Reabank wrote:

Very disappointing result yesterday, failure to chase 280 and not getting the 218 to beat Middlesex cost us dear. Chasing, particularly chasing tricky mid range targets, does seem to be a problem. The positive from the tournament would be the performances of Kai Smith, Michael Booth and Taz Ali - all of whom seem to be making the step up from good young player to just good player - Booth in particular is this season's pleasant surprise. I think Taz benefitted from Barnard's captaincy, where he was used as an attacking bowler, I think Davies is always a bit worried he'll get whacked around. But captaincy, like everything else, is easier in the Metrobank 50. Obviously none of the three has made it and T20 cricket, whilst giving players lots of opportunity, does make building a career harder, but the signs are good. The more experienced players weren't great but it seemed to me as if Alex Davies threw himself into the competition which was impressive as being blanked from The Hundred must have been a blow to the ego and bank balance. Our season now all seems to hinge on the Somerset quarter - final.

Taz Ali is certain to get a T20 at some point in the future even if its a couple of seasons away, and Kai Smith may get a chance at some point as Davies' understudy.

However Booth seems absolutely ready for T20 now. I'd play him in the quarter finals.

Well, we need a strong side and as we will have our players back from The Hundread so we should be alright to put out a full strength side.

Smith has been in the T20 team all year?

totally agree on Booth he looks potentially our best seamer/all rounder since Woakes and Clarke

paulbear wrote:

Well, we need a strong side and as we will have our players back from The Hundread so we should be alright to put out a full strength side.

I'd have Sam Hain and Danny Briggs back but Bethell will be with England and I'm not sure that Mousley merits a place ahead of, say, Shaikh. Who's available from the Overseas players?

I would say that the Metro Bank cup has shown that Taz has moved ahead of Lintott as a spinner, and that Kai should be classed as the best keeper on the staff.

UrsaMinor wrote:

paulbear wrote:

Well, we need a strong side and as we will have our players back from The Hundread so we should be alright to put out a full strength side.

I'd have Sam Hain and Danny Briggs back but Bethell will be with England and I'm not sure that Mousley merits a place ahead of, say, Shaikh. Who's available from the Overseas players?

For the Blast quarter final? Mousley is way ahead of Shaikh.

ITE7376 wrote:

I'm going to throw a bit of a hand grenade in here but I can't help noticing the double standards regarding Davies and Barnard

Davies gets a T20 team to the knockout stage for the 2nd consecutive year and gets a dog's abuse for it- and he got us to the knockout stage last year with a basically unbeaten record in his tenure as captain, recovering the team after a terrible start after we looked appalling losing (i think) every game (or virtually every game) under the lacklustre 'guidance' of Moeen.

He visibly injected energy and purpose into that dismally failing T20 team last year, until the usual QF bottle job which has roots deeper and wider and longer than Davies has been at the club to be blamed for. (for a start, and I'll throw another hand grenade in, our best batsman by far Sam Hain is a big-game bottler who has only once made a contribution in I think 8 T20 knockout games it is now. I say this as someone who near-worships Hain, but facts are facts, he has a horrendous record in knockout T20, just the 2017 final knock against Notts to his name amidst a series of limp, anxious failures).

(I also recall distinctly Davies getting 1000 CC runs last year and it scarcely causing a ripple of recognition on here.)

And St Ed of Barnard, forum darling, his team snatches competition failure from the jaws of success, to seemingly near-universal acclaim.

Look, I love Ed and he's had another good year in this comp but not nearly up to previous standards, and until the ton at the weekend was having a pretty mediocre competition with the bat. He also got out especially early in the comp playing shots certain other players (mentioning no names) would be taking abuse for playing.

I think there are a couple of factors specific to T20 in play here, not least that nowadays we go into the QFs with our best two batsmen robbed of time at the crease and form and touch by the 100, not Davies's fault.

I also think that on here and among members particularly, T20 (for various reasons in my opinion, some pretty churlish) is willfully downgraded as the least important comp, so I suppose i can see why not getting to the knockout stage in 50ov can be counted equivalent to doing so twice in T20. In fact, not just equivalent but better, just about everyone praising St Ed's captaincy and looking forward to the next campaign after what was ultimately an unsuccessful debut as captain, nobody doing the same for Davies for getting to 2 QFs.

