| Surrey v Middx 00:01 - May 11 with 10508 views | stowmarketrange |
Is anyone else going to the Oval for the game starting tomorrow?We’ll have to play a lot better than we did against Essex last week to get a result.
I have complimentary tickets if anyone fancies a freebie tomorrow?The perks of being a member of Surrey ccc.
It’s the only day I’ll be able to attend I think as we have my daughter’s wedding in a couple of weeks time and I’ve got to give enough time for the black eyes and bruises to heal.
Send me a pm if you want a free day at the cricket.
Come on the brown hatters. |  | | |  |
| Surrey v Middx on 08:03 - Jun 15 with 1660 views | Loyalitat |
Indeed, very well played Surrey. I attended days two and three and both sides played excellent cricket. The innings from Jamie Smith on the third day was the turning point, as he scored a virtually flawless century at such a ridiculously quick rate. However, the contribution of Dom Sibley shouldn't go unnoticed. Unfairly derided by some, he was the perfect foil for both Smith and Foakes. Had Kent managed to get him out early, the result may have been different.
Really feel for Kent who didn't do anything wrong in my view. 500 runs' lead against any other county and they win the game. This Surrey side at the moment is pretty extraordinary and I can see them winning the league by a massive margin, already 32 points after just 7 games,
Just hope this loss doesn't derail Kent's season, as it's a tough one to take. Best of luck to Kent against Northants in their next championship match. [Post edited 15 Jun 2023 8:26]
|  | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 09:12 - Jun 15 with 1579 views | Tonto |
Sibley is an interesting case - he probably has no chance of getting into the current England team, but that innings yesterday was key to the 8th highest run chase in HISTORY - yes it was that high! it was the slowest hundred in the championship, yet was vital. sometimes an innings needs an anchor and I worry Bazball doesnt do it. Yes Bazball is great to watch, but you cant press the pedal to the metal all the time. |  |
| |
| Surrey v Middx on 09:28 - Jun 15 with 1560 views | BlackAndGoldRanger |
It was a great showing of old school cricket and "Bazball" all in one innings.
The anchor role from Sibley was superb, the way him and Foakes went about playing with new ball was perfect in the situation. But as has been mentioned, without Jamie Smith's counter attack it wouldn't have been possible. Just incredible all round, Kent's catching or lack of catching on day 3 helped.
Credit to the bowlers from both teams of plugging away on what turned into a road.
Wouldn't be surprised to see a 400+ chase in the ashes even with the step up in quality of bowling. | | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 09:54 - Jun 15 with 1543 views | terryb |
A question to those of you who have far more knowledge of cricket than I do? Is Bairstow more likely to score more runs than Foakes would, than he could concede with mistakes as wicketkeeper?
I appreciate that it would just be conjecture, but my gut tells me that England might rue this decision. | | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:05 - Jun 15 with 1529 views | BlackAndGoldRanger |
| Surrey v Middx on 09:54 - Jun 15 by terryb |
A question to those of you who have far more knowledge of cricket than I do? Is Bairstow more likely to score more runs than Foakes would, than he could concede with mistakes as wicketkeeper?
I appreciate that it would just be conjecture, but my gut tells me that England might rue this decision. |
I would say Foakes is the best keeper in the country by a long way and he can snatch wickets with amazing catches/super quick hands. Bairstow is a decent keeper. Could account for a few wickets over the series.
But Bairstow is a better and faster scoring batsman. Foakes is a quality batsmen but in the more traditional sense, hasn't played much T20 recently.
In the "Bazball" era - fast runs will always trump slower scoring players.
Personally I would have them both in the team with Bairstow opening instead of Crawley.
I can see Foakes playing at some point during the 5 tests. Injury/drop of form etc. | | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:12 - Jun 15 with 1528 views | GaryBannister86 |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:05 - Jun 15 by BlackAndGoldRanger |
I would say Foakes is the best keeper in the country by a long way and he can snatch wickets with amazing catches/super quick hands. Bairstow is a decent keeper. Could account for a few wickets over the series.
But Bairstow is a better and faster scoring batsman. Foakes is a quality batsmen but in the more traditional sense, hasn't played much T20 recently.
In the "Bazball" era - fast runs will always trump slower scoring players.
