I can see why the different counties would want different things to be honest. I saw from the players poll that Surrey have 31 players, surely we don't have anywhere near that amount so they are naturally better rested. In addition they are probably younger, better paid, better resourced and have decent crowds in to watch them guaranteeing more exposure. These differences and more besides are spread across all clubs in the country and influence those votes.

mad wrote:

ajones1328 wrote:

Surrey chairman on future of county cricket

https://youtu.be/2m-kgGtRshg?si=d8AwghGU1a1SwZRx

Key takeaway

At a vote, all Surrey players want a 14 game County championship 31-0.
Surrey CC are clearly proud of the CC and its their main priority and the membership and attendance shows that.

Baffles me that Warwickshire's playing staff wouldn't be on exactly the same page as the Surrey playing staff and not want any reduction to the county championship. Ditto most of the other sets of players across the counties.

So either were being misled by the PCA and the Warwickshire hierarchy or else we and other clubs have a playing squad that just doesn't like playing cricket????!??

Which in a way would chime with the overall poor results over the past ten seasons for Warwickshire just one slightly fortuitous county championship title in that time and continual failure in the Blast and ODC. A sign of a very badly run club at least from a playing aspect.

The hierarchy at Warwickshire should be nowhere near deciding they can instruct a successfully run county like Surrey or Somerset that they have to reduce fixtures IMHO

And down the line the Warwickshire members shouldn't put up with this regime for much longer either

Yup, played well. That Davies wicket just before the rain was a bit of a downer but still shouldn't affect the status of the match now. I hadn't watched the feed until today, but there was one commentator who seemed to be braying about how Surrey were "so good" in live time while it was becoming clearer, with the Notts game as well, how this round was slipping away from them. In all honesty I don't think he was that arrogant, just a little bit unaware of social situations and how he was coming across. As Bosworth says, you don't need to care about them.

It seems the weather is moving West to East as I got that rain about 20 minutes earlier. It's now passed and back to sunshine so I expect they'll be back, though that was useful time out of the game.

Slightly more interesting this morning than I thought, I watched the first three overs and saw very quick scoring albeit giving away a wicket, though from that point it seemed slower though still losing wickets. Probably Surrey didn't play it so well and did they sacrifice runs to allow Sibley to get a century? Overall weather is looking better down here though I am West London not South, at absolute worst we lose a bit to a shower but it won't be a long interruption if it happens. Looks like we have to bat out all those 7x overs...

Draw away to Surrey is an OK result and had it been 100% dry we probably would lose - so could be worse. Having said that, Notts and Hants will probably win and Soms will probably draw with more BPs so we lose ground in every direction. Still a bit to play though we did hold our own for a while against a stronger team. Have to make the points back in the last two games.

I was just about to make a comment about "finishing off the tail" but seems Booth has taken care of that. Scorecard tells a story on Dan Worrall. Bowled first ball. I guess that's what Booth is there for.

Interesting, didn't watch the game, only took periodic looks at cricinfo, I didn't realise how far ahead we were at certain points in those late exchanges. If I was, I probably would be more gutted, as it stands I wasn't that disappointed as I did expect Somerset to win and was really looking for a closer game and for us to play a bit more confident cricket than in prior QFs. From the start of our innings I thought I saw that.

This is probably an iteration of the the above point, but I think beating ourselves up about the wrong bowler at the death is probably not going to help. Somerset are a stronger team than us (as are Surrey today). It will take a long time to change this and there are many causes: Selection, recruitment, academy production, management - etc.

Personally I thought we were heading in the right direction here - though if it is the case we bottled it (was the slowdown in scoring with the bat lack of confidence/bottle too?) then it does have echoes of the end of the Robinson era.

I've only looked at the scorecard all evening but it looked close. Unlike previous QFs we didn't seem to get battered. Some had very good figures. You can tell even from looking at a scorecard Barnard shouldn't bowl the last over though, I put that down to a gamble a few overs earlier that didn't come off.

