I think the deal is the ECB have his contract, we get compensation and he is in effect loaned back to us when England need. Which means he's essentially using Warwickshire to fine-tune for internationals. Willing to be corrected as I'm not sure I've quite got it.

I can live with that so long as it is England internationals. IPL I'm suspect about though I recognise one or two stints per career gives the player something new to learn. Who wouldn't want that over a short career?

What I worry about is if our players end up missing games for us ( ie looseners for internationals) while playing something like, and no disrespect to, the Pakistan Premier League. I fear Woakes might be going in this direction if he does slip out of the England Test squad - which in this case I think isn't his fault.

white-lightning wrote:

I wonder how Chris Woakes contract with Warwickshire is set up? He never seems to play many games at all for the Bears. Even when there's been opportunities particularly towards the end of the season the ECB have rested him due to Test appearances. A frustrating situation; so many formats and the IPL doesn't benefit the Bears.

If the England Test team was picked on merit at the end of last summer, he was in it. The winter has been damaging. Aware of the oddities of the quarantine period and training. However, not sure this is the key issue really. Depends on how Woakes sees his career going from here. I'd hope he wanted to get some red ball for Warks ahead of making a case for the test side while only playing enough white ball to raise profile for the next franchise gig. So the hundred basically. Even after having such a sparse winter I can't see him competing on all fronts the rest of this season.

Has anyone else noticed just how little Woakes has played in the last eight months? And does anyone have an idea of how much he will play, in any format, team or country, in the coming months? I notice he has played three T20s in IPL plus two intra-England squad games, only, since last summers home internationals. I wonder if, given his slightly iffy knees, he is aiming at a career of franchise cricket from here. Was just speculating to myself given the postponement of IPL what he would do now. Given travel difficulties and quarantine, might well be the next games he is available for in the UK full stop are the NZ tests and then 100.

Notice the comment re Vihari. Three games is too short a time to assess anything but I'm inclined to say it was a shake of the dice that didn't come off. I wouldn't sweat the cost, hat budget would have been earmarked for player spend anyhow and there would have been a saving on not having Malan here. Also of note this game, its been horror batting after two good fourth innings. Could it be they just got a little over confident? I think not, it sounds like it was bad conditions for that first 1-2 hours and it got better. Good life lessons though...

Few points about this game, but this about Burgess I think is interesting. By way of comparison, there was some data out recently that Bairstow and Buttler in tests have got the huge majority of their test match runs in innings one of four in the match. Preaumably once they've kept in the field their concentration is then shot. Could well be the same with Burgess. Basically being a batsman keeper is really tough and especially so if your top order fold all the time and you come I at 30/4 all the time.

*BristolBear wrote:**

SC_Bear wrote:

Notwithstanding all the above I'm very concerned about Burgess. His keeping looks pretty acceptable but his contributions with bat have been dismal. Not really up to date with our other wicket keeping options but I do wonder how much longer they can perservere with Burgess in this form.

I think you're doing his keeping a disservice, as glovemen go, he's excellent. I'm not sure I've ever seen him drop a catch. He also looks like he's a popular member of the team.

Agree batting wise he's in poor form, but it's hardly like everyone else is tearing up trees currently. What I don't understand is that for the majority of his career Ambrose would always bat 7, I'm not sure why we bat Burgess at 6. Burgess played as a batsman only in 2019 and he looked good. Since he's taken over the keeping full time, he's found it more difficult. Not excusing the form, but most keepers bat at 7 for a reason. I think we need to give the likes of him, Bresnan and Lamb a proper platform for once, they're supposed to be attacking batsmen, not digging us out a hole batsmen.

Few points about this game, but this about Burgess I think is interesting. By way of comparison, there was some data out recently that Bairstow and Buttler in tests have got the huge majority of their test match runs in innings one of four in the match. Preaumably once they've kept in the field their concentration is then shot. Could well be the same with Burgess. Basically being a batsman keeper is really tough and especially so if your top order fold all the time and you come I at 30/4 all the time.

*BristolBear wrote:**

SC_Bear wrote:

Notwithstanding all the above I'm very concerned about Burgess. His keeping looks pretty acceptable but his contributions with bat have been dismal. Not really up to date with our other wicket keeping options but I do wonder how much longer they can perservere with Burgess in this form.

I think you're doing his keeping a disservice, as glovemen go, he's excellent. I'm not sure I've ever seen him drop a catch. He also looks like he's a popular member of the team.

