14 man squad:-

Rhodes, Benjamin, Bresnan, Briggs, E. Brookes, Burgess, Hain, Hose, Lamb, Lintott, Miles, Pollock, Woakes and Yates.

I would think Brookes and Lamb will miss out, but can't guess the other. Bresnan perhaps (though that only gives us 3 seamers), or Yates?

We've signed West Indies fast bowler, Chemar Holder, for the remaining 6 County Championship games.

PS Sorry about the typo in the thread title - I couldn't change it!

paulbear wrote:

Bresnan seems to be a spent force as far as his bowling goes in all formats and cannot see why a bloke who has 2 Test scores in the 90's would bat so low in the order. Was there a reason why Rhodes didn't bowl? This whole tournament has been topsy-turvy and strange to see Glamorgan actually qualify, perhaps they have had fewer injuries or Hundred call-ups.

I agree with all that Paul.

I think Bresnan is a spent force, full stop. A great bloke with a great pedigree, but one season past his sell by date (we got the - final - best, out of him last year). His bowling has gone, but his batting hasn't been great. A couple of Championship 50's (averaging 27) and a top score of 34 in the T20, is no where near what he did last season. And the injuries are starting to pile up. Obviously that's why Yorks let him go (or didn't give him a long contract). He's done his bit for us, but I would let him go at the end of the season.

As regards the Captain, for the life of me, I can not see how he uses himself for bowling - in red ball, as well as white. Top of the averages in the Championship (18.5, with 21 wickets, but only bowled 146 overs in 10 matches - that's less overs than any other seamer, even the injured ones !), top of the averages by a mile in the RLC (18, with 8 wickets, but again only 26 overs in 6 matches) and way top in T20 (11.7, with 14 wickets, but only 18 overs in 13 matches !). Anybody would think he is keeping himself back, to maintain his average (I know a few Captains in Club cricket who have always done that !). I wonder how Robinson feels about it - he must either be happy, or doesn't want an argument !

As you sum it all up Paul, it IS a very strange Tournament !

We was well and truly stuffed ! After some hope, with late runs from Brookes and Miles, our bowlers have really let us down. Only Yates and Carver can claim some pride - everyone else has been thumped - principally by David, who clouted 140 off 70 balls (with 11 x 6's) !

13 man squad - van Vollenhoven out from the Northants squad, Miles and Bresnan in.

I guess Johal and Bulpitt will be left out of the starting lineup ?

Andy wrote:

Potentially a very curious situation coming up here re. Benjamin, is it possible he could go 'freelance' and try and play in the T20 leagues around the world? He seems made for it.

I think this could well happen. The signing of Alex Davies does make the need for Benjamin as second keeper and a T20 player a bit redundant.

12 man squad, as expected, the only change from York is Garrett is out.

Pollock, Yates, Rhodes, Burgess, Mousley, Lamb, Bethell, Brookes , Carver, Johal, Bulpitt and van Vollenhoven.

I guess the only change in the starting lineup, will be Bulpitt for Garrett - KvV 12th man?

Lilly wrote:

32 off the final over from Brookes, I imagine that could prove extremely costly.

Going at over 10 an over in a 50 over game does not make great reading for the lad.

I think, in Ethan's perfomances for the First's and the Second's this season, he clearly is now a batsman, who bowls part-time. He's not the all rounder he once promised to be. He shouldn't be bowling 7 overs in a 50 over game, one or two change / impact overs at best. They gambled with 3 front line seamers, one of which (the Captain !), going for over 9 an over, so it was inevitable that they'd have to turn to him. The experiment of 3 spinners, with Carver in, didn't really work out. Lets just hope Ethan shows he is worth his place as a batsman alone.

Bald_Reynard wrote:

The_Lickey_Banker wrote:

Bald_Reynard wrote:

Andy wrote:

He might come in for Carver...

