Tuesday, 19 September 2017

Derbyshire v Kent day 1

No play

I get the frustration from supporters, desperate to watch the last cricket of 2017 on home turf. The sun is shining, but the ground is waterlogged from heavy overnight rain and it is impossible.

Yet what, realistically, can the club be expected to do?

There has been a freakish amount of rain this summer and the volume that apparently fell on the Chesterfield area overnight would have done for many a county headquarters, let alone an out ground where the facilities are of a lesser standard.

Whether it allows for play tomorrow is a moot point, but with more rain forecast on Thursday, I have no hesitation in suggesting that this game will be a draw. With an obviously high water table, any volume on Thursday will rule out Friday. Such is the lot of the out ground.

It's a shame and frustrating, but the drainage at Queen's Park is improved yet couldn't cope. We might spend money on drainage this winter, and it may improve things, but there will still be days when simply too much rain has fallen and play is impossible.

It is a shame, but I don't know how you get around this one. There may have been play everywhere else, but unless you are a budding Carol Kirkwood, it may be that  they simply avoided the worst of the rain.

Let's see what tomorrow brings.

In other news, I read today that Glamorgan have a lot of work over the winter. To add to Jacques Rudolph's retirement, Colin Ingram only wants to play one-day cricket next year. In addition, Graham Wagg is out of contract and, after an injury-hit summer, it appears far from certain that he will be offered another deal.

Would you consider him for Derbyshire, or, at 35 next summer, is he too old now?


Anonymous said...

It's not only at Chesterfield we are losing days to wet outfields. In our last home match at Derby we lost three days out of four to a wet outfield whereas neighbouring Nottinghamshire managed to play on all four days.

Peakfan said...

Use a name please Anon...
I know that but you cannot compare Test ground drainage with a non Test ground.They have spent thousands on theirs that we simply dont have

Leamo said...

Boyzone? Elton John? Or a game of cricket at ....err a Cricket ground? I appreciate we need to make a few quid but at what expense?
Was it last year we had the same at Chesterfield.
Would the Glamorgan match have been decimated without Elton earlier in the year.
Last I looked we were a Cricket Club not a pop venue
Make all the money you want, but not if it affects your day job.

notoveryet said...

I pointed out the issue of lost days at Chesterfield a couple of weeks ago. In the last 6 years, we have had 25 days of first-class cricket at Chesterfield and 9 complete days have been lost. The fact is that Chesterfield is a wet place with a poorly-draining ground and inadequate covering and equipment. No matter how beautiful it is, or how atmospheric it can be on a good day with a good crowd, it's no use if you can't play cricket on it on more than one day in three. I suspect that with the amount of rain yesterday, there was no way of preventing today's (and from the sound of it, possibly tomorrow's too) abandonment, other than not playing at a ground that can't cope with perfectly normal English weather.

To be fair to many of those commenting on this, the frustration isn't with Chesterfield. I think everyone knows that rain is very likely to ruin games at Chesterfield, and some of us are ready, even eager, to risk it for the romance and nostalgia of (possibly) seeing some cricket in an iconic setting. The frustration is at the amount of cricket being lost at Derby which is then compounded by scheduling games at Chesterfield. Out of the last 7 days of home 4 day cricket across three matches, there has been play on only two of them, and even then for only two sessions. It hasn't been an exceptionally wet summer, and the club can prate all it likes about abnormally heavy rainfall, those of us living close to Derby know full well that the amount of time being lost is out of all proportion to the actual rainfall.

My guess, for what it's worth, is that the increased loss of playing time at Derby in recent years is related to the building of hard surfaces around the racecourse end of the ground, where until the media centre was built there were soft grassed areas that would help to absorb the run off from the playing area. So the question I'd like to hear the answer to is whether or not any improvements to drainage were carried out at the same time as the construction of the media centre and the extension of hard surfaces elsewhere on the ground? If not, this is likely to be an entirely self-inflicted problem, and one that is going to impact seriously on the reputation and credibility of the club. It's already happening to some extent - apart from Robert Croft's critical remarks, the Radio 5 commentators this morning were discussing why Derbyshire weren't playing again when everyone else was. If money needs to be spent to improve the situation, then it needs to be found, even if that impacts on what we can spend on the cricket. There is no point spending huge sums on marquee cricketers who are barely going to get on the pitch

Paul Fitzpatrick said...

