It’s alright, Bresnan and Briggs are our most in form batsmen.

It looks a really tough pitch to bat on. Getting 100 from here looks a challenge. We can I to hope we can skittle them out cheaply too.

I'd settle for 50 at this point. What is our lowest first-class score?

It’s absolutely bizarre to watch. Briggs got one that popped. Burgess’ looked like it went below his bat whilst playing forward. Bresnan played a long way inside it. Hain left it. I’d get it if they were all edging behind but so many bowled and LBWs is odd. Even the way the watch was offered was odd.

One another note however, I do have to ask, why in the same game do we have to rest our England fast bowler, but Durham can play theirs? I understand load management and the ECB will be sending down orders, but seems a bit unfair.

It was 16 against Kent over 100 years ago.

BristolBear wrote:

It’s absolutely bizarre to watch. Briggs got one that popped. Burgess’ looked like it went below his bat whilst playing forward. Bresnan played a long way inside it. Hain left it. I’d get it if they were all edging behind but so many bowled and LBWs is odd. Even the way the watch was offered was odd.

One another note however, I do have to ask, why in the same game do we have to rest our England fast bowler, but Durham can play theirs? I understand load management and the ECB will be sending down orders, but seems a bit unfair.

The difference I believe is that Stone has played two games in a row for us and this is Woods first appearance for Durham.

I do appreciate that, but I suppose my issue is that if you’re going to rest them, rest them all in the same round. Otherwise you could end up having hypothetically (all being fit and available) the Roses match and Yorkshire have to rest Bess, Bairstow and Root, but Anderson and Butler can play for Lancashire.
I know fitness and availability effect this, but if they said all fit ECB bowlers can play rounds 2, 3 & 5. Everyone knows where they stand, if a player isn’t fit for then, so be it. But I suppose it’s a case of the ECB comes first.

I must have a word with the person who wrote in the Deep Extra Cover preview that batting conditions would be good.
Oh, hang on, it was me!

BristolBear wrote:

I do appreciate that, but I suppose my issue is that if you’re going to rest them, rest them all in the same round. Otherwise you could end up having hypothetically (all being fit and available) the Roses match and Yorkshire have to rest Bess, Bairstow and Root, but Anderson and Butler can play for Lancashire.
I know fitness and availability effect this, but if they said all fit ECB bowlers can play rounds 2, 3 & 5. Everyone knows where they stand, if a player isn’t fit for then, so be it. But I suppose it’s a case of the ECB comes first.

I agree it is odd and a trifle unfair to think that some counties have their ECB players whilst others don’t.

On the other hand we may see Norwell steaming in and matching Raine and we wouldn’t notice that Stone is not here.

This is the issue the counties have with the ECB players. I wonder whether I’ll ever see Chris Woakes play for us again live.

Relief, Carse and Rushworth have bowled some rubbish at Miles and Norwell.
They’re searching for wickets, when it looks like all you have to do is bowl stump to stump and the pitch will eventually do it for you.

The wicket is rubbish. The ball is keeping low quite often with an unpredictable bounce. Somewhat of a recovery by Miles and Norwell!

Well, it could have been a lot worse. Now we just need to bowl at the stumps and let the pitch do the rest!

Not convinced we’re bowling particularly well, or have got our tactics right so far. We’re bowling on this pitch like it’s a normal pitch. It’s a newly relayed wicket, it has a settling period, especially when it’s rained recently. We’re looking for outside edges, but I’m not sure there’s the carry in it for that.
They need to do what Raine did, go full and straight, stump to stump.

Yes, a very poor day. Bowling looks average although Norwell looks threatening. Could really do with Stone!

The overhead conditions look to have improved but Brez and Miles have bowled dross here, too many leave balls and something on the batsmans hip every over.

Abysmal day

Whilst I'm not sure we're going to get anything out of this game we just have to hope some of our poor performing batsman have a better second innings

This type of day was always likely, generally our bowlers have carried our batsman.

It’s a day like this when it’s a shame that the overseas pro hasn’t been able to spend a good amount of pre season with the squad or have much experience of playing county cricket.

I’m in no way blaming the teams batting on Vihari, circumstances have dictated his time with us, but when an experienced and calm head was needed sadly we didn’t have one.

I think today we have to accept that we were second best on all fronts.

Over the three games, how can anyone say Vahari has provided good value for the many thousands the club has spent on him? Not just salary, but flights, visa and work permits,, acomodation for him and his wife/partner. Id be very surprised if there was any change from £15,000.

For the development of the team, and our players, it would have been more effective to have played either Moulsey or Hose. It's unlikely either would have scored less runs over the three games.

I’m not disagreeing with you, however it is not his fault it’s more of a team management decision to try and bring someone in once it was clear Malian was not going to be available for the start of the season.

I would say his half century in the second innings against Essex was very important though.

Highveld wrote:

Over the three games, how can anyone say Vahari has provided good value for the many thousands the club has spent on him? Not just salary, but flights, visa and work permits,, acomodation for him and his wife/partner. Id be very surprised if there was any change from £15,000.

For the development of the team, and our players, it would have been more effective to have played either Moulsey or Hose. It's unlikely either would have scored less runs over the three games.

Yes its difficult to say its good value for money however, we should be looking to keep him on for a few more weeks as we can have 2 overseas players.

High quality players are not just judged on field but their impact off the field can be just as great, although not sure that can occur in just 3 weeks.

My initial feeling still stands, for a 3 week period in April I would have looked at a fast bowler.

You have to wonder who made the decision to sign him, and how much the exersize has cost.

One good innings in three games is not good value, or helping the team develop.