Dan M is in for Bulpitt, Carver stays. They've obviously gone with the extra spinner / batsman instead of a seamer - shame, I would have liked the left armer to be given another chance (though I'm sure we'll see him again). Team:-

Pollock, Yates, Rhodes, Burgess, Mousley, Lamb, Bethell, E Brookes, Carver, Garrett & Johal.

We won the toss and elected to bowl.

Although York wasn't Carver's home Club ground, he will have bowled there a lot (he played for Sheriff Hutton Bridge for 4 years, in the same League) - and it might well be a wicket that takes spin (a lot of Yorkshire Club grounds do).

And of course, an 'old boy', returning to a County who have released him, is always wanting to prove a point ! Added to the fact, that he should well know his opponents batting weaknesses (though the downside, is they'll know his bowling weaknesses!).

The extent to which Carver and Rhodes have been tonked by the Yorkie batsmen today, clearly shows they know the bowling weaknesses of their former team mates ! Carver 10 overs, 1 for 64, Rhodes 5 overs, 1 for 48 ! Mind you, Ethan Brookes got whopped for 73 in his 7 overs ! Yorkshire finished on 320 for 7 (only George Garrett came out with any distinction - 2 for 24, off 7 overs). Even if it is small ground and our batsmen have been in form recently (well, one batsman, each match !), that is a huge ask of us ?

The_Lickey_Banker wrote:

Bald_Reynard wrote:

Andy wrote:

He might come in for Carver...

Dan M is in for Bulpitt, Carver stays. They've obviously gone with the extra spinner / batsman instead of a seamer - shame, I would have liked the left armer to be given another chance (though I'm sure we'll see him again). Team:-

Pollock, Yates, Rhodes, Burgess, Mousley, Lamb, Bethell, E Brookes, Carver, Garrett & Johal.

We won the toss and elected to bowl.

Although York wasn't Carver's home Club ground, he will have bowled there a lot (he played for Sheriff Hutton Bridge for 4 years, in the same League) - and it might well be a wicket that takes spin (a lot of Yorkshire Club grounds do).

And of course, an 'old boy', returning to a County who have released him, is always wanting to prove a point ! Added to the fact, that he should well know his opponents batting weaknesses (though the downside, is they'll know his bowling weaknesses!).

Andy wrote:

He might come in for Carver...

Dan M is in for Bulpitt, Carver stays. They've obviously gone with the extra spinner / batsman instead of a seamer - shame, I would have liked the left armer to be given another chance (though I'm sure we'll see him again). Team:-

Pollock, Yates, Rhodes, Burgess, Mousley, Lamb, Bethell, E Brookes, Carver, Garrett & Johal.

We won the toss and elected to bowl.

Andy wrote:

He might come in for Carver...

Yep, thinking about it, you're probably right Andy. Dan's off spin has come on well this last year and he does merit a place in the bowling (though he didn't have a fantastic T20 run). Of course, we desperately need a longer batting lineup (Carver was going in at 8, which is way higher than his record supports) and DM at 4, 5 or 6, with Brookes dropping down to 7 and Bethell down to 8, is far better.

13 man squad, including Dan Mousley (as predicted by Andy):-

Rhodes, Bethell, Ethan Brookes, Bulpitt, Burgess, Carver, Garrett, Johal, Lamb, Mousley, Pollock, van Vollenhoven & Yates

If he is fully fit, I'm sure Dan will be straight back in, but then, which 2 will be left out ? KvV would be one, but I can't predict the other.

We're really lucky that all the RLC games in our Group were rain affected and finished as No Result. So, everyone playing today got 1 point. We stay fourth, a lot of rivals have missed out on a win and have one less game in hand (some, played 4, the same as us). It makes a change for us to get benefit from the weather.

coolerking wrote:

Brookes and Lamb playing a blinder here. Chris Wright getting the full treatment.

