Why did we need to bat first?????? They only got 130 odd!

Devon_Bear wrote:

Davies just said in interview that they misread the pitch and should have batted first - how could they misread the pitch? We're the bloomin' home team! It beggars belief. Also the Gloucester captain said that they trained under lights on Wednesday to get the feel of things, did we think to do anything like that?

If Robinson and Davies have any credibility they shouldn’t need pushing. And how long before we get a bloody bowling coach? Sam Hain was the most reliable of county batsmen……not any more……..can’t pace his innings poor choice of shots, time after time.

Need a captain and a coach. Another poor season. Just look at our line up compared to Gloucestershire! Not sure how many teams from either division could have lost this game. Won the toss, at home, full Edgbaston, what else do you need ?..

BristolBear wrote:

They clearly had a plan to declare overnight, problem is Hain batted for his average, there was no intent, no cohesive plan, everyone played differently.
So we ended up 60-70 runs light, and they declared anyway.
On a flat, slow pitch, with 3 front line bowlers, surely they’re smart enough to know they need to commit to early to the draw if Somerset look in a good position. But they didn’t. They spent so long pretending they could win, they let themselves lose.

Just a season of sleepwalking. No coherent tactics, awful decision making, weak inept coach, poor tactician as a captain, squad built on injury prone bowlers.

There’s 4 players in the championship who all things considered, can be relied on to deliver, Hain, Burgess, Barnard and OHD. That’s a joke.

A great point

A great point

I see Somerset as very firm favourites. We just seem to be drifting to another defeat without showing much resistance. Why no Rhodes? Why no Mousley, and before anyone says he doesn’t bowl in red ball cricket, the kid takes wickets. Give him a go, use all the clubs you have in your bag if necessary. How Robinson explains this one away, will be really interesting!

Poor game plan. Can you imagine Surrey, Hampshire, Durham, etc, etc adopting these tactics, in similar circumstances?
Where does it come from?

God knows what the discussion was at tea.

God knows what the discussion was at tea.

Well said! Hopefully it will be short lived and even more quickly, forgotten.

Well said! Hopefully it will be short lived and even more quickly, forgotten.

I am happy if you choose to pass over the decision to not enforce the follow on, all about opinions. The fact remains that they were already down and had just been bowled out, in less than a day, on their own muck heap, by a kid making his debut and a part time spinner, in 50 overs and facing the prospect of being back at the crease in 10 minutes. To say nothing of a 230+ first innings deficit!!!! Can you imagine who had to pick themselves up ? One and a half hours later they had 5 wickets in the bag and had been handed the ultimate get out of jail card. They couldn’t believe their luck, they would have been absolutely delighted and couldn’t wait to get at us next morning. Who would have slept the better that night? And us? We went back to our dressing room and hotel, with our tails between our legs and embarrassed. Totally unnecessary, crass, stupid arrogant, probably all of them.

They were out of the game, they were a beaten team. We threw them the lifeline. Why give yourself another decision to make- “how many do we need?”. Awful management and captaincy, I cannot believe for a minute that the decision not to enforce the follow on was one that was universally agreed, certainly not by Simmonds, the young man must have been champing at the bit to get out and have a go at them. I forget the last time this team played hard cricket, if you have your opponent down, and he was down, don’t give him a hand to get back up. Our young, talented, batsmen need to get into the nets with a proper coach or careers that included expectations of international acclaim (Hain included) will frizzle away. This story is the same as last year and the year before.

LeicesterExile wrote:

Not enforcing the follow on was, in my opinion, the right decision. We should then have batted them out the game a=by getting a lead well in excess of 400 with a day and half to getting the 10 2nd innings wickets.

Not sure when we can expect to be ambitious, or at least optimistic, given a target of 175 in 60 overs, on our own muck heap, against the divisions bottom team, (whatever happens they will still be bottom). Perhaps that might be our problem? I wonder how Surrey would view the same challenge? Or in fact the majority of counties.

Who mentioned 400? Have a look at the 350-400 innings, statistics can be picked out to fit any argument. The point being made (by myself, I fully accept) is that the Oval is a great batting square and given the opportunity to use it first, and grasp the initiative, is not an opportunity to be missed. This is simply my opinion, of course, but one that appears to have been shared by Surrrey captains down the years.

I got to around the 50% mark, I cannot listen to the man. Since when, in the middle of a hot spell, do Oval wickets become 250/300 tracks? That is not honest. Claiming that we were out bowled and out batted is stating the bloody obvious, but where was the out managed observation by deciding to bowl after winning the toss? And I refuse to accept that it was Rhodes decision alone.

Someone needs to follow Ed Barnard’s lead and put their hand up! Doubt that it will happen. Forgive me for going back to the first championship game of the season at Somerset, I still say that we should have won that game, instead we spoke of a “solid” start to the season. It’s a mindset, solid performances or wins? We handed Surrey the initiative this week, before a ball was bowled, and let’s face it, they are a very fine county championship team and do not need any hand outs.