All posts by n8rngtd.top

He rescues visitors from 87 for 4 in their second innings before rain ensures a draw at Lord’s

ECB Reporters Network supported by Rothesay11-Sep-2025Brooke Guest’s unbeaten half-century steered Derbyshire to safety against Middlesex and kept their promotion hopes alive ahead of next week’s vital Rothesay County Championship meeting with Glamorgan.Guest finished on 65 at Lord’s, having added 66 with Martin Andersson (31 not out) after third-placed Derbyshire had slumped to 87 for 4 in their second innings, an advantage of just 72 over their hosts.An afternoon downpour brought the contest to a premature close and left Derbyshire 27 points adrift of second-placed Glamorgan, who they host in the penultimate round of Division Two fixtures.Middlesex, a further three points behind Derbyshire, still retain a slim chance of promotion following the draw, which was also enough to confirm Leicestershire’s elevation to the top flight after 22 years.The home side’s hopes of forcing a victory were boosted after the opening four overs of the day, in which they captured two wickets to leave Derbyshire three down with a slender lead of 31.Luis Reece added just five to his overnight 17 before he was given out lbw to a Ryan Higgins delivery that zoomed some way back down the slope and Wayne Madsen soon followed in similar fashion to Toby Roland-Jones.Guest rode his luck at the start of his innings, with two inside edges off Higgins (2 for 49) that zipped just past the stumps and rolled to the rope, as well as surviving a persuasive lbw appeal by Olly Stone to a ball that kept low.The England pace bowler, in the first of a two-match loan from Nottinghamshire, was unlucky not to gain greater reward for an impressive pre-lunch spell, although he did remove Harry Came with a beauty that cannoned in to send middle stump flying.Having given away just six runs in his first eight overs, Stone conceded the same from one short-pitched delivery after the interval as Andersson pulled him into the Mound Stand to stretch Derbyshire’s lead to three figures.A brief rain stoppage with Guest on 47 could not derail the Derbyshire wicketkeeper, who punched Stone through the covers for four to complete a fifth half-century of the campaign soon after play resumed.Although Guest got away with a mistimed pull off Higgins that looped up and fell to safety, his work was already done and the dark clouds menacing the ground duly unloaded an hour into the afternoon session to confirm a stalemate.

Bangladesh made only 139 after being reduced to 0 for 2 in the first innings, and Sri Lanka won with 32 balls to spare

Karthik Krishnaswamy13-Sep-20251:53

Maharoof: Nissanka one of the best openers in the world

They were locked 8-8 in T20Is in the decade leading up to this match, and all signs pointed to the first close contest of this Asia Cup after it kicked off with four mismatches. It was a bit of an anticlimax in the end, however, with Sri Lanka brushing Bangladesh aside by six wickets, with 32 balls remaining.Given the high stakes of this group-of-death contest, Sri Lanka got everything they wanted from it: two points and a massive net-run-rate boost. Bangladesh, who had already copped criticism for taking 17.4 overs to chase down 144 against Hong Kong, now face an uphill task to qualify for the Super Four.Sri Lanka dominated the match from its extraordinary start – Nuwan Thushara and Dushmantha Chameera bowled back-to-back wicket maidens with the new ball – to its breezy finish, with Bangladesh only really competing during an unbroken sixth-wicket stand of 86 between Shamim Hossain and Jaker Ali.That partnership, which began at 53 for 5, gave Bangladesh some sort of total to bowl at. Very quickly, though, Pathum Nissanka’s fluency and Kamil Mishara’s power made it look like no sort of total. Nissanka scored 50 off 34 balls and became the quickest Sri Lankan batter to 2000 T20I runs, while Mishara finished unbeaten on 46 off 32.

0 for 2 in two overs

Sri Lanka found new-ball swing after they chose to bowl, but that couldn’t have been the only reason why Tanzid Hasan and Parvez Hossain Emon struggled to the extent they did. There were signs that this was a slightly two-paced pitch when Tanzid kept failing to find the middle of the bat – or the gaps – in the first over (though two of the mishits were off full-tosses), before Thushara swung his sixth ball through his gate as he attempted a get-out-of-jail drive on the up.1:14

Maharoof: Bangladesh have been lacking in major tournaments

The second-over contest between Chameera and Emon was similar, though it only lasted four balls. This time, the on-the-up drive ended up as an outside edge to the keeper, with the ball swinging less than the batter expected. With Chameera rounding off the over with a pair of dots to No. 4 Towhid Hridoy, the scoreboard was an extraordinary sight: 0 for 2 in two overs.

