Think they need to win tomorrow. Another draw, a team below us winning then a break of a couple of weeks makes things harder still. Plus we can eat up the defecit with Som in the table. If we bat on it just chews up time. I can't see them getting 4 and quarter runs an over last innings.

On the season more generally, it's quite crucial too. I can live with being below Surrey and Essex, to an extent Hants given their spending, but we're going backwards fast if we finish behind Durham, Notts or Somerset.

Think it needs a full day plus maybe 15 overs to bowl them out again so what's that? 65 odd overs? Could get 225 or so in that time... rain seems OK from BBC forecast. Seems Notts are, shall we say, up against it against a point-to-prove Anderson at Old Trafford.

Anyone know what's going on there? Seems very little rain from BBC radar. Any repeat of the shenanigans last year when they used their outfield as a ploughed field to sow vegetables or owt?

I'm not sure how valid this is, no health professional will be gassing about his patients mental state like this. What I do think is expected is for people to gossip about though and it comes from a logical place. He probably misses all this season now and that will be two full seasons out. It would be rare for an employee anywhere to take two full years off sick. It must have created a terrible mental state for him in that he loses his livelihood once his contract expires. FWIW ai read somewhere it was a chronic condition in whatever part of his body. Couldn't see that it's anything else but career ending.

KingofSpain wrote:

Spot on Andy. I heard from within the club that Norwell's issues are as much mental as physical. He just doesn't trust his body to get through a game. For me, he has to go at the end of the season along with Miles and Rushworth. Let's get some young fit bowlers in.

Don't know if Moeen comes into the Blast after the T20 world cup, if he does I reckon he bats top six for the rest of the season block. Mousley has done nothing wrong with the ball so far, but would like Mo to take some of his overs too. Let the lad focus on his batting. Other than that I don't think much needs to change. I don't think it's in anyone's interests to have Benjamin struggle for six more games.

meashambear wrote:

Not been on for a while but a couple of things to mention on out T20 so far:

1. Our bowling attack is really on point with lots of flexibility, options and threat.
2. It is really nice to see home grown/youth playing key parts with Yates, Haine, Mousley & Bethell in particular of late.
3. I am worried that our batting is not deep enough when we come up against better attacks and that we over rely on Hain, Mousley & Bethel for the bulk of runs. Barnard needs to play in place of Benjamin, giving us another bowling option and with so many all rounders available we could put in another batsman (Burgess?) if we get through to the knockout stages.

Title of the thread still holds true. When he comes back from T20 WC does he play for us in the rest of the Blast? Is he still a Warks player? Or a free agent going from contract to contract?

Interesting that Garton and Gleeson both look crock. That's a winter of recruitment burnt up if they're both injured. Interesting point on Mousley. I think he's clearly got the ability to be a destructive bat in this tournament but seems the club are giving him more and more to do with the ball. That must be affecting his batting - he's still young.

There was an game earlier this season with a similar scenario(can't remember against who) where the risk appetite seemed to be to set 300 in 75 overs - which I think is probably just between those two positions of save the game first then trying to nick it. Its about right to my mind but if we got them out for 150 odd first innings we could be a bit more aggressive.

Couple of interesting points being discussed. If you've made 90 odd second innings it's hard to look any further than this for that defeat. A supporting factor is both the quicks who did the damage first innings were nowhere near as effective second innings and both went for more than four an over. I think we let them off the hook though, both inexperienced. We know out batting has been poor for a number of years now. Its doubly damaging now that this is combined by an increasingly threadbare bowling attack too. Will we see Woakes , Ali and Rushworth play anytime soon?

Indeed. This is precisely the affect in Rugby of higher salaries. Its just about mitigated in cricket through central contracts but it could end up going the same way. I don't think any counties are due to go bust in the short term either.

LeicesterExile wrote:

Simple fact in pretty well all sport - the stars are paid far too much. The result of this is two fold. Clubs seek sponsorship/advertising to cover this cost and suddenly the sponsorship ceases and/or advertising reduces. The other is the cost of admission goes up to such an extent that the average supporter stays away leaving behind the prawn sandwich corporate attendees which again starts to reduce when companies feel the financial squeeze.
My local rugby club (purely amateur) has advised they can get tickets for England v All Blacks next November - cost £149 - others are over £100. Similar happenings in cricket. Football pays its players way too much and that bubble will eventually burst.
Until reality is applied to sport's wages bill things will just get worse.