A wonderful 6th wicket partnership of 153 between Lamb and Brookes. Matt got 119NO off 105 balls (at last showing his quality in white ball) and Ethan, 63. We made 303 for 6 - not bad after being 121 for 5 after 23 overs. Rob Yates also keeping his form up, with 72. Pollock a duck, Bethell with 3 and Burgess with 12, were the only ones not doing it today. Chris Wright got caned - 60 off his 7 overs (8.5 an over !), for no wickets.

GerryShedd wrote:

I was confused at first because Cricinfo currently has only nine men in the Bears' team - hopefully they will put that right.
It will be interesting to see how Bulpitt and Carver fare. I am pleased that Bethell stays in the team because he looks like a real talent to be nurtured.

Pollock, Yates, Rhodes, Lamb, Bethell, Brookes, Burgess, Carver, Johal, Garrett and Bulpitt.

We don't bat very long with that lineup - pretty much stopping at 7. I hope Derby don't set a big target or our early batters (finally) get a few runs - and quickly, given how much the overs are likely to be reduced even more.

Bald_Reynard wrote:

12 man squad:-

Rhodes, Bethell, E Brookes, Bulpitt, Burgess, Carver, Garrett, Johal, Lamb, Pollock, van Vollenhoven and Yates.

Sidebottom injured and Chaprakani got exams!

I guess we'll see Bulpitt & Carver in and KvV might get another chance, with Garrett as 12th man - though that will depend on a view on whether the wicket will be better for spin or seam (and of course Kiel is a far better batsman than George).

Play has started, we won the toss and (naturally, given the extreme likelihood of rain later), chose to bowl. The match is already reduced to 45 overs.

Garrett is in, rather than KvV. Bulpitt and Carver also make their Bears 1st team debuts.

12 man squad:-

Rhodes, Bethell, E Brookes, Bulpitt, Burgess, Carver, Garrett, Johal, Lamb, Pollock, van Vollenhoven and Yates.

Sidebottom injured and Chaprakani got exams!

I guess we'll see Bulpitt & Carver in and KvV might get another chance, with Garrett as 12th man - though that will depend on a view on whether the wicket will be better for spin or seam (and of course Kiel is a far better batsman than George).

GerryShedd wrote:

Bearing in mind that Sidebottom went off part way through the Notts innings and then batted with a runner, I fear that we may need to add him to the walking wounded list. The situation with quick bowlers is almost as bad as it was two years ago. I know that Paul Farbrace said that he was changing the training routines to avoid the same problems arising but it doesn't seem to have worked too well.
As for the weather, the pessimist in me thinks that the main worry is that the predicted storms will hold off and won't save the Bears from another defeat. But let's hope that the sun and the Bears both shine tomorrow.

So, if Sidey is out, then it's Miles, if fit, or Bulpitt? I don't think Ryan is really cut out for white ball, so I'd be happy with CM or Bulpitt. The former is predictable, but uninspiring, the latter COULD be a game changer. I am so looking forward to seeing a left arm seamer again turn out for us. I keep saying it, Giles's willingness to let Keith Barker go, was one of the biggest tragedies for us in recent times!

Even though losing 2 matches out of 8 is likely to mean we'll miss out on a top 4 in the RLC, I do think a win tomorrow or Friday is vital, if the teams confidence is to be regained - and particularly needed for the youngsters, who have been thrown in at the deep end. I really hope the likes of Johal, KvV, Bethell and Brookes, who have shown such promise in many Seconds games this season, won't be judged too quickly on their performances in these RLC matches, which are as much a disaster for older and wiser heads in the squad (with a couple of honourable exceptions, like Rob Yates).

I agree, the weather could be a big downer for tomorrow, not a good forecast.

Pretty much a trouncing by Notts - 86 runs. Yates, the pick of the batsmen with a ton and decent 30's from Rhodes and Lamb, but the lack of experience in the youngsters shone through, with only Bethell showing anything (20). Brookes, Chakrapani and van Vollenhoven, all out in single figures.