Anytime anyone tried to play an attacking stroke they played and missed or got in trouble. Tough pitch this, and getting tougher.

It might be one of those situations where because Monday looks bleak, it might be better to get bowled out with a 220 lead and then they could easily lose a whole hatful in the 4th innings tomorrow or even lose.

This pitch is doing all sorts! Webster beaten by a ball that kept low, next ball bouncing up off Hain's gloves. If we can get a lead of around 200 that could be enough, batting last is going to be extremely tough.

Given the weather forecast for tomorrow do you think we should declare now we have a lead over 250 ?

I think we should declare yes. Goodness knows what we were messing around at last night.

Commentator talking about Worcs victory but it’s highly unlikely

I think we should declare yes. Goodness knows what we were messing around at last night.

Commentator talking about Worcs victory but it’s highly unlikely

Captains generally seem to be very reluctant to make a declaration based on a weather forecast. This seems to be a case in point unless it is the opposite - Alex Davies is so convinced that the forecast is right that he thinks there is no chance of a result and so will just bat on.
The way Division One is shaping, Warwickshire are gradually getting shoved down the table by teams such as Surrey, Sussex and Somerset that started the season slowly but are now doing better.

Batted too long I think if tomorrow's forecast is right. I don't agree with the criticism of last night as the ball was doing all sorts and preserving your wicket was equally as important as runs, we could have been 50-4 easily if we had thrown the bat.

paulbear wrote:

Batted too long I think if tomorrow's forecast is right. I don't agree with the criticism of last night as the ball was doing all sorts and preserving your wicket was equally as important as runs, we could have been 50-4 easily if we had thrown the bat.

Agreed, Hain, Barnard, Woakes etc can't do what they did today without the graft Yates and Latham did last night.

I don't know what forecast people are looking at but BBC and met check are both saying just chances or showers from 1300?? Could easily get 60 overs in, which on the basis of what has happened so far is enough to get eight wickers but not enough for Worcs to get the runs to win.

The official Met Office site - Not saying it will be correct but, Rain in Worcester 60% chance from 1200-1400, 70% chance from 1400-1600, 60% chance from 1600-1700 and 80% chance 1700-1800.

Ah OK. If that's correct it's probably less than 60 overs. As you infer thohgh ... who knows!

paulbear wrote:

The official Met Office site - Not saying it will be correct but, Rain in Worcester 60% chance from 1200-1400, 70% chance from 1400-1600, 60% chance from 1600-1700 and 80% chance 1700-1800.

Ah OK. If that's correct it's probably less than 60 overs. As you infer thohgh ... who knows!

paulbear wrote:

The official Met Office site - Not saying it will be correct but, Rain in Worcester 60% chance from 1200-1400, 70% chance from 1400-1600, 60% chance from 1600-1700 and 80% chance 1700-1800.

Any short rain breaks will be to Warks advantage - bowlers get a chance to rest while the batsmen have their concentration interrupted. 3 wickets minimum before lunch needed.

Just the start we wanted.

"Unlikely", "Marginal", yes if you are a Pears commentator.

Oh look, 4 down.

50 partnership - perhaps give Yates a couple of overs before lunch

7 down but keep the wicket takers on, mustn't let up.

So Smith has the gloves again?!