Would like to see Simmons as looked quite promising in the one game he played against Essex last year. Jofra-esque. Will bow down if Booth is better prepared in pre-season though. Think Briggs will get the spinner spot. If it was just bowling would prefer Lintott but it's a long tail without Briggs at eight.

Certainly has been the case but his knees (or at this precise moment, his ankle) are so bad he can only make the odd game and can't play consistently.

white-lightning wrote:

We could really do with Chris Woakes playing at the start of this season. Surely he needs some matches to build up his fitness? Or are the ECB going to deny him playing for us yet again??

In reply to a couple of comments. The "mutual consent" has just happened with Warren Gatland as head coach of Wales rugby, the WRU were celebrating it was done like this as it saved them paying out his contract. My guess is same happened with Robinson, he held out and this week was the deadline at which the club would sack him. So maybe it is actually a good outcome not to have to pay him out. Re Frost as batting coach. I think he could do it in isolation, seems one player per season makes good progress on their batting, but not overall and couldn't help multiple people at the same time. Perhaps he was more suited as batting mentor rather than someone with squad responsibility.

I think right decision overall. But it's been so late in the off-season and he's just gave a few quotes last week. "Mutual consent" seems to infer it took him a while to agree. It's the timing that's surprising more than anything.

Have to say a bit meh about the appointment, and also a bit meh about Robinson now being the mouthpiece for it. I'd have thought that a genuine fast, or big bounce, or left arm bowler is what we needed. However, if someone can prove with data that winning matches in the extremes of the summer needs right arm medium fast to fast medium then I'm happy to defer...

I think if we ever see him in the summer now comes down to whether that test number three slot is his. Personally I'm not sure (yet) that it is though this central contract and a Guardo column by Mark Ramprakash saying it is hint to the fact he might get a good run there.

Yup. That's totally what I was inferring. That England should keep the same side for the second test. However, when it comes to the home tests in 2025 and Aussie away - can you see Jacob as test #3? I somehow can't and don't think this was ever anyone's plan.

paulbear wrote:

I would leave it, with Woakes, Atkinson and Carse at 8,9 and 10 it is a long batting line-up. Pope kept well, made runs and so why bring in a new 'keeper who hasn't played in a while and is making a debut. It appears to be a bad move to change things if it not really needed.

Honestly expected Jacob to struggle more than that. Obviously he has a temperament for test cricket. It's an interesting thing to debate whether England have a space at three or not. Pope's had a long run but he's never been totally convincing and him batting six and keeping seemed to work in this game. Do England stick with the lineup from this game or revert to Pope at three then Ollie Robinson goes in with the gloves at six or seven?

Andy, yes I think he's kept more than occasionally and fairly recently too. Don't think he (or Davies) should be doing it in the cc though, top three is a job in itself.

I presume Latham goes in at three as a straight swap for Rhodes, which I think should be good.

It's irrelevant now, but I had noodled a month or so ago that seeing as Mo Ali isn't going to play for England anymore he could use his "play and pay" clause to bat three in cc and bowl spin. As it stands, however, think it's more likely he retires from.cricket than does this.

I was in Hong Kong at the time of this and was well up for it - it was advertised on buses, trams and online. Would have gone (£60) and was aware of Barney and Davies being there but England had been knocked out by Oman by the time I could do it. Oman celebrating well at the airport on the way home.

GerryShedd wrote:

This tournament went (perhaps rightly) under the radar; but from this report, it would appear that, as well as Ethan Brookes, Ed Barnard and Alex Davies also played for the England team:
https://wccc.co.uk/brookes-part-of-england-squad-for-hong-kong-sixes/
Losing to Nepal and Oman doesn't suggest that it was a very successful venture.

I'm relatively happy with his involvement in the England teams. I think Warks will lose him for white ball internationals but I don't think he'll have a lot of Test involvement which is about fine for his experience. Looks like he's going to get these games in NZ, from which I think the best that can happen is he finds he had a lot to learn. In a good way. Then he sets about trying to actually make that up.

I'm annoyed generally when we (Warks or England) lose any player to IPL. Don't see any developemt gain from it with the conditions so different.

I mentioned Marco Janssen in a game feed earlier in the season, he would tick a number if boxes. I'm not sure it's the priority right now though, or not the sole priority. Also heard a rumour that Ben Compton was linked with the Rhodes replacement, that would just leave a spinner. Not sure how far away/if at all Taz Ali is but it might be the plan.

To the overall question about the season, it all hinged on that Gloucs T20 quarter. That changed everything and new players aren't really going to fix that collective mindset. I suppose it all depends on this review and that might change things fundamentally, but with some new players starting to bed in I'm hopeful this season is the worst one before a recovery...

No way will Yates be replaced but interesting to see what happens to Davies post review. Are we safe from relegation? I don't think so yet eh? I mentioned it last game but I don't think we'll go down but could go below Notts this game which would be a pretty shameful end to the season.

Good paywall breaching Terry. I think George has it in the cricketer too. Before that broke though, I think I saw on BBC that the sale might well be beyond 2025. A delay seems the best route for us as opposition to get organised.

Lintott, Walker and Mouse to miss out?

We can advocate fantasy cricket teams all we like, freedom of speech and all that. But no way will Davies be dropped or dropped as captain for the last game. Neither will Rob Yates. Speaking of free speech, I can see Dobell acknowledges dressing room disharmony in his article in the cricketer. Still think it's pointless to discuss it here, but would seem to be a strong focus of the review.

Thanks Terry. Was anyone at this forum and get a sense of the mood? This write up seems very defensive on the overseas player sitn. Seems the message of the last few days has been "Everything that could have gone wrong has gone wrong (and it's not our fault)".

Agree with your point that Barnard would be a great captaincy pick, he leads by experience and he's talismanic. He typifies the spirit and the style in which Warks play (or want to play).

Don't think Robinson or Davies will go as soon as that though, or even in the off season, however the club do seem to be taking this review seriously.

Highveld wrote:

It would be better if Robinson and Davies resigned today.

Appoint Ed Barnard as captain and make Ian Westwood interim head coach.

Davies should not be involved at Trent Bridge, to allow the new captain and coach the maximum opportunity to make a fresh start.

3 for 4 is actually hilariously bad, especially with Snater biffing it around first thing.

Up to each individual. Personally I'd say if you're talking about whether x doesn't get on with y and you don't 100% know the truth (none of us can be on top of every dressing room discussion) then I'd call it gossip.

Tragically that's probably more entertaining than what happened today, couldn't even get Somerset to put away Lancashire. Paul mentioned that the end of the season couldn't come soon enough, I kind of agree with a slight exception - they can still finish by playing a bit better. Robinson's "Take momentum into the off season" was pure bad management speak but I know what he's getting at. Let's not approach off season business on the back foot.

Rayb wrote:

Tayls79 wrote:

I'd honestly give speculating about relationships in the squad a miss. We'll never know the true situation. We don't know whether it is disharmonious, toxic or anything else. In any other working environment it would be and should be here, confidential. All we do here by speculating on it is gossip.

I thought that is what sports forums are for? In addition there seems to be sufficient evidence to suggest that it’s way beyond gossip. It’s not gossip that’s doing for Hain, Yates, etc