I'm being both a little facetious and exaggerating just a little for effect. But only a little, 'well done Ed, credit for the this campaign!', I see above; credit for what? having his worst 50ov tournament with the bat in 3 years (pretty sure his wickets were down too), and captaining a team that failed to get to the knockout stage?

Imagine the reaction if he'd got us to 2 consecutive knockout stages.

I'll leave the mini-rant on this thought, Barnard and Davies have exactly the same number of match-winning centuries in the 50ovs this year. The reaction to those centuries was a comical study in contrasts. Its not a complement to say the seemingly constant need for club supporters (of any sport) to find a whipping boy makes the club supporters concerned look just like football fans. If there is a club, and a forum, there will be a whipping boy, and there will be a darling. Its like BBC 5live on Saturday at 6pm on here half the time, which really, really isn't a complement.

Great post.

Highveld wrote:

> I would say that the Metro Bank cup has shown that Taz has moved ahead of Lintott as a spinner, and that Kai should be classed as the best keeper on the staff.

i was really wondering that, albeit Lintott's ability to contribute with the bat at 8 is likely a major factor in selection. although, picking Booth to replace (say) Ali may well mean we could pick an extra non-batter

Andy wrote:

UrsaMinor wrote:

paulbear wrote:

Well, we need a strong side and as we will have our players back from The Hundread so we should be alright to put out a full strength side.

I'd have Sam Hain and Danny Briggs back but Bethell will be with England and I'm not sure that Mousley merits a place ahead of, say, Shaikh. Who's available from the Overseas players?

For the Blast quarter final? Mousley is way ahead of Shaikh.

yeah its a crying shame both he and Hain will return from the 100 in the usual combination of poor form and lack of time at the crease. if Hose hasn't got injured we could probably have had Hain back for a game or two. just our luck to have Sam sat around in the dugout waiting for numerous inferior players to get out before he gets his handful of deliveries, instead.

ITE7376 wrote:

Smith has been in the T20 team all year?

totally agree on Booth he looks potentially our best seamer/all rounder since Woakes and Clarke

Ha Ha - of course he has. he needs top play in the QF with booth too!

Highveld wrote:

I would say that the Metro Bank cup has shown that Taz has moved ahead of Lintott as a spinner, and that Kai should be classed as the best keeper on the staff.

I very much like Kai and he has potential. However, having watched him throughout the one day cup it is clear that he has a lot of work to do on his keeping - he is a bit “scruffy” and made several basic mistakes - these are not criticisms, just observations. Alex Davies is the better keeper at present, but hopefully Kai can develop as he matures.

Agreed, I'm a huge fan of Kai, he's a much better keeper now than he was in April May but he's still got a way to go. Tuesday showed that, he was particularly untidy though he did take a good catch to dismiss Ibrahim. He'll get there.

The reprieve that we gave them hasn’t done Middlesex much good - beaten by Hampshire today.

MalmesburyBear wrote:

Highveld wrote:

I would say that the Metro Bank cup has shown that Taz has moved ahead of Lintott as a spinner, and that Kai should be classed as the best keeper on the staff.

I very much like Kai and he has potential. However, having watched him throughout the one day cup it is clear that he has a lot of work to do on his keeping - he is a bit “scruffy” and made several basic mistakes - these are not criticisms, just observations. Alex Davies is the better keeper at present, but hopefully Kai can develop as he matures.

It's a shame that once Smith does mature he will be off to play franchise cricket and we will have to find another one.

Just getting over the disappointment of our ODC exit. The game was in our hands. Much has been said about the merits and dismerits of Captain Barnard and Non Captain Davies. This debate will run and run. From Westwood's point of view, and he said as much, he would expect the most senior batsman in the team to see us home from that position.
Putting aside my disappointment, plenty of positives to take from the tournament overall.
Simmons missing out was a blow and unfortunately we had Sylvester, who isn't good enough.
Smith, Malik, Sheikh and Taz Ali all made good contributions and will get better and better. The form of Yates remains a concern.
Let's hope we can keep our white ball season going in the T20!

GerryShedd wrote:

The reprieve that we gave them hasn’t done Middlesex much good - beaten by Hampshire today.

I was consoled over our losing out in the Metro Cup, by the fact that we would have almost certainly lost to Hampshire as well (as we always do in Cups).

