On the other hand, why risk him in a game that's likely to be a draw? The "hernia-like symptoms" are very vague. I've actually got a hernia right now, above the belly button, and it doesn’t affect me doing anything. But I work in an office and don't bowl 20 overs a day. I also don't know the limits of what I can do and was advised not to push it until I found out.

Andy wrote:

These hernia like symptoms that need managing must be quite significant. Shame, he looked in great rhythm v Sussex and has a decent record v Notts.

Hain for Malik with Young to open does make us stronger both at opener and number four.

I'm intrigued to see Simmons in the squad but can't see him playing. I mentioned it earlier in the season, but I hope the club can make something out of him as he promises a lot - and I don't think they would have included him were they intending to let him go.

So without the Indian spinner (who's name I forget) the bowlers line up as per the last game. Which I think is for the best.

That's the opening bat part of the "Big Open Question" resolved then...

Interesting to look at this card with an eye to the firsts. Garton playing as opening bat only, not much success. Are we just trying to get as much batting as we can into him? I see the sense of it if so. Kai keeping and captaining, can't judge the former, maybe not totally happy in the latter, but indicates some investment in him. Will the latter be with the firsts on Thursday? Certain to be in the squad but I can't see him getting the gloves just yet. Be fascinating to see how opening bat, keeper and number 7 go for the rest of the season with a view to next year.

50/50 record over all white ball this season with a slightly positive NRR in both comps. Having seen what I've seen I think that's representative and the figures don't lie. I remeber Webster's century, Mousley's hitting and Jani's continued improvement more than the rubbish.

I think back to Dobell's scathing remarks about our one day form and I don't think it's that bad. I think we have deteriorated in the last two years but I think that would have happened anyway as the peak Robinson team got older and there have been more injuries and unavailability this season. I think with more planning and preparation next year, we'll be better.

It's an interesting article and Dobell does seem to have good sources (but perhaps not this this time). A bit like the Leicester comms guys on Friday night, he does come across a bit harshly on his 'own' team if we assume that is Warks - but we do that too.

I did read with interest the sections on using our own talent and, if I hypothesise here, the problems with have properly bedding in our own academy players. When the 100 kicked off it was mentioned each side would have a 'local hero' that would bridge between the counties and the franchise and there were two: Moeen Ali and Christ Woakes - both of whom have left BP. Without that there's even less reason for us to support those 100 teams. Tariq and Jordan T are the Warks players in this years side but hardly local heroes. Perhaps the problems we've had getting our own players through to the Warwickshire side is this problem, played out over a decade. Our most likely local heroes would be Barnard, Mousley and Hain right now, alongside Jacob, all not playing for other franchises.

I'm a bit more positive than George in general terms, I think getting rid of Robinson was the right call and I think Westwood is prioritising the CC in a general recovery in all formats. But these are problems built up over the last 10-15 years so it is going to take a while.

Sorry you're right, misread the table (and I was looking at the same table). That does seem a bit more believable.

Highveld wrote:

Kai has actually scored more runs from less innings and at a better strike rate. While batting a lot lower, and having to sacrafice his innings at times to help the team situation.

https://countycrickethub.net/team-averages.html?teamid=16&comp=2&year=2026

I was quite surprised to find we were still in the competition, I though the Leics game finished it. Would take some sequence of results tomorrow to happen though and some run rate swings.

Was at a wedding so missed all but a few balls of the Lancs game, seemed a good one though. Unpopular view re Davies is he has now scored more runs at a better average in the competition than Kai Smith, which muddies the water still further. One of the few overs I saw was Gilchrist's first and seemed very messy with two wides and a no-ball, hadn't seen Charlie Taylor show that so hopefully the latter can kick on and be a good player. Here's to a good game tomorrow v Kent.

Watched precious little of it but from what I did see I think we lost, narrowly, to a well organised side that had set roles. That showed us up a little bit. We've been a bit unlucky this season with Hain getting injured, Garton not bowling and Davies in a two year slump - but an awful lot of it was predictable: we knew what players we were going to lose to the other comp yet we perpetually seem to not know the balance of the side or really have a plan. I think I said in an earlier thread I can take it if we don't really develop in one day if we show some decent progress in the CC. Which looks far more promising.

