The T20 averages for the season so far

https://countycrickethub.net/team-averages.html?teamid=16&comp=3&year=2025

for all the abuse Davies gets 393 runs at SR151 is a good return. again there are multiple players in the 100 with inferior output this year.

for context, there are 27 players who have scored over 350, and only 14 of them have scored at 150 or above.

That's a good return from Davies and that strike rate would get you to 180 if the whole team batted at the same rate. A few of us discussed Ross Whiteley yesterday and why he keeps getting T20 contracts and his strike rate of 136.36 would only get an average score of just over 163. We have good strike rates for quite a few batsmen but our bowling does worry me at times as we do leak a few runs and players like Mouseley have conceded a few compared to last season. We must tighten up when we play Somerset as they have some really fast scorers in their side.

Tom Latham scored a very similar number of runs, at a similar strike rate, without the stupid dismissals, but some here claimed he was too slow.
I know who most people would prefer to haver in the side.

The figues show some of our more exprienced players have fqailed to perform and contribute at an acceptable level, for some that is the case in all 3 forms of the game.

Highveld wrote:

Tom Latham scored a very similar number of runs, at a similar strike rate, without the stupid dismissals, but some here claimed he was too slow.
I know who most people would prefer to haver in the side.

Latham's strike rate was greatly increased by a single innings (the ton, plus another against Notts), though, Davies's was consistent across most of his innings. The comments on here about him scoring slowly were, firstly, made before the season, secondly, based on a significant sample size across his T20 career, and thirdly, born out in 12 out of 14 of his innings last season.

Without the 2 innings as outliers, and they very much were outliers, he'd have been right back to his career strike rate in the mid-130s

As for 'without the stupid dismissals'?, they were both dismissed 14/14 innings, and I recall plenty of unnecessary or poor shots from Latham getting him dismissed. At this point it looks like you're just inventing reasons to shout about Davies I'm afraid because Latham played his fair share of shockers too.

I'd also suggest you are misunderstanding somewhat the role Davies has been given/given himself. Latham was the 'play through the innings' opener and Davies the quick scoring one. Same as Mousley's role was clearly to come in and score quickly (his strike rate went up about 20 from last year) and hain's, as ever, was to bat through. Getting out earlier is somewhat built into Davies's role the same way it was for Neil Carter. Teams nowadays don't have batsmen each coming in hoping to anchor the innings and get a NO from wherever they are in the order. They have players for different roles. Even given that, I'd personally like to have seen Davies kick on past 50 much more often in his time with us, but you aren't looking at the stats through the right lens in my opinion.

given his role as quick scorer in my opinion, with the risk taking that implies, Davies getting nearly 400 runs is a good/very good gross total matched with SR.

as for 'most people' would prefer Latham, well for one thing it never fails to amuse seeing people's assumption of the universality of their own viewpoint but that aside, there is a perfectly reasonable standpoint saying they actually complemented each other beautifully, and I think formed the highest-scoring opening partnership in the whole competition.

it may be a scandalous idea but- they don't have to be either/or, and you can praise both at the same time, or one of them without deriding the other. Opening partnerships can work badly or well, we had a partnership scoring 800 between them and you're slagging the guy who got half the runs? ah well.

The above was a "party political broadcast" from the "Alex Davies fan Club", membership 2, Alex Davies & ITE7376.

Remembering the infamous "Jean" from the previous boad, perhaps they are the3 same person?

Anyway, to return to the topic.

The game will be played at Taunton, under floodlights, so allowing for the twilight period, there ,may be an advantage of batting second on the day.

Great post ITE7376, so many good points. The numbers would suggest the batters have batted well this comp, most strike rates there look good.

But no you have to pick a side and be staunch over it. If you don't hate Alex Davies and criticise him at every available opportunity you won't get on on here. Pick your favourites and stick to them. Don't do in depth discussion and debate.

as a different context, across 18 counties there were 60 top 5 batsmen. Davies was 22nd in the scoring. in the top 3rd, pretty impressive stuff. imagine how many bad dismissals the 48 below him must have had

Highveld wrote:

The above was a "party political broadcast" from the "Alex Davies fan Club", membership 2, Alex Davies & ITE7376.

Remembering the infamous "Jean" from the previous boad, perhaps they are the3 same person?

your comments about Davies are now saying far more about you than they are rationally saying about him.

