|
Post by Giggy of Telford on Jun 26, 2007 16:55:53 GMT
Think this first pic is bad? Below is what happened at Belper Town FC.
|
|
|
Post by malxscfc on Jun 26, 2007 17:17:40 GMT
Poor old Belper..... I wonder how Waterbeach FC got on. Funny how Hillsborough looks so different when under water.
|
|
|
Post by ambersalamander on Jun 26, 2007 18:23:47 GMT
|
|
votp
Steaming Bovril
Posts: 328
|
Post by votp on Jun 26, 2007 19:51:09 GMT
What? No "Flood the box!" or "Bring on the Sub!" comments?
|
|
|
Post by amberaleman on Jun 26, 2007 22:12:48 GMT
Definitely Noah such comments!
|
|
|
Post by bh on Jun 27, 2007 8:24:03 GMT
They say Hillsborough was under five feet of water!!!!
|
|
|
Post by bonehead on Jun 27, 2007 8:37:20 GMT
Some unkind people might think that Sheffield Wednesday should be 6-feet under ;-)
Is it true Worcester CCC's ground is now flooded, Daza? I blame Wimbledon fortnight - and Phil!
|
|
|
Post by bh on Jun 27, 2007 9:15:55 GMT
|
|
mazey
Soggy Chip
Posts: 107
|
Post by mazey on Jun 27, 2007 14:21:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by DazaB_WCFC on Jul 10, 2007 23:51:29 GMT
Sorry guys, must have missed this thread :S The outfield is still completely sodden and we've lost almost £170,000 And the Kents are trying to rub salt in the womb
|
|
|
Post by Daza on Jul 11, 2007 0:36:55 GMT
TINPOT!
|
|
|
Post by coops on Jul 11, 2007 9:16:17 GMT
Sorry guys, must have missed this thread :S The outfield is still completely sodden and we've lost almost £170,000 And the Kents are trying to rub salt in the womb Whilst I have some sympathy for Worcestershire CCC I have more for Kent who must be a bit pissed off that Worcester made no attempt to move the game despite the ground being more of a swamp than a cricket ground.
|
|
|
Post by DazaB_WCFC on Jul 11, 2007 13:20:50 GMT
Sorry guys, must have missed this thread :S The outfield is still completely sodden and we've lost almost £170,000 And the Kents are trying to rub salt in the womb Whilst I have some sympathy for Worcestershire CCC I have more for Kent who must be a bit pissed off that Worcester made no attempt to move the game despite the ground being more of a swamp than a cricket ground. Had we moved the Kent game it would have required moving vital resources from New Road to, say, Kidderminster, to prepare a wicket there good enough for 4-day cricket. This would have meant a single day to prepare New Road for the floodlit match with Hampshire. A game which, if abandoned, will cripple the clubs position financially. Had Kent agreed to switch the fixture this could have been avoided.
|
|
|
Post by Col ISIHAC. on Jul 11, 2007 14:32:13 GMT
Bearing in mind that the rules of the twenty-20 actually prevented Worcester from moving their home games in that competition, I would understand their reluctance to accommodate the authorities in any way! Should a first class county go under (tee hee) then the blame lies with the suits...
Surprise, surprse!
|
|
|
Post by DazaB_WCFC on Jul 11, 2007 14:48:03 GMT
The authorities were happy for us to move our 4-day game to Kent's Beckenham ground but it would still have been treated as a home game for us, yet they wouldn't let us move our 20/20 game with Warwick (where 7000 tickets had been sold) to a ground just a few miles over the county border. Indeed, Edgbaston lies on the same 144 Bus route as New Road from Brum to Worcester.
|
|