I'd still start with Woakes tomorrow, surely he has a say here eventually?! Clearly a massive first half hour tomorrow, probably need them 7 or 8 down by half 11 or so. Sussex do bat pretty deep.

Even though it's still very early in the season this game feels significant.

I would also see how Woakes goes first thing but if he leaks too many runs then he has to come off. Not as many runs to play with as when the 5th wicket fell so we cannot afford the amount of '4 balls' we have given them. It does feel significant as there are better sides than Sussex and like Notts did last season, building up a head of steam and getting early points can breed confidence and momentum.

This isn't good, typical of us, 2 players making their home debut are taking this away from us and Leaning who has made 11 100's in 15 seasons at an average of 31, is really doing a job here on us.

Been ok this morning thus far, just isn't happening. Need a 'bang bang' here.

Completely comfortable for an average Sussex full of journeymen.

Another mid table (at best) finish for us this season.

I can only echo what's been said already. This will be a really poor defeat, and worrying for the rest of the campaign.

The same old problems of not being able to bowl teams out after removing the top order. We won't win many games until that's sorted.

You would've hoped with the return of Welch those problems would be fixed somewhat - maybe he just needs a bit longer.

Really poor to not defend over 300 on a worn track. Comeback OH-D!

Thompson & Webster are good AR's but we already have 2 in Woakes & Barnard. Woakes was poor in this game and should still make a difference over the season but everything just looks much of a muchness regarding our seamers. Webster is a batting AR.......has he & Thompson improved our attack? I would say not. Bamber takes wickets with the new ball but then tapers off, Booth is still quite raw and erratic

We needed to recruit either a proper quickie or a top end spinner to give us something different, as it is we are no better off than last season with players like Thompson taking the place of our own home grown kids.

As was pointed out a few seasons ago, too many bowlers of similar pace and all right arm. We can't use Yates and Mousley (Doesn't spin it) as spin options so give Taz a go. Why is Garton not considered, I know there have been a few comments on here about him but if all he does is play T20 and keep himself nice and fresh for the other 1000 franchises he plays for, then get rid of him, his T20 economy rate is over 9 per over anyway so he is hardly a dream 'Specialist'. 6 seamers must have been wonderful for Sussex, "Here's another one, same type, different name, same result". Why did we need 6, it appeared too many v Surrey and we have made Sussex look better than they are. Time for the management to make some decisions and get some variation into the bowling which as far as I am concerned, has lost us this game. A few batsmen could do with a score but when you decide that you want to bat first, make the highest score from the first 3 innings and then watch the 4th innings with the highest total needed by 61 runs, you have to admit you blew it.

Tough one to lose - a bit of a reverse from last year's home fixture against Worcestershire, with one team edging it over the first three innings & getting pegged back at the close. I'm a bit less worried about the rest of the season that some others. Batting deep and having lots of decent right arm seam options works well in the county championship and I think Sussex are one of the stronger teams we'll play, potential championship winners IMO. What does worry me is Jake Lintott being ahead of Taz Ali and in the squad. There is an obligation on the club to dvelop players and not just pack the team with old stagers, but as with all these things we don't see what goes on at practice so maybe there is an explanation.

So frustrating. I said all game like it looked a decent batting track, a good cricket wicket in fact, Paul Farbrace said at the end of Day 2 it was flattening out and I just couldn't get that out my head.

Its really the done thing on this forum but sometimes you just have give the opposition credit and say "fair play", they bowled better than our guys did every day. Our guys just couldn't bowl well enough for long enough to create pressure. In the 4th innings Sussex got off to a bit of a flyer all things considered and despite losing 3 wickets inside the first 15 overs were already well into the chase going at 5 and over. Could Barney have been a little bit braver and kept attacking fields in for longer? We probably weren't bowling well enough in fairness.

Feel like we've been done trying to defend 300+ a few times in recent years. Teams do tend to get off to decent starts against us and you look up and they already seem to have the runs req below 240 and from there we're only 1 good partnership away from playing big time catch up.

I get what people are saying about the samey sort of nature of our attack but Sussex were no different, they just bowled better for longer.

I felt like after each sides 1st innings we were well in control however to be 20-4 in the third innings the game just became a dog fight.

Feels like a significant result already.

I still think we're in decent shape, no kneejerking just yet.

Agree a disappointing result but not panic stations yet.
Bearing in mind Sussex's financial woes and the fact that they will have to offload a lot of players at the end of the season, is there anyone that we should consider signing who would add something different to the squad?

I thought we were well in the game until the last session yesterday, when we had them at 184-5 we looked to be favourites to win. After that our bowlers seemed to run out of ideas, and the final hour yesterday and this morning we were very disappointing. Two games in and we're already struggling to take 20 wickets in a game, same issue as we've had over the last couple of seasons. In our last two and a bit seasons we have only won 4 out of 30 matches - something needs to change. I would like to see Gilchrist and Taz Ali in the team on Friday for Thompson and Woakes.

Team for Friday:

Yates
Davies
Mousley
Hain
Webster
Barnard
Smith
Booth
Bamber
Gilchrist
Taz Ali

I've been fairly impressed with Thompson, he's about the only one who can pose a threat with the old ball and he's way better at the short ball tactic than Booth. I'd still back Woakes to get it right, whether he needs a rest or not is another matter.

Curious as to why Webster isn't bowling his offies? His seamers have looked extremely innocuous thus far.

A disappointing one this after winning the toss.

My hope with Woakes is he will improve with overs under his belt. He’s often got better when he’s bowled a number of overs at domestic and international level.

We definitely need a more balanced attack. If three seamers can’t get the wickets it’s unlikely any more will! If we must have four then we have Barnard anyway as all rounder!

V disappointing as looks like we’ve got so close to an amazing start to the season! Now wondering where 20 wickets will come from!

Feel like there's been a trend across the country with pitches getting flatter as the game goes on, broadly speaking. Maybe something to consider at the toss.

Pitches tend not to crumble anymore and maybe if a pitch is being prepared to crumble, if it all goes wrong and starts to 'Go' too early, the pitch inspector comes along for a visit. Our pitches at home are very bland' a bit like the ones in the 1970's and 80's even though they were 3-day games. Variation is needed though if only to stop opposing batsmen from getting 'In' against bowling that is virtually the same every over. I don't think Webster is going to trouble anyone with his bowling, I heard on the commentary yesterday that he is considered a proper all-rounder because his batting average is higher than his bowling average but that is nonsense as so many so-called 'All-rounders' hardly bowl but have a few cheap wickets and as Webster averages 1.77 wickets per first-class match, he is hardly up there with Woakes or a few others. Onwards and upwards, keep the faith and pray for better on Friday-Monday v Essex.

He'd opened the bowling for Tasmania in the Sheffield Shield as recently as Feb and he was bowling serviceable off breaks at the SCG in the Ashes, he's definitely an all rounder. He looked a decent bowler for us last year. Against Surrey and Sussex thus far though he's looked ordinary. Wonder if we're using him wrong?

Re: Webster I think even Bamber would struggle if he was coming on 3rd or 4th change.

We’ve just go the balance of the side wrong!

The report in The Cricketer agrees with posters on here:
"For Warwickshire, this feels like an opportunity missed. The Championship dark horses, boasting an embarrassment of riches in the seam department, looked a little toothless. It might well be a case, for all their quality, that they have a bit too much of the same thing."