Hasaranga returns with a bang

Bangladesh sank deeper into misery in the fifth over when Hridoy was run out going for a sharp and needless third run, but Litton Das made sure they didn’t let Sri Lanka have it all their own way. When they tried to slip in a quiet over from their fifth bowler Dasun Shanaka, Litton went after him – after edging his first ball just short of a diving fly slip – and hit him for three fours in the sixth over.That did not signal a shift of momentum, though, as Wanindu Hasaranga, who had missed Sri Lanka’s recent tour of Zimbabwe with a hamstring injury, came on in the eighth over and made an almost instant impact, trapping Mahedi Hasan lbw with his second ball, a trademark wrong’un.Wanindu Hasaranga delivered a deadly opening spell•Asian Cricket Council

He came close twice more with the wrong’un. Litton, given out on-field, successfully reviewed an lbw decision against him, with the inside edge coming to his rescue. Then Jaker, beaten comprehensively while defending off the front foot, was saved by the bails staying put after the ball brushed the off stump.Hasaranga did get a second wicket, two balls later, with Litton gloving an attempted reverse-sweep to the keeper.

Shamim and Jaker lead rescue act

Bangladesh’s sixth-wicket pair came together at 53 for 5 in the tenth over, and walked off together at the end of the innings with unbeaten 40s to their name. That both went at strike rates in the 120s, and both struggled to find the boundary for long stretches – including a barren spell of 21 balls – indicated both the excellence of Sri Lanka’s defensive bowling, particularly that of Chameera whose yorkers achieved a rare level of precision in overs 18 and 20, and the two-paced nature of this Abu Dhabi surface.Shamim hit the only six of Bangladesh’s innings, a pick-up shot over midwicket off Matheesha Pathirana in the 19th over, and that shot and Pathirana’s figures – 0 for 42 in four overs – indicated that batters could feed off pace on the ball in these conditions.

Nissanka and Mishara show off extra gear

Both these teams have had well-documented issues with their T20I scoring rates in recent years, but Sri Lanka have been trendsetters in this format in previous eras. And Nissanka and Mishara showed that that spark might still endure.Pathum Nissanka and Kamil Mishara gave Sri Lanka a big win•Associated Press

Off just the fourth ball of his innings, Nissanka played what was unarguably the shot of the match up to that point, a resounding pulled six, well in front of square, off Mustafizur Rahman. And after Mustafizur hit back by nicking off Kusal Mendis, Nissanka and Mishara continued to pepper the boundary in a way Bangladesh had struggled to do throughout their innings.This was partly down to Bangladesh bowling short balls far more frequently than Sri Lanka had, but Mishara also dispatched them with an easy, stand-and-deliver power that Bangladesh cricket has traditionally struggled to produce. None of this may have come to pass, however, had Mahedi held on to a chance at mid-on when Shoriful Islam got a short ball to get big on Mishara; he was batting on 1 off 7 at that point, and the pitch was still looking two-paced.That spilled chance seemingly transformed the conditions too, with Mishara spanking the luckless Shoriful for 6, 4, 4 off the last three balls of the over. Nissanka, at the other end, sashayed this way and that to manipulate length and line, and timed the ball with a fluency that no one else from either side matched.These two put on 95 in just 52 balls, and Sri Lanka could have finished things off even quicker, but they lost 3 for 18 in a 17-ball spell late in the game when they had the result all but sewn up.

The passing of the 11pm deadline on Thursday confirmed that Tottenham Hotspur have failed to sign a single player for the second transfer window running, leaving supporters caught somewhere on the spectrum between bewilderment and exasperation.

Another blank drawn in the transfer market. That’s two successive windows without a signing and just one new name to report from three windows. In a game which is hampered by short-term thinking, knee-jerk decision making and tempestuous opinions, it’s quite incredible that Pochettino has managed to steer the Tottenham ship in the desired direction in recent years, even if his failure to claim silverware continues to cloud his reputation.