Personally I would have them both in the team with Bairstow opening instead of Crawley.
I can see Foakes playing at some point during the 5 tests. Injury/drop of form etc. |
I don't agree. For Foakes, read Jack Russell, Chris Read, James Foster. It's the age-old English obsession with classy-looking wicket keepers where the ball melts into their hands.
It's overblown nonsense. Of course Foakes is a brilliant gloveman. But he still drops chances, misses stumpings, lets through byes. Bairstow isn't as elegant, just as Stewart wasn't compared to Russell, but he misses very few. And he is obviously a better bat.
Jack Russell was the greatest myth, even more so now he's retired. Yes he was capable of absolute genius. But I saw him drop stuff, miss stumpings just like everyone else. Stewart, much as I dislike him, hardly missed anything. |  | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:17 - Jun 15 with 1515 views | GaryBannister86 |
| Surrey v Middx on 08:03 - Jun 15 by Loyalitat |
Indeed, very well played Surrey. I attended days two and three and both sides played excellent cricket. The innings from Jamie Smith on the third day was the turning point, as he scored a virtually flawless century at such a ridiculously quick rate. However, the contribution of Dom Sibley shouldn't go unnoticed. Unfairly derided by some, he was the perfect foil for both Smith and Foakes. Had Kent managed to get him out early, the result may have been different.
Really feel for Kent who didn't do anything wrong in my view. 500 runs' lead against any other county and they win the game. This Surrey side at the moment is pretty extraordinary and I can see them winning the league by a massive margin, already 32 points after just 7 games,
Just hope this loss doesn't derail Kent's season, as it's a tough one to take. Best of luck to Kent against Northants in their next championship match. [Post edited 15 Jun 2023 8:26]
|
Our (Kent's) bowling attack is still so weak, even when we are importing all and sundry. It is shocking that the county just can't seem to produce any decent bowlers and hasn't for absolutely ages.
For all Surrey's millions and buying whoever they want they still embarrassed us with home-growners.
Having said that, Foakes was stone dead LBW when the game was very much in the balance. Just like in football, big clubs seem to get plenty of these decisions and I say that as an umpire myself. Kent were pretty convinced they had him caught behind too not long after. | | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:38 - Jun 15 with 1485 views | BlackAndGoldRanger |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:12 - Jun 15 by GaryBannister86 |
I don't agree. For Foakes, read Jack Russell, Chris Read, James Foster. It's the age-old English obsession with classy-looking wicket keepers where the ball melts into their hands.
It's overblown nonsense. Of course Foakes is a brilliant gloveman. But he still drops chances, misses stumpings, lets through byes. Bairstow isn't as elegant, just as Stewart wasn't compared to Russell, but he misses very few. And he is obviously a better bat.
Jack Russell was the greatest myth, even more so now he's retired. Yes he was capable of absolute genius. But I saw him drop stuff, miss stumpings just like everyone else. Stewart, much as I dislike him, hardly missed anything. |
Yeah they are only human so of course he will drop some things, he did in the Kent match.
But I'm saying he will likely catch more than Bairstow, particularly more in the "harder" catches/stumpings vain. Especially down the leg side, Foakes reads the flight of the ball incredibly well. I am biased but still think many would agree he is the best keeper in the country if not the world currently (certainly top 5).
All in all I hope Bairstow does brilliantly, makes all his catches, makes a hatful or runs and we beat the Aussies 5-0 (I actually reckon 3-2 either way) | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Surrey v Middx on 10:49 - Jun 15 with 1472 views | GaryBannister86 |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:38 - Jun 15 by BlackAndGoldRanger |
Yeah they are only human so of course he will drop some things, he did in the Kent match.
But I'm saying he will likely catch more than Bairstow, particularly more in the "harder" catches/stumpings vain. Especially down the leg side, Foakes reads the flight of the ball incredibly well. I am biased but still think many would agree he is the best keeper in the country if not the world currently (certainly top 5).
All in all I hope Bairstow does brilliantly, makes all his catches, makes a hatful or runs and we beat the Aussies 5-0 (I actually reckon 3-2 either way) |
Yes, that's the point. I don't think Bairstow is any more or less likely to take the normal chances than Foakes. Foakes is more likely to conjure up a worldie or something out of nothing. But how often does that happen? Once every 2/3 tests at best?