That's white ball season done now and it's objectively the same levels as the last few seasons. I still feel we're looking up now though and I sense there was just more belief this season. Even if this was just from looking at the scorecard.

Scoring rate dropped off a lot. What was the reason for those watching? Pace off was harder tonget away?

I was mentally noodling this before the squad was announced, only with Vani at 7 in place of Miles Could be Hamza comes in. Like you say, it's pretty much the strongest available - unfortunate no Overseas.

Andy wrote:

Think Michael Booth's lack of experience in this comp goes against him for this particular game. Having said that I thought Taz (0 t20 appearances) might have atleast got in the squad...

Interesting to see who opens instead of the injured Latham, suspect it might be Yates. Barnard might go up there. Hasan a huge miss.

Davies
Yates
Mousley
Hain
Barnard
Kai
Garton
Lintott
Briggs
Miles
Gleeson

???

Hamza/Zen for Miles to get an extra batter in?

Lack of Hason Ali in this format is huge when you look at the bowling options on paper atleast.

Actually think Miles fielding has probably got him the nod over, say, Booth. We'll see.

Very difficult game against an extremely good side who look very strong even without Banton and Henry.

I was mentally noodling this before the squad was announced, only with Vani at 7 in place of Miles Could be Hamza comes in. Like you say, it's pretty much the strongest available - unfortunate no Overseas.

Andy wrote:

Think Michael Booth's lack of experience in this comp goes against him for this particular game. Having said that I thought Taz (0 t20 appearances) might have atleast got in the squad...

Interesting to see who opens instead of the injured Latham, suspect it might be Yates. Barnard might go up there. Hasan a huge miss.

Davies
Yates
Mousley
Hain
Barnard
Kai
Garton
Lintott
Briggs
Miles
Gleeson

???

Hamza/Zen for Miles to get an extra batter in?

Lack of Hason Ali in this format is huge when you look at the bowling options on paper atleast.

Actually think Miles fielding has probably got him the nod over, say, Booth. We'll see.

Very difficult game against an extremely good side who look very strong even without Banton and Henry.

The innings with the bat seems to have redeemed that profligacy with the ball, seems most commentators recognise the balance of the side is a bit off rather than Bethell (and Jacks) underperforming with the ball.

With regards Dobell's piece, I can't get access but it was a while ago. I mentioned it in a slightly different context but he too is assuming Bethell's main focus is as a test player and I'm not sure that's how England see it. Since Stokes' temper tantrum about the media "misunderstanding" him about Bethell going straight back in as test number three earlier in the summer I don't think anyone at England have pushed him as predominantly a test player. He filled in when Stokes got injured, sure, but if England are getting him to concentrate on white ball for the next period of time, last night's performance and the Ireland captaincy is some sort of plan in progress.

Having said that, I really don't know. Expect him in the Ashes party as cover for 3-6 I'm sure is incoming.

We've consistently seen a need for faster bowlers (ie Garton could be useful), a left armer (Garton) and a solid number eight bat (Garton again) so think there was a need for him and would have been good to convert him to CC. Does the club want him to? Does he not fancy it? Or will he just disintegrate if he has to bowl more than four overs? I genuinely don't know. I think the ships sailed now though with Barker, seemingly only here to play CC, unless Garton has a year and a half timeline on being red ball ready? Also don't think they're on massive money for 14 blast games.

I don't want to interrupt a little debate, but the Birmingham / Warwickshire thing and two potential reasons behind it...

i) Wasn't it partly done as per a package of things to curry favour with Birmingham Council when they effectively paid for the ground works? and partly ii) as a positioning exercise ahead what became the 100? 'Look here ECB, we're already a city-based franchise, we can just take one franchise on already, we're ready now.'

Either way, I don't think it was ever designed to disenfranchise or enfranchise one set of supporters. Just political. I never took any notice, but I suppose I'm from Moseley so I wouldn't mind.

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.