Tottenham’s failure to sign a single new player has understandably been ridiculed by some supporters. But those who have vehemently voiced their anguish in light of this aberration need to focus on the stadium move and the strain that it is undoubtedly placing on their resources.

The financial situation needs to be placed into context: when Arsenal moved into the Emirates Stadium in 2006 their net spend for the two years which preceded it stood at £27.12 million and Tottenham’s is due to stand at £4.72 million. Not much to separate the two north London giants, right?

In modern day terms the difference stands at about one decent Premier League standard player, which is hardly huge in two years of transfer activity. But the main difference to consider is the cost of the respective stadiums: the Emirates Stadium cost a reported £390 million to build, which equated to £534.8 million when adjusted for inflation in 2015 (as per Daily Mirror); the New White Hart Lane is expected to cost roughly £1 billion (as per Goal).

It doesn’t take a financial expert to appreciate that £1 billion is a fair few hefty briefcases stuffed with cash, even in the near-incomprehensible world of top level sport.

The absence of an official confirmation concerning the financial impact of Tottenham’s new stadium and it’s correlation with a lack of transfer activity notwithstanding, these black and white figures tell a story of their own which needs no further explanation from a club official or insider.

Tottenham have simply been hamstrung by their move into a state-of-the-art arena which promises to be one of the world’s best: a modern piece of footballing architecture like no other.

In the two years which followed Arsenal’s stadium move, the club made a profit of £21.76 million in the market, with Thierry Henry’s sale to Barcelona effectively ensuring profit in a £21.6 million deal.

That news will not arrive as any great comfort for Spurs supporters, but the growing pressure which is mounting on Levy’s shoulders will certainly force him to act in the summer once the stadium move has been completed.

But, either way, there is no question that sections of the Spurs faithful are in need of a reality check, and a quick glance at Arsenal’s transfer history while they were undergoing a stadium move of their own can go some way to explaining the predicament Pochettino and Levy currently find themselves in.

You can’t have it all, can you? The silver lining for Spurs is that, when the move into the new stadium has, at long last, been completed, the absence of signings in the past two windows will pale into insignificance.

Tottenham fans – thoughts on another window without a transfer? Let us know below!

[ad_pod ]

Tottenham managed to clinch a 3-1 victory over Leicester City on Sunday but the result could have been different if it wasn’t for the heroics of Hugo Lloris.

Indeed, the Foxes travelled to Wembley and showed plenty of attacking intent, but their endeavours were largely thwarted by the Frenchman.

The turning point of the match arrived in the second-half as Jamie Vardy came off the bench with a golden opportunity to score a deserved equaliser from the penalty spot.

But Lloris won the mental battle and parried a weak penalty around the post, sparking delirium in the stands and amongst the Spurs players, with Jan Vertonghen’s reaction particularly catching the eye on social media.

Indeed, the 31-year-old looked stunned by the crucial penalty save, and supporters were eager to share that feeling on Twitter.

However, one fan jumped to Lloris’ defence and suggested that his penalty saving record is better than supporters are willing to give him credit for.

Here’s what the Spurs fans had to say about their defender’s reaction to the incident:

Leeds United currently find themselves sitting at the top of the Championship table after securing all three points against Swansea City last time out.

The Whites will need to ensure consistency from here on in if they are to stand any chance of meeting their aims, with a number of teams all fighting for a limited amount of places.

However, one thing that has been worrying supporters in recent times is the fact that Kemar Roofe has dropped off the pace massively, with no goals to his name in his last five Championship appearances.

Indeed, the Englishman established himself as one of the standout performers for the Whites during the first half of the season as he grabbed an impressive amount of goals, with his tally currently standing at 14. But, things have gone awfully quiet in recent times, which has had a negative affect on some of Leeds’ results as he just hasn’t been able to find the finishing touch that brought him so much success earlier on in the current campaign.

It’s safe to say that Leeds should have cashed in on him last month, despite him playing a big part this season, as his performances since January have been less than impressive. The Whites would have had time to bring in a proven replacement for Roofe and he would have more than likely attracted a big fee.

So, with Leeds now having to deal with his inconsistencies in front of goal, it now looks as if they should have made the brave decision to move him on while they could.

Leeds United fans – thoughts on whether you should have cashed in on Roofe?