Presume Mousley comes in for Thompson and we have the same little niggle with balance again. Means Mouse and Yates have to make up an allocation. If ever there was a time for Garton to send down a few overs this would be it. Would anyone replace Malik or Jani with Mouse? Can't see it.

Yeah the returning players have made a difference in the last two games. Could be Thompson and Mouseley back for Friday. Who would they replace?

One of only a few games I will see live this year. Watching at the ground and side on you see a good example of the bowlers lengths and the complementary nature of all the seamers on show. I thought it was a tough batting track and may well have been early on but out bats did make it look easy. You can also see that Malik and Jani need a jolt of confidence. When they get that they are way better.

I think once we got that third we were ahead though Surrey did some work to keep at it. Been thinking this competition as a whole we've got one or two too many unnatural white ball bowlers. I'd have put Barnard into that category too but having watched him from the over where he got the wicket he seems to have slowed right down, floating it up, little cutters, etc. In other words, turned into a more T20 type seamer - and that type of bowling was important to closing it out. Fair do's to him for having the mindset to learn a new skill relatively late in his career. I would have thought Taz would come back for Rugby and think Booth will be more effective there as well. OHD could do wirh a rest, despite his 5fer. Who else would sit out? Barnard won't be available on Sunday but wouldn't have thought either of those could replace him.

Bearing in mind what we've seen so far I think 350 is probably needed!

So not far away if he is to be a first team player - makes it even more intriguing if we're in the market for a keeper.

Yes the interest in Ben Cox is interesting. I would have thought that we don't have a keeper problem. We've got an opening batsman problem. What would it mean if we did recruit him? Presumably, he comes in for Davies, Kai still has a view on the gloves long term and Dandy is coming through if it is eventually decided that Kai isn't a keeper. How old his Dandy, BTW? So we also need an opening bat from somewhere if we don't convert Malik. I would say Bethell in early season, but, you know how that will turn out.

I was probably thinking ahead to Rugby on Sunday which I bet will be a dust bowl. In any case though, spinners have been doing slightly better. Did forget about poor Charlie lad as well, despite him having my name, he's probably more deserving at Edgbaston than Ali, then revert for Rugby.

Andy wrote:

Tbf you could probably get away with 3 seamers and 3/4 spinners at Edgbaston this time of year, that XI looks ok.

Yates
Barnard
Wylie
Davies
Smith
Garton
Jani / Malik
Booth
Lintott
Bamber
Ali

There's an awful lot more flexibility with Wylie, Barnard and Booth playing. As per Andy though, can't see them doing it. Probably need one more seamer.

I'm warming up to my Eddie Jones / 3rd season theory a bit more now. Seems white ball has barely been thought about this year, there has definitely not been a discernable change in approach or an improvement of approach. Could be the case they just prioritised it behind the County Championship. If we place well in the CC (I don't think we are realistic winners), then I think I can take one poor season of white balls if it does bring about some sort of change the next season. Then it's time for a judgment on Westwood as a whole - I get the argument he's an insider and only really continuing the work of the year's before right now.

I can see how someone would be upgraded from being a bit sore and rested to then being fully injured. Thing was I think this also happened with Hain last year and then he ended up being away for a while with something undisclosed.

Tough watch isn't it? Gave up a number of hours ago, come back, watched a four heaved over cow, a scurried two then a catch in the ring. Lintott batting but shouldn't be on him.

One difference between this and the Notts game, from what I've seen, is they've mentally lost it as well. What occured to me earlier today is there are just too many unnatural white ball players in the team to look like they have a game plan. I remember Eddie Jones, ex England rugby coach, saying that you need a third season to get the squad you want (first season is effectively just continuing the prior regime). On that basis next year is judgment time on all squad's format. There's been some criticism of Jani and Malik, rightly, but both were recruited as 2nd XI batsmen so there must have been acknowledgement they wouldn't be able to be effective at the top level.

Whether that's the fault of recruitment or the academy I don't know but we do seem to struggle to bring batsmen along and to make them better.