Agree batting wise he's in poor form, but it's hardly like everyone else is tearing up trees currently. What I don't understand is that for the majority of his career Ambrose would always bat 7, I'm not sure why we bat Burgess at 6. Burgess played as a batsman only in 2019 and he looked good. Since he's taken over the keeping full time, he's found it more difficult. Not excusing the form, but most keepers bat at 7 for a reason. I think we need to give the likes of him, Bresnan and Lamb a proper platform for once, they're supposed to be attacking batsmen, not digging us out a hole batsmen.

Has anyone said officially that Stone is being rested, specifically, for England this early season period? I get Woakes being managed seeing as he has a long term injury and is actually likely to play Tests this summer - if he ever gets out of quarantine that is. Stone I can't see is anything more than third choice fast bowler to take their turn after Archer and Wood.

First paragraph is the crucial one - to engage the different communities in Birmingham. So I would argue it's done for the right reasons. Warks have always done a fine job recruiting from the wider county but a poor job with the Asian and Caribbean communities right on our doorstep. If these games are done as part of a wider marketing effort to create better pathways from the games on the concrete football pitches in Sparkbrook to Edgbaston then bring it on. Who wouldn't want a few more Moeen Ali's?

First paragraph is the crucial one - to engage the different communities in Birmingham. So I would argue it's done for the right reasons. Warks have always done a fine job recruiting from the wider county but a poor job with the Asian and Caribbean communities right on our doorstep. If these games are done as part of a wider marketing effort to create better pathways from the games on the concrete football pitches in Sparkbrook to Edgbaston then bring it on. Who wouldn't want a few more Moeen Ali's?

Couple of points re batting here. One thing not mentioned about Vihari is he club were unsure if Malan would ever get his visa. So I wonder if at the time if signing they anticipated it was going to be for half a season. I think the finances of it are irrelevant. That budget was set aside for wages and there would have been some sort of rebate on Malan being delayed.

Techniques of players I have had chance to take a good look at with youtube. Hain seems to get his leg side set-up out of the way once he's set. So that comment someone made about there being a mental problem I agree is part of the malaise - especially these two knocks when he's been well set. I also had no idea before today how awkward looking Matt Lamb was at the crease. Both these two just skittled by Paterson I reckon could have been avoided with a better off side technique.

Having said all that, I think we might be more on the way up than the way down. Most of the batting order are in the right position, they've done it all at least once before and everyone knows their jobs. A bit more experience I think things could change. Might even get a score above 250 soon.

Thanks for the insight coolerking. I've been watching a bit this morning (Hey, its Friday) and paying keen attention to Hain's backlift. Seems he is very strongly set to leg side now, shuffling across the crease, opens up, bat is coming down pointing to gully. So he plays to on all the time and looks very awkward playing on the off side. It was noted that he used to play like Trott, though people don't say that anymore. Could that be because he's adjusted his game so strongly to one day cricket? He's still young, he can adjust. Hope out batting coach has picked this up but be interesting to hear what him himself is thinking.

Bit harsh on Vihari, he's only been in the UK a few days and first net was yesterday. As others have posted the consistent failure to knock over the lower half of the order was the problem here. It would have been easier for Vihari to bat from number five at a different part of the day as opposed to first drop at around 1845 with Broad steaming in.

I didn't watch any of yesterday, but how did the bowling fall away? Did Notts just bat well? Did we run out of steam? Or were they just following bad plans? I can remember England having g the same problem.

I'm finding myself in agreement with the above points re extra batsmen, especially as I saw the tweet with Vihari in kit at the ground, suggests he is available to play tomorrow. I think overall the feeling I had last season was we hadn't reached the bottom of our slump yet - but I sense we're on the way up now. However, one thing I don't think has been addressed is variation and strike power in the bowling to finish teams off. What took on Derbyshire was almost exclusively right arm medium - fine when it's earlier and damp but not afternoon and drying. Adding Stone for some straight up speed or getting a left armer from somewhere I suspect must be next priority. Not being able to knock Derbyshire over sooner, in either innings, was chief among the reasons we couldn't win there.

As Andy says, would have taken it at the start of the day. Any thoughts, however, that we might just have let that slip a bit from 11/3? The last pair hung around a while, we're not sure how strong our batting is and we lost a wicket late in the day? I'm going to remain nervous overnight... But I'll bet this situation is something Sibbo dreams of.