For me the Boyzone concert was a late development decided AFTER season fixtures planned
But I respect we need commercial revenue
To move a game to Chesterfield in September was always a risk ...weather, drainage, facilities
In an ideal world if Concerts are a thing of the future then the planning timeline needs to be integrated with the Fixture planning
As we see the season stretched into early April and late September to accommodate more t 20 cricket I would suggest Chesterfield should really be ring fenced for June/July/August based on the current facilities
In terms of Waggy NO THANKS
Decent Opening Bat and Decent Opening bowler (1 overseas/1 Kolpak or seasoned pro)
Release Cork Milnes Hemmings and sign a t20 specialist (all rounder)
Get Davis fit ,back Hosein ,Critchley,Qadri with game time

Peakfan said...

Good points notoveryet. The development work had to have some impact on drainage.
Hopefully the club will make a statement soon on planned winter work to address issues at Derby.

Opening Bat said...

I think I agree the development and additional concrete around the ground will have contributed to the wet problem, just look at the flash flooding, and rivers bursting banks we now get around the country which we didn't years ago. I think the concerts will have contributed less to the problem than the developments. As previously noted, was drainage improvement part of these developments, if not it should be No.1 priority this winter, even if it restricts new signings, back these youngsters, critchley, hosein, Slater, Hughes, Davis, that is half a team, then add the experienced guys we have, Billy, Wayne etc!!

Anonymous said...

Every one has already made the point that its not just Chesterfield where we have lost cricket but Derby as well.

I class this latest fiasco as losing cricket at Derby as well as we moved the game to Chesterfield to accommodate a concert - in September !

Look, we are a first class county obligated to provide first class cricket facilities and we don't. We're probably undermining the game as pop concerts take precedence over the cricket. If was the ECB I would find this unacceptable and would be inclined to introduce some kind of punative measure. It is akin to preparing a pitch that is not fit for purpose.

Notoveryet has made the point that the amount of rain this summer, which is by no means extraordinary, does not justify the days of cricket lost. On most of the days lost we have been sat in the sunshine watching the grass grow. Unacceptable. The county takes members money gladly and fails to provide proper consideration.

One member lost I'm afraid.


jasper said...

Growing up in chesterfield and developing my love for the game by watching cricket at Queen's Park i find this all very disappointing. I can't recall there being so many problems with a wet outfield in my youth and don't regard this as a particularly wet summer. Yes plenty of rain Monday night but 2 whole days washed out? All this exacerbated by the issues at Derby. Not good enough and i can see why bob and others are upset.

Gary said...

Lancashire have had the same issues. If it hadn't been an international match on Tuesday then the game wouldn't have gone ahead. I spoke to the groundsman at a game a few weeks ago and he said the extra concert put on for the Manchester bombing had turned the outfield into a bit of a nightmare. It was all bare patches and basically turned to mud with the slightest bit of rain which I suspect has happened at Derby.
Chesterfield in Sept is a different story but the county have to balance the books some way. I suspect John Wright, Imran Tahir, Hardus Viljoen don't come cheap and wouldn't be around without the concerts

David Woolley said...

I've already had my say on the drainage problems, so no more to add, other than I think the club hierarchy will be well aware of our feelings, and will be looking to make improvements.
With regard to Waggy. I absolutely loved the guy when he was here previously. Good solid all rounder, with a bit of an edge about him. Unfortunately, not now, age a disadvantage and fitness.
I would also ask Bob to think again about not renewing his membership. Yes, the loss of cricket due to difficulties with drainage is annoying, but must surely be out weighed by our general improvements this year on the field. Personally, I am looking to get through winter, see a couple of exciting signings arrive, and get stuck in again next season.

notoveryet said...

I really don't see the concert as a factor in the loss of the Glamorgan match. The Elton John concert was at the beginning of June, and the WWC matches were fine apart from one where it rained all day in. We played Notts in early August when there was really heavy and persistent rain for about 30 hours on the third day. Even so, the ground was fit to play (much to our cost) within about 3 hours of the rain stopping, when most of the other matches in the area were abandoned. If the ground had been damaged as a result of the concert, this wouldn't have been possible. It makes the loss of time in the Glamorgan game even more surprising when there simply wasn't anything like the same amount of rain. It's easy to point to the use of the ground for concerts as the scapegoat, but I'm certain it's a red herring, but so too is the club's line of exceptional rainfall. Unfortunately Simon Storey's interview today didn't address this issue, so the question remains - what was the difference between the Glamorgan game and the Notts game?

Nic H said...

I'm trying to picture these concerts. I presume the outfield will be covered, but what with I have no idea. Can anyone complete the picture?

Ash said...

They cover the square but no the outfield