It was an odd campaign. Objectively we were worse than last year in not qualifying for the knockout stages.

Subjectively though, I think it was good. We got brushed aside by Yorks, who are much stronger in this competition, other than that we made a mess of two chases (Middix and Sussex) we should have closed down and were ahead of - and that's all the bad moments. I don't know if this is a legacy of the Robinson era, ie a bit of bravado just covering the fact they'd bottled it a bit, or just inexperience. On the whole I'm tending to inexperience, we know from the outset that our middle order was quite green and they did come on, indeed against Soms and Durham chasing down bigger scores. Shaikh I had the biggest question mark on at the start but he has laid down some scores of 50+ now and we can see what style of player he is. Kai and Taz obviously are established now. We all said it about Taz but, with Kai, If you include the 40-odd* against Worcester in the CC he has finished off three chases now, maybe more.

Overall, with the decision to rotate the bowlers fully was honoured and all the batsmen have come on a bit, we can say it was a successful development competition. Missing out on the QFs indeed might have helped this year rather than just repeating another ko defeat to Hampshire, which would just give the impression nothing had changed.

It's a shame that once Smith does mature he will be off to play franchise cricket and we will have to find another one.

don't be too sure- remember the selection criteria for franchise cricket, certainly the 100, seems to be a little unpredictable. certainly, the best-performing players in terms of gross run output don't always get selected. I've been somewhat 'sensitive' over this for some time due to my girlish fanboying over Sam Hain. EG in the big bash, the likes of Alex fking Whiteley got picked, you'd have say Laurie Evans or Kohler-Cadmore where Hain probably scored 1-200 more runs over a 3 year period but they were ahead of him in the Q.

Look at the 100 now, you've got the likes of Louis Kimber, Max Holden, McKinley, they're nowhere near Hain in runs scored but they do 'hit a long ball' and 'have the ability to score from ball 1' to coin the popular cliches which seem to heavily influence selection criteria (also, batters who bowl part-time spin are a major selection criterion, the likes of Coles Mousley Kellerman Rehan Ahmed)

obviously the sweet spot selfishly is for us to develop players who are very good, but not quite good enough for England and preferably without the cosmetic criteria that define franchise selection (hitting sixes), and on current experience Kai's face doesn't quite fit in that sense, I don't think he'll ever be a guy with a massive % of sixes and as a wkt-batter he would be competing against lots of that type for a franchise place. so there is a hope for me that he can kick on and develop and still not be stolen away from us

I don't agree that Hampshire would have beaten us, nothing is so obvious that you can just call out a result in a game that never happened. I agree about the strange selection for The Hundread, there are some very ordinary cricketers in there and Whiteley is another one who baffles me, mainly, how he keeps getting picked in teams of all sorts and hardly ever seems to have a decent game. I think we have a situation in the UK whereby if a cricketer has one good game where they appear to have made a difference to the result, they suddenly gain a reputation for being some sort of specialist. I remember Kabir Ali once managing to defend 7 off the last over in a O.D.I in South Africa and suddenly he was a 'Last over specialist' and apart from the 2012 final at Lord's, I don't remember him doing much else. I think Josh Hull was picked for England because he defended the last over v Hampshire in a 50-over final a few years ago and I think Payne got picked because he was a part of Gloucestershire's T20 side last year. I does appear that certain teams are grasping at straws in this dreadful 100-ball farce and just look at players who no one has heard of and put them amongst Test players maybe hoping something will rub-off, it hasn't so far.

paulbear wrote:

> I don't agree that Hampshire would have beaten us, nothing is so obvious that you can just call out a result in a game that never happened.

But they always do!!! ha. one CB40 final one 50ov quarter final and now 3 T20 qFs I think? I will always hate James Vince. he ruined my 2010 fantasy year.

and I think Payne got picked because he was a part of Gloucestershire's T20 side last year.

a tad unfair to Payne, he's 4th all time in T20 blast wickets, excellent strike rate (under 17), swings it early and bowls very well at the death, and a left armer, and tall to boot. ticks nearly every box

i totally take your other points and examples though and agree sometimes someone gets a rep- Alex fvcking donkey-slogger 'Mr Dot Ball and an occasional six' Whiteley being the best example- for very isolated examples of their 'talents'