So give me Bairstow's potential for big runs.
Also agree that I don't care who plays as long as we win. I can't see Mo being a success but would absolutely love him to pin Travis Head and then smoke a 100. | | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 19:50 - Jun 15 with 1390 views | numptydumpty |
fantastic time to be a Surrey fan.
Potential to be a bit of a Man City in cricketing terms.
Massive strength in depth - in all forms of the game and when the internationals are not there, there still is great quality to come in.
That win was outrageous !!!!
Just signed Dan Lawrence from next season, a squad player perhaps but when got test call up recently was being touted very favourably - didnt work out - but something in the water at the Oval recently - all fine and dandy !!! |  |
| |
| Surrey v Middx on 19:54 - Jun 15 with 1386 views | numptydumpty |
Bairstow could end up being used as an opener - and then I think Foakes comes in as wicketkeeper.
If Bairstow in as batsman down the order, cant see Foakes picked just for his batting - he is a decent player but England are very strong currently and there are several others with great potential that would see Foakes missing out on team selection.
But am interested to see how Bazball works against the Aussies. I have an inkling it wont be as successful as it has been thus far.
And if thats the case, will there be some kind of in game management to turn away from Bazball as win or bust no more !!! [Post edited 15 Jun 2023 19:56]
| |
| |
| Surrey v Middx on 08:36 - Jun 16 with 1327 views | Superhoops2808 |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:17 - Jun 15 by GaryBannister86 |
Our (Kent's) bowling attack is still so weak, even when we are importing all and sundry. It is shocking that the county just can't seem to produce any decent bowlers and hasn't for absolutely ages.
For all Surrey's millions and buying whoever they want they still embarrassed us with home-growners.
Having said that, Foakes was stone dead LBW when the game was very much in the balance. Just like in football, big clubs seem to get plenty of these decisions and I say that as an umpire myself. Kent were pretty convinced they had him caught behind too not long after. |
Hardly call Sean Abbott and Tom Latham as homegrown but anyway
I live in hope that the result didnt dent our season and I am off to Lords tonight to hopefully see us grab another victory in T20
As for Surrey, I really couldnt take pride in a side that just hoovers up talent from all the counties until they have it all. We should have made them follow on on day 2 and not chosen to bat. I genuinely think we would have won from there |  | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 14:43 - Jun 16 with 1287 views | numptydumpty |
| Surrey v Middx on 08:36 - Jun 16 by Superhoops2808 |
Hardly call Sean Abbott and Tom Latham as homegrown but anyway
I live in hope that the result didnt dent our season and I am off to Lords tonight to hopefully see us grab another victory in T20
As for Surrey, I really couldnt take pride in a side that just hoovers up talent from all the counties until they have it all. We should have made them follow on on day 2 and not chosen to bat. I genuinely think we would have won from there |
Sounding very like the green eyed monster 🤣 | |
| |
| Surrey v Middx on 15:17 - Jun 16 with 1273 views | Loyalitat |
| Surrey v Middx on 08:36 - Jun 16 by Superhoops2808 |
Hardly call Sean Abbott and Tom Latham as homegrown but anyway
I live in hope that the result didnt dent our season and I am off to Lords tonight to hopefully see us grab another victory in T20
As for Surrey, I really couldnt take pride in a side that just hoovers up talent from all the counties until they have it all. We should have made them follow on on day 2 and not chosen to bat. I genuinely think we would have won from there |
Foakes: Essex homegrown; Clarke: Lancashire homegrown; Dan Worrall: Australian; to add to Abbott and Latham. Other counties have fielded as many, if not more homegrown players than Surrey in the last round of county matches. My county Essex had 9 playing against Somerset and Somerset had 6 at least.
They've now captured Dan Lawrence: Essex homegrown for next season. Give it another year or two and I suspect they'll lure Cox away from Kent.