Actually, i'd have said that daring to critise Davies was the minority view on here, there were times whern North Korea allowed more vbariation of opinion than thios board, but as the great Lady Thatcher once said, "hasving a minority view does not mean you are wrong".

Love to know how much we pay ,Garton and Gleeson ??

A very good question, I'd be interested to know the total cost of emplying Hassan Ali, including flights, housing and work permits.

Unlike pro sports in the USA salary figures aren't disclosed.

Ridiculous if you consider that they both obviously have contracts but I would love to know what they say, I mean, both could only end up playing 14 T20 games so 14 days cricket isn't really hard work.

There as been times this season we probably needed Garton in CC ,surely it should be included in his contract to be available .

Garton has claimed he wanted to play red ball cricket, but was never available.

Garton and Gleason are mercanaries, who appear to have no real commitment to Warwickshire. I'd rather spend the money on players available all season.

Gleeson is a Blast only deal I believe so is only contracted so is only paid during the Blast? Garton white ball only with a pay as you play option for red ball? You'd hope?But has never turned out for the 2's in the 2nd XI championship so...he has done sub fielder a few times for the 1's. Theres never be a time where time thought "we need Garton here" personally when watching the CC. Don't think either are anchoring the club with exorbitant salaries. Could be wrong.

We've consistently seen a need for faster bowlers (ie Garton could be useful), a left armer (Garton) and a solid number eight bat (Garton again) so think there was a need for him and would have been good to convert him to CC. Does the club want him to? Does he not fancy it? Or will he just disintegrate if he has to bowl more than four overs? I genuinely don't know. I think the ships sailed now though with Barker, seemingly only here to play CC, unless Garton has a year and a half timeline on being red ball ready? Also don't think they're on massive money for 14 blast games.

I think a lot of s-called 'County Cricketers don't care about playing CC games as long as they make some sort of name for themselves in short format games and can play around the world in the various T20 leagues, making good money and any sort of longer games world wear them out whereas a few 4-over bowling spells are not going to tax them much over the winter and they appear happy to earn their living this way.

Andy wrote:

Great post ITE7376, so many good points. The numbers would suggest the batters have batted well this comp, most strike rates there look good.

cheers. from a pure stats perspective, Ed Barnard getting well over 300 at over SR160 is probably the most impressive single achievement for me. Especially when you consider that the top 4 ahead of him all faced an awful lot of balls, to get that gross weight of runs was very impressive as it wasn't like he was continually coming in overs 4-10, quite the opposite. When he did come in relatively early after an early run of wickets it seemed like he got a good contribution every time, and the season SR speaks eloquently of the success of his shorter cameo innings and his 'ability to score quickly from ball one'. Very good consistency, when he was coming in at a position in the lineup where consistency is difficult. Again those factors being as prized as they are (apparently) in franchise recruitment I'm slightly surprised he didn't get picked up, as the 'specialist finisher' does seem to be a role they actively recruit for.

Our ex-Bear Ethan Brookes had a near-identical season with the bat in both gross runs and SR and is a more successful T20 bowler than Barney on recent form as well as a brilliant fielder and, again, both his stats and the way they fit with franchise wishlists make it surprising to me nobody picked him up. I honestly question the quality of the scouting in Brookes's case as although (IIRC) his bowling was expensive this year, he does take wickets and is a useful no6 bowling option/very useful no7 option. I do strongly suspect that the scouting/recruitment will catch up with Brookes sooner than later and wouldn't be at all surprised if he is playing Big Bash within another year or two

Tayls79 wrote:

We've consistently seen a need for faster bowlers (ie Garton could be useful), a left armer (Garton) and a solid number eight bat (Garton again) so think there was a need for him and would have been good to convert him to CC. Does the club want him to? Does he not fancy it? Or will he just disintegrate if he has to bowl more than four overs? I genuinely don't know. I think the ships sailed now though with Barker, seemingly only here to play CC, unless Garton has a year and a half timeline on being red ball ready? Also don't think they're on massive money for 14 blast games.

with his age, injury record, and considerable bulk/size, I'd be fairly certain he would rather not risk his body (and franchise money) with the grind of long-form cricket. AFAIK he hasn't played any in years.