Grareful for the information provided above. Wonder what he thinks of it all? It could be a good thing for him thats he's realtively close to home with a new baby with minimal work for decent money. Or annoyed at the lack of involvement? Being carded at eight behind Ahmed, Willey and Moores must be a bit frustrating.

I don't think he was overlooked though. My gut feel is he was on parental leave for four whole weeks and appearing as Hose's fielding replacement was his first game involvement back. Of course it does beg the question of why he didn't start that game for Hose - but not going to overthink it. Was he spotted as a replacement fielder earlier in the tournament?

This totally addreses my question, thanks ITE. I totally agree with you though, joining part-way through a tournament does Sam no favours, especially with a month off. I'm not strongly in favour of him joining the metro bank squad, despite the fact it could improve it, but speculating if he could join it if his involvement in 100 was sacked off. Feel for Hose, but Sam is a way better player, he should come in at three and ahead of Ahmed. I'm really bothered about the metro bank though and it seems all our batsmen have contributed at least once now.

ITE7376 wrote:

Tayls79 wrote:

Occured to me a few times iver the weekend. I think he may still be on parental leave, companies give big long breaks for this now and Sam hasn't played in over a month now. Adam Hose has taken his place for the Rockets in the 100 but Hose got one of those horrific knee injuries the other night. Could well be that Hain comes in for him now. If he doesn't, then it is worth speculating if he comes back at the end of the One Day cup and hopefully doesn't go into the T20 QF totally cold.

Hain came on as the sub fielder for Hose

i was eager for Hain to play but given his history in franchises between BBL and the 100 (basically, not picked at the start of tournament, given his chance halfway through when undercooked, played at the wrong position at number 5), I don't think the prognosis is any better this year

Hose has been batting at no7, behind (amongst others) an admittedly-promising virtual child all-rounder in Rehan Ahmed, and at least one other batsmen without Hose's proven track record over several years domestically. It seems they almost had him as a designated 'big man to come in and his sixes at the end' a la Paul Walter or say Alex Whiteley (albeit Whiteley's career SR actually suggests he wasn't actually that good at it...Mr Dot Ball... its a bugbear of mine)

so i have the fear that once again Hain's 'big chance' will be a hospital pass whilst he has spent the tournament so far watching multiple players with significantly inferior records have their day in the sun

for context Hain is the only player with over 1000 runs in the last 2 years of the Blast

Occured to me a few times over the weekend. I think he may still be on parental leave, companies give big long breaks for this now and Sam hasn't played in over a month now. Adam Hose has taken his place for the Rockets in the 100 but Hose got one of those horrific knee injuries the other night. Could well be that Hain comes in for him now. If he doesn't, then it is worth speculating if he comes back at the end of the One Day cup and hopefully doesn't go into the T20 QF totally cold.

I read something, can't remember what, that concurred no operation in order to be fit for the Ashes. Alsonread somewhere else, also unremembered, that said he might be a decent, non-playing ashes pick. So it could be these two anecdotes are combined for a one-test appearance on tour and Warks have two tourists both of which are back ups...

As always like the analysis Andy, very much what I saw as well. Seems the wrist spinners were the danger today, Hollman- never seen bowl before - put the skids on the innings.really. Very difficult to chase on this ground, I've seen five games on it now (at the ground and on the stream) and batting first has won all five. The ground was much drier than this time last year as well, not going to help.

Having said all that, at least three of our top order chucked wickets away playing loose shots immediately after scoring. Just mentally a bit flaky. I think at some level they can all do it - with one exception, Rob Yates. Just can't seem to move the ball into space for singles or turn 1s into 2s. It's fine at this level and he brings much more to the side but it does indicate he shouldn't be aiming for a bigger T20 role in the future.

Finally, very good day at the venue. Thought catering better than last year, toilet only used once early doors, was almost fragrant. Beer wasn't an issue, even if a draft would improve things, given the excellent Merchant Inn opposite that had a good range and decent toilets. My son decided he was supporting Middlesex (fair do's he was born a mile from Lords) but great field to have a throw, kick and Frisbee on. Excellent stuff.