Window Cleaner

You are probably not entirely wrong actually. In fact I seem to remember that one of the grand gurus of ecology back in the day seemed to think that curing sicknesses in the third world was going to lead us to endless problems. I can't remember his name but he wasn't yer ordinary, ecology, left leaning type. Doesn't Dan Brown have one of his pantomine villains with similar theories ?

So Warks at the Rose Bowl today. No Vince or Dawson because they're with the England Lions just now. Is that really necessary? Really? Is it some sort of invented measure to even up between counties with internationals and those without. Carberry gone already, Adams not off the mark having faced 12 balls. Looks like it could be down to Rossouw and Bailey because with Ervine down to bat at 5 it's not looking very solid after them. And it goes from bad to worse, Rossouw and Bailey are now both back in the pavilion and we're 32/3, why do we elect to bat each time and find ourselves in ridiculous positions. We'll not do a "Taunton" every time.

But match income is such a minor line on the balance sheet nowadays, What does it matter that you have just a handful of matchgoers when the PL gives you 118 million, ie 6 million and change for every home game. You'd need to sell a lot of tickets to make 6 million a match really.

Can't see why not, didn't Dortmund sack him because they ran out of patience with him being a knob all of the time ? Won't have too many "big club" offers methinks.

Apparently we've made a bit over 122 million £ from the PL this last season so we can expect a significant boost in profits I'd guess. Might be able to pay off most of our loans and cut interest payments.

Epic win, well bowled chaps. Oh and well done to the batsmen who managed to make 293 on what must have been a turnip field yesterday. Obviously a wicket that turned excessively to advantage their bowlers backfired on them and left a potential bank holiday crowd tomorrow with nothing to watch. Might they get a sanction for that?

OK so maybe we can bowl a bit. Wicket must be pretty tricky down at Taunton, probably explains why we chose to bat first on it, didn't want to get caught on a potato patch batting 4th.

Wasn't he pretty awful when he got some first team experience during the RLC games ? For me the big disappointment is Topley, he was a real prospect when we signed him a couple of years back but he just doesn't seem to be anywhere near the same player since his season long injury.

As someone remarked the other day, we have suddenly become a shambles. Can't bat and can't bowl.

Well it looks like our good start to the season was just a bit of an illusion. Against Somerset at Taunton today we are now 62-4 with Dawson, Carberry, Vince and Rossouw already back in the pavilion.

The most probable answer is that they can't and they don't. These "a week" figures are usually way off the mark. He was able to leave on some sort of exit free clause I think so probably got a bit of a signing on bonus which is then divided over his contract length to give an exceptional "a week" sum.

Why would anyone want Moyes now, he'll be lucky to get a job as assistant coach with the Chinese equivalent of Pompey.

So it looks like we're going to lose this game because of our first day bowling performance, soft ball or whatever. We really have to find a solution to our inefficient bowling against old stick in the muds like Cooke and Ballance because we'll not get another get out of jail card again this season. Correction: First line should read We have lost this game.....

Ah well looks like we're down to the rain option then. How can such a talented (well on paper) batting side as Hampshire be so abject twice in a row.

And it doesn't seem to have gotten any better second time around. Hopefully Rossouw and Bailey will put on a mega partnership for the 4th wicket or it will rain from about now until tomorrow teatime or even later.

Easier said than done apparently..:blush:

Makes sense but he'd probably have not got slammed in the last overs as the others did.

To compensate for the no balls and wides you mean. We lost this one all by ourselves due to bad bowling.

What like Berg you mean. Was he injured today or did we just play the lad Holland just for the hell of it ?

Hants in desperate trouble now, Glams only need 9 off the last over. Had it on a plate and then our bowling got savaged by Cooke.

Well fortunately we got a big score thanks to Vince and Dawson and pinned Glamorgan down at the start because Dawson and Crane have been absolutely hammered. Guess that's part of the plan.

Look to be a bit pinned down right now. Three wickets down so I guess the onus is on Dawson and Vince to build a decent score.

As I believe I said at the time, Boufal isn't a goalscorer in the vein of Mané, I doubt that we recruted him as such.

For a big cheque with lots of zeros you buy what you can't for half or a quarter of the price...consistency, the ability to do it under any circumstances and often when it's most needed, like Sanchez yesterday. But these blokes are few and far between and when you unearth one under a stone somewhere you need to be able to hold on to him. For example, the Boufal dribble and shot late on yesterday. Do you think Sanchez or Aguero would have blasted the final effort 10 yards wide? No, back of the net, that's the difference between top class and so-so I'm afraid.

Always the same argument, Leicester, Leicester, Leicester. It was a one off freak situation based on one or two players that they got lucky with. If you want a striker who's established in the game and guaranteed to score goals in the PL then that's going to cost you a lot of money. Alternatively you can go for less and hope you get lucky on occasions.