I virtually never see games live anymore but this seems to be perceived as a big success and I'm minded to agree. I'd normally see all those 20s a d 30s and say they're a bit short but seems a lot of potential collapses were averted. We don't have the strongest attack and Surrey have some good bats back, could be a long time in the field but them batting last could see this being in the balance right the way to the end.

I don't think this is an emergency right now. Its 100 franchises that are being put up for investment. The ownership of these entities I'm not sure of but I'm pretty sure it doesn't all feed through directly into the respective county clubs, ECB will get some if not all of this cash. In theory it could be ringfenced by the 100 entirely. Birmingham Mumbai Indians Phoenix anyone? Yeah I don't care either.

I do agree with the point Ronay seems to be making overall, that it seems a lot of marginal suffering for what seems like greed. I read reabanks financial analysis in depth and the overall situation in cricket is not that horrifying, nothing like the situation in rugby where 4 of of the top 15 pro teams have recently gone bust.

That's the sort of target I had in mind too - though may be hard to set that. 30 overs morning session, needs to be about 4.5 an over? Quickest scoring since day 1. Might be OK with 10 wickets to utilise.

paulbear wrote:

Have to agree, strange angles to watch a game from seeing as it wasn't like that on the first day. Hope we can quickly get to a 200 lead and then the rest of the batsmen must be told to really try and "Give it a whack" and see if we can set them perhaps 280 in 60+ overs. Trouble is though, draw points are worth a lot now so a lot of teams might not be tempted to try and be positive. Essex already have 2 wins and drawing will only leave us and others, a big margin of points behind.

Definitely feel a bit for Burgess but Bethell I wonder about ... I was always under the impression he was a batting all-rounder but is seems the club have the view he's a batman that bowls and behind Yates with the ball. Do we think he's a long term option as a specialist number 5? I'm not sure I do.

Thanks Reabank. I will set this aside to have a full read in the future. Appreciate your analysis. I'm a part-qualified accountant, alas, and can't fully decipher the results from source. So defer to you as the fully-qualified analyst!

That's always a very interesting page on the BBC. Interesting to see how little there is in our section and how much there is in Worcestershire's on the very next entry, the talent they have lost is staggering - especially so they are playing up a division in 2024.

As BosworthBear says I think Warks need to concentrate on their academy players being able to make it into first team this post season while looking at stabilising their performances and playing under pressure. As always there's a space for an overseas, left arm quick would be perfect though I don't think we'll get that.

We could do with another opener. Forgive me if I mispell his name but is it Amir Khan a potential first teamer? Thinking of second team, Billy Godleman is released by Derby and he played for us the end of last year. Wouldn't be surprised if he joined but wouldn't really be excited about it either. Would be a kick for Alex Davies if it happened too,

Right, it's annoying if you're at the ground but in the grand scheme of things irrelevant now Hampshire have won, I guess knocking over four hungover lower order batsmen can be done fairly quickly.

Yes, agree with the sentiment in the previous comments. 3rd or 4th is all on Surrey against Hampshire and althought there is a big difference in those two positions it shouldn't change our assessment of the season. I'd say it has been a good season too, despite the fact there are some things to work on. They as an existing group, without too many new players, need to sort out between themselves and they don't need to rip anything up or start again. It's not a terrible place to be.

Surrey v Hants looks like it's going to end up a nailbiter as well. Which is more than can be said of Essex. If we do win this, and I think that's going to be tough from here, we will be very close to matching Essex and I didn't consider that a possibility until a few hours ago.

Yah, see my comment earlier up the stream about needing 400... Tough ask. It's good to be pushed like this though and the last game was the same re Hants. Appreciate people's comments that the players aren't fussed about 3rd v 4th position but for us hardcore it's a good watch and reflection on the CC.

BosworthBear wrote:

Given the Hampshire position we need 350 minimum here it seems to me.