paulbear wrote:

The idea of losing Lamb is totally insane if it wasn't for the FACT that we had someone like Davies who has been there just 1 season and has played badly. It isn't just that Davies has had no form, it's the way he has been dismissed. If he got a few absolute 'Snorters' or unplayable deliveries I could have some sympathy but he has played some of the most atrocious shots I have ever seen on a cricket field. Not just that, but he has played some of those shots AGAIN, the very next game and not surprisingly, WITH EXACTLY THE SAME RESULT. It must be heartbreaking for a local boy like Lamb to have to move on. I almost hope he plays for another county and makes runs against us so that the management here can hang their heads in shame.

It's the Warwickshire way sadly. We're not a county that values its homegrown players as much as it should. Not as much as other counties do anyway. Recruits from elsewhere will always get better backing seemingly.

Thanks!

Tayls79 wrote:

To me, the issue here is less one of naming and phrasing, and one of financing.

I was reading a blog post of someone on this forum who is an accountant - perhaps Reabank?? - who went into forensic detail about how the pavilion end was paid for (or indeed how it wasn't) and how it led to the conclusion that Warwickshire wasn't a very well run club compared to, presumably, Lancashire, Hampshire and Surrey.

Personally, I think they can describe it how they want if it leads to the club being in a healthier financial state through a profitable project. Too many elite sporting organisations in the West Midlands aren't.

Interesting, where could one find this blog post?

Lamb is off. I was chatting to him in the members bar yesterday after the game. He seemed genuinely distraught, it was quite sobering actually.

I actually think Rhodes has looked in decent nick all year just found ways of getting out. Yates, a horror season really. Sibley strong, what a player. Hain, Atlas like. I've said my piece on Davies many a time.

The release of Matt Lamb just looks totally bewildering.

It's harder to judge bowlers going off stats alone.

OHD was Herculean, obviously. A real talisman.

Yeah that article has been done by someone who just looks at stats and scorecards.

Didn't see the end, what's this drop?

We're dead

Highveld wrote:

Can you honestly say that Yates, Sidebottom or Davies actually made useful contributions?

No mate I agree, i just being a bit silly.

Gone down to 8 players now?! Was 9 on Tuesday...

Bracey got a stinker.

Terrible umpiring again, every innings we're seeing some utter howlers.

I remember that, transpired he had a bost up with Dougie Brown didn't he?

He was poor today behind the stumps, looked lazy, there was a couple where he didn't even put a dive in. Like has been said, even the commentator picked up on it.

Yes we produce a decent amount of cricketers, particularly batters, but we generally dispense with them far too quickly in favour of signing average players from other counties. It's seemingly happening with Matt Lamb.

With the size of our catchment area we should have a minimum of 5 or 6 locally developed players in our XI for most games.

Yeah Saini looked like he could so something whereas this Dale fella looks legitimately rank.

Little test here now. Normally when we go into rebuild mode we stay in rebuild mode and just go along at barely 2 an over. Can we get through this session and then push on after lunch and get ahead in the game?

Starting to worry a bit for Rob Yates now. Even when he's looking good he's still getting out.

Davies, that was just expected. He's absolutely rubbish.

Sidebottom in.

Has there been some sort of disciplinary issue with Matt Lamb that we don't know about?