Interesting that there's a third man in right away

We failed to get a batting point I think? Just 2 runs more......

Yeah

How many do we need this session do we think? 4?

Mikkyk wrote:

To further the above I tried to pause the live stream at the point the ball got to Foakes and it definitely looks like it hit the floor.

I wish we could have had a close up because I have never seen a keeper who felt the need to immediately claim that the ball had not hit the floor, as Foakes did. I thought that was most strange!! It’s the cynic in me.

Well the rain has helped us today. I wonder how daring Surrey will be.

There is an argument for declaring now so they can bowl with the new ball at 1030.

I think it'll be a declaration once a draw is secured rather than the dangling the carrot type.

A draw keeps them in first even if Notts win.

Draw away to Surrey is an OK result and had it been 100% dry we probably would lose - so could be worse. Having said that, Notts and Hants will probably win and Soms will probably draw with more BPs so we lose ground in every direction. Still a bit to play though we did hold our own for a while against a stronger team. Have to make the points back in the last two games.

As this game is heading to, an almost certain, draw, would it not be a good idea to let Kai keep wicket for the remainder of the Surrey innings and gain more experience of keeping in English conditions?

Highveld wrote:

As this game is heading to, an almost certain, draw, would it not be a good idea to let Kai keep wicket for the remainder of the Surrey innings and gain more experience of keeping in English conditions?

Why almost certain draw?

The game situation and the time remaining.

Yeah we can definitely find a way of losing this, this is Warwickshire!

Surely Burns should be made to carry about 20kg of ballast to make him equal to Sibley's body mass?

:-)

Magnificent fielding by us.

Do runners not have to wear the same equipment as the batsman? Burns isn’t wearing a thigh pad!

Ah good point

Slightly more interesting this morning than I thought, I watched the first three overs and saw very quick scoring albeit giving away a wicket, though from that point it seemed slower though still losing wickets. Probably Surrey didn't play it so well and did they sacrifice runs to allow Sibley to get a century? Overall weather is looking better down here though I am West London not South, at absolute worst we lose a bit to a shower but it won't be a long interruption if it happens. Looks like we have to bat out all those 7x overs...

Let's hope we don't get more dodgy decisions against us this afternoon!

BosworthBear wrote:

Magnificent fielding by us.

Do runners not have to wear the same equipment as the batsman? Burns isn’t wearing a thigh pad!

The Laws of Cricket state that a runner must: "wear external protective equipment equivalent to that worn by the batter for whom he/she runs and shall carry a bat."
So I guess a thigh pad is not external whereas an arm guard would be - unless it was worn beneath a long sleeved shirt.
We need Highveld, as a qualified umpire, to rule on this.

Hampshire deducted 8 points for substandard pitch v Sussex back in May. They lost the game by 9 wickets. As consequence they've gone from 5th to 8th in the table.

I'd be more concerned about using someone who is much lighter and faster been used as the runner!

As the law says external equipment, so technically no laws were broken.