Good point made about inserting the follow-on, which seems so off-trend nowadays. Best of luck to the Spitfires this evening. [Post edited 16 Jun 2023 15:51]
| | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 15:53 - Jun 16 with 1246 views | numptydumpty |
| Surrey v Middx on 15:17 - Jun 16 by Loyalitat |
Foakes: Essex homegrown; Clarke: Lancashire homegrown; Dan Worrall: Australian; to add to Abbott and Latham. Other counties have fielded as many, if not more homegrown players than Surrey in the last round of county matches. My county Essex had 9 playing against Somerset and Somerset had 6 at least.
They've now captured Dan Lawrence: Essex homegrown for next season. Give it another year or two and I suspect they'll lure Cox away from Kent.
Good point made about inserting the follow-on, which seems so off-trend nowadays. Best of luck to the Spitfires this evening. [Post edited 16 Jun 2023 15:51]
|
And your point is exactly.
They have all chosen to further their careers at a more progressive set up and wishing to progress their own ambitions at a club that they feel they have a very good chance of doing this.
That's like saying I am glad QPR are competing in league Two as we have 11 academy players in our first team today. But we lose every game so that makes me feel better.
Having the set up and the financial clout does not always guarantee success. Our own teams efforts in 2014 / 15 season very evident of this fact.
But if we won the Premier league with just one player from the academy as opposed to being mid table in league Two with eleven home grown players.
As said tinge of back handed jealousy in evidence, I suggest !!!! [Post edited 16 Jun 2023 15:54]
| |
| |
| Surrey v Middx on 17:02 - Jun 16 with 1228 views | Loyalitat |
| Surrey v Middx on 15:53 - Jun 16 by numptydumpty |
And your point is exactly.
They have all chosen to further their careers at a more progressive set up and wishing to progress their own ambitions at a club that they feel they have a very good chance of doing this.
That's like saying I am glad QPR are competing in league Two as we have 11 academy players in our first team today. But we lose every game so that makes me feel better.
Having the set up and the financial clout does not always guarantee success. Our own teams efforts in 2014 / 15 season very evident of this fact.
But if we won the Premier league with just one player from the academy as opposed to being mid table in league Two with eleven home grown players.
As said tinge of back handed jealousy in evidence, I suggest !!!! [Post edited 16 Jun 2023 15:54]
|
A tad supercilious on your part may I suggest and clearly in evidence!!!
Here's the evidence by way of facts to disprove your assertion that clubs like Essex and Kent aren't as "progressive".
Since Essex was promoted back to division one in 2017, it has won the county championship twice: 2017 and 2019, which is as many as Surrey during the same period. It has also won the T20 tournament in 2019, and even the Bob Willis Trophy in 2020. All honours achieved with sides that had a preponderance of homegrown players who were clearly winners too. The two aren't mutually exclusive and are definitely not the sole preserve of the wealthiest county.
Since Kent's promotion back to division one in 2018, it has won the t20 tournament and 50-over tournament in successive seasons.
For a club as "progressive" as Surrey, it should be asked why it had to wait 16 years before winning the county championship again in 2018, including getting relegated, and how a "non/less progressive" county like Essex has since its return to division one, actually managed to have won more honours. [Post edited 16 Jun 2023 18:26]
| | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 18:42 - Jun 16 with 1189 views | numptydumpty |
| Surrey v Middx on 17:02 - Jun 16 by Loyalitat |
A tad supercilious on your part may I suggest and clearly in evidence!!!
Here's the evidence by way of facts to disprove your assertion that clubs like Essex and Kent aren't as "progressive".
Since Essex was promoted back to division one in 2017, it has won the county championship twice: 2017 and 2019, which is as many as Surrey during the same period. It has also won the T20 tournament in 2019, and even the Bob Willis Trophy in 2020. All honours achieved with sides that had a preponderance of homegrown players who were clearly winners too. The two aren't mutually exclusive and are definitely not the sole preserve of the wealthiest county.
Since Kent's promotion back to division one in 2018, it has won the t20 tournament and 50-over tournament in successive seasons.
For a club as "progressive" as Surrey, it should be asked why it had to wait 16 years before winning the county championship again in 2018, including getting relegated, and how a "non/less progressive" county like Essex has since its return to division one, actually managed to have won more honours. [Post edited 16 Jun 2023 18:26]
|
Was just responding to your post criticising Surrey's recent achievements and your own justifications.
Great. Kent and Essex have had success.
Cricket is not a game where monopolised success happens. No county consistently wins.
