact he went from the 3's to the 2's then to the 1's. At this time only a few uni cricketers played college cricket as opposed to now where everyone except the first xi play for their colleges.
As most colleges have a Uni player in their side there is always someone to encourage them to come along to training and get involved etc. Some people will never want to play and that is their choice.
I can honestly say that selection now is far less cliquey than it was 5 years ago by a long way and that is testament to the captains over the past 3/4 seasons of all teams as well as the creation of the BUSA 3's side a few years ago.
I think Nick's point about college cricket acting as a feeder system better than other sports is also a valid one. Indeed I wonder how many of the current Uni I's have played college cricket at some point - my bet is a fair few apart from Hudson and Vanner.
If any more proof is needed... one of the former presidents (who also opened the batting for the Uni 1's) began playing for James college (and got a diamond duck!).
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report