Currently fab to be a Surrey follower and 501 to win in the fourth innings however that's achieved whether you personally like it or not, that performance in a match is outstanding.
Swings and roundabouts though but your criticisms do seem to come from a position of "well its easy for them" given how and when they acquire their players.
All I can say is "Who cares" how it's achieved. If we playing fantastic cricket it's great to watch.
As sure from your previous successes you yourself have enjoyed.
Ok edit. Surrey are CURRENTLY more progressive team. 🤣
Crikey the words TEETH and PULLING spring to mind !!! [Post edited 16 Jun 2023 18:47]
| |
| |
| Surrey v Middx on 19:12 - Jun 16 with 1170 views | Loyalitat |
| Surrey v Middx on 18:42 - Jun 16 by numptydumpty |
Was just responding to your post criticising Surrey's recent achievements and your own justifications.
Great. Kent and Essex have had success.
Cricket is not a game where monopolised success happens. No county consistently wins.
Currently fab to be a Surrey follower and 501 to win in the fourth innings however that's achieved whether you personally like it or not, that performance in a match is outstanding.
Swings and roundabouts though but your criticisms do seem to come from a position of "well its easy for them" given how and when they acquire their players.
All I can say is "Who cares" how it's achieved. If we playing fantastic cricket it's great to watch.
As sure from your previous successes you yourself have enjoyed.
Ok edit. Surrey are CURRENTLY more progressive team. 🤣
Crikey the words TEETH and PULLING spring to mind !!! [Post edited 16 Jun 2023 18:47]
|
Fair play and all the best to Surrey who, barring a major scale implosion, should comfortably win this season's championship. [Post edited 16 Jun 2023 19:27]
| | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 09:50 - Jun 17 with 1100 views | terryb |
Is it not the case that their is an overall £ salary cap for all counties? Therefore, if they are paying the maximum, with every signing they make they would have to release a player. Also they would be using up some of the allowed cap on players that aren't available for all the season due to playing for England.
I expect that a large proportion of Surrey's income is from England matches played at the Oval and that would certainly give an advantage over counties like Essex & Kent etc. However, Lancs, Notts, Waricks & Yorks would have the same advantage. I suspect those four counties have more members as well.
I'm sure I will be shot down in flames if this is incorrect! | | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:33 - Jun 17 with 1073 views | Superhoops2808 |
| Surrey v Middx on 15:17 - Jun 16 by Loyalitat |
Foakes: Essex homegrown; Clarke: Lancashire homegrown; Dan Worrall: Australian; to add to Abbott and Latham. Other counties have fielded as many, if not more homegrown players than Surrey in the last round of county matches. My county Essex had 9 playing against Somerset and Somerset had 6 at least.
They've now captured Dan Lawrence: Essex homegrown for next season. Give it another year or two and I suspect they'll lure Cox away from Kent.
Good point made about inserting the follow-on, which seems so off-trend nowadays. Best of luck to the Spitfires this evening. [Post edited 16 Jun 2023 15:51]
|
I am glad someone gets my point. Maybe the clue is in the posters name!!
I saw about Lawrence the other day and I just dont get why the move but anyway. He is not a bad cricketer at all and will likely only be a squad player at Surrey. It feels like Chelsea where they get players in just so the other counties cannot use them.
Great game last night, but wow are Middlesex woeful. Had we not had our leading wicket taker taken off for two dangerous balls in his first over we would have finished it sooner I think.
Highest ever score at Lords in a T20 by any side so I will take that and on to tonights game | | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:40 - Jun 17 with 1070 views | thame_hoops |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:33 - Jun 17 by Superhoops2808 |
I am glad someone gets my point. Maybe the clue is in the posters name!!
I saw about Lawrence the other day and I just dont get why the move but anyway. He is not a bad cricketer at all and will likely only be a squad player at Surrey. It feels like Chelsea where they get players in just so the other counties cannot use them.
Great game last night, but wow are Middlesex woeful. Had we not had our leading wicket taker taken off for two dangerous balls in his first over we would have finished it sooner I think.
Highest ever score at Lords in a T20 by any side so I will take that and on to tonights game |
It was a really enjoyable night wasn’t it. Although we lost, the weather was perfect, the atmosphere was great and the crowd did really get behind Middlesex. I was expecting to leave around the 15over Mark, but stayed till the end while Holden was in (and there was a small chance of winning) that was crazy what happened to your bowler, 2 really high fukl tosses.
Going back to Surrey, I was speaking to a Surrey member a few weeks ago who mentioned that they have to cap Membership at the Oval? And some membership schemes don’t even allow you to watch T-20? |  | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 14:34 - Jun 17 with 1037 views | Superhoops2808 |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:40 - Jun 17 by thame_hoops |
It was a really enjoyable night wasn’t it. Although we lost, the weather was perfect, the atmosphere was great and the crowd did really get behind Middlesex. I was expecting to leave around the 15over Mark, but stayed till the end while Holden was in (and there was a small chance of winning) that was crazy what happened to your bowler, 2 really high fukl tosses.
Going back to Surrey, I was speaking to a Surrey member a few weeks ago who mentioned that they have to cap Membership at the Oval? And some membership schemes don’t even allow you to watch T-20? |
I am glad my Kent membership lets me watch all Men & Womens game for free. Imagine being restricted.
Wish I had known you were going last night, where were you sat? We were in the Compton stand. It was a great atmosphere but I do think Higgins was on the end of a poor decision.
Getting to and from the ground is hard too, St Johns Wood just cannot cope
As for Stewart, can only assume that sweat played a part in losing grip of the ball but I dont know, he is normally reliable. He used to play for Middlesex | | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 16:04 - Jun 17 with 978 views | stowmarketrange |
| Surrey v Middx on 10:40 - Jun 17 by thame_hoops |
It was a really enjoyable night wasn’t it. Although we lost, the weather was perfect, the atmosphere was great and the crowd did really get behind Middlesex. I was expecting to leave around the 15over Mark, but stayed till the end while Holden was in (and there was a small chance of winning) that was crazy what happened to your bowler, 2 really high fukl tosses.
Going back to Surrey, I was speaking to a Surrey member a few weeks ago who mentioned that they have to cap Membership at the Oval? And some membership schemes don’t even allow you to watch T-20? |
I got a Surrey membership this year and it allows me access to all games including the hundred.The members can sit in the Flynn stand for certain games if there are too many members in the pavilion,but as far as I know there are no restrictions if you get a full membership. | | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 17:08 - Jun 17 with 954 views | thame_hoops |
| Surrey v Middx on 16:04 - Jun 17 by stowmarketrange |
I got a Surrey membership this year and it allows me access to all games including the hundred.The members can sit in the Flynn stand for certain games if there are too many members in the pavilion,but as far as I know there are no restrictions if you get a full membership. |
Aha gotcha.. I looked on their website and they do a county membership only which includes the 50 over and CC, not T20, it makes it much cheaper. Middlesex is the same way you can get into every match for free. Doesn’t include 100 though, but you do get a discounted rate on tickets. | | | |
| Surrey v Middx on 17:12 - Jun 17 with 952 views | thame_hoops |
| Surrey v Middx on 14:34 - Jun 17 by Superhoops2808 |
I am glad my Kent membership lets me watch all Men & Womens game for free. Imagine being restricted.
Wish I had known you were going last night, where were you sat? We were in the Compton stand. It was a great atmosphere but I do think Higgins was on the end of a poor decision.
Getting to and from the ground is hard too, St Johns Wood just cannot cope
As for Stewart, can only assume that sweat played a part in losing grip of the ball but I dont know, he is normally reliable. He used to play for Middlesex |
Agree, I don’t think there was malice, and he seemed quite embarrassed. I don’t recall him playing for Middlesex, I will look him up. Obviously, Denley had three years with us.
I was sat in the Warner stand, the Middlesex member stand.
Usually I get the train from Princes Risborough to Marleybone and walk from there, I never have any issues getting away. Since I’ve been 30 days sober (and counting) I drove in. Got a parking space on Saint Johns wood Road 5:45, pointing in the right direction to leave. When the game was over, I hopped out the exit by the museum (gate 6 on grove end road, much quicker) I got in the car straight away and got back home to Oxfordshire in 50 minutes, a record. [Post edited 17 Jun 2023 17:13]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
