Interesting to see who's got who to play. Looks like we have the easiest run in and with Lancs losing RR against Yorks looks like a real possibility of second. Second or third means Surrey or Hampshire in the quarters... Not sure what to make of that!

I don't think loads short but definitely could have got more. I don't watch that much any more but was only really Hain and Barnard that looked at ease, everyone else was jittery, which I think was exactly the same comment I made on the CC game at Sussex.

Indeed Bethell in for Yates, Yates was originally in for Moeen and Bethell for Mo is a like-for-like. Yates needs to stay close to the squad though, He will need to sub in for Latham when the latter goes to NZ international duty. Good to see England have finally released Bethell. The hawks are circling with Crawley in the test team and Jacob could stand in here (though unlikely to open) but overall Bethell's next international duty is likely to be the England September white ball games so good to get a tune up now, ahead of the 100.

EDIT - indeed, we still need Yates in the side or not enough batsmen. Either way, good to have Jacob back!

Bethell situation is different to Woakes, Woakes has had a bad knee condition for years, he added pace which cost physical effort and has meant he's needed his loads managing for a while. Bethell I find maddening right now as he has nothing like the stresses on his body. It's looking like he might not play a single test this season, so getting two T20 games in right now probably sets him up well for the 100 and then the England white ball games in September - which he's far more likely to play.

Highest T20 strike rate of any of our top order with the exception of Bethell (who has a smaller sample size). It way well be true to say he isn't performing right now, however. Overall point still holds though, if Mo ain't there we still need a fast scoring batsman.

LeicesterExile wrote:

Post #25 - not sure I understand describing Moeen as an explosive batsman. Since he returned he has done very little to even justify his place and, to me, gives the impression of just turning up for a final pay cheque.
Latham, to me, has been a big disappointment and hardly justifies being selected ahead of Yates.

A lot of posters on here were calling for Mo to be dropped immediatetly so don't think there can be too many complaints on that. Gleeson is a little confusing though, unless he is on graduated return to play or something. Yesterday's side did look very ad-hoc overall, Yates and Latham really shouldn't be playing in the same side and it leaves the top six short of firepower. I get it if Yates will drop in for Latham when Latham leaves (does and will he leave soon??) I think the bowling overall is alright but we are, no matter which way you look at it, an explosive batsman short without Mo. I'm not sure a Bethell return will happen, unfortunately, but that would solve it.

Overall though, I sort of get the feeling that not qualifying for the QFs and having experimented a bit is in line with the clubs ambitions this year. If we sneak 4th, get Hants away and get battered in the QF, it really just continues the run of form that got Robinson sacked. It's just that any experimentation or introduction of academy players this year hasn't really happened, at least successfully, either.

Yeah it was good to see Mouse get a score yesterday. His development was definitely skew whiff in the last year or so. I'd like to see him focus on all format batting and not get too distracted with bowling and hanging around representative squads from here. It's a bit if a problem if, for example, Malik gets rhe five slot in cc rather than our own academy product.

Devon_Bear wrote:

It was an excellent performance last night, some good bowling and sensible batting in the run chase. Young Mousley played a couple of streaky shots early on, but settled down to play a disciplined innings. There's no doubt batting with Hain was a big factor in his this. I would like to see Mousley bat at 5 in the CC, batting in between Hain at 4 & Barnard at 6 would help him no end. I would really like to see him selected for all the remaining CC games this season, he needs a decent run of games instead of playing 2 or 3 & then getting dropped.

I don't think they will play Yates and Latham together unless it's a real emergency, think it more likely they would promote Sheikh, Malik or Jani. Perhaps Yates in the squad as good fielder and for later when Latham is out...

Highveld wrote:

Based on recent form, if Lintott and Hassan Ali play, we need to hope the remaining 3 bowlers go for under 30 each, as Lintott & ali are conceding around 100 runs from their 8 overs.

Also, Yates was dropped from the side after the first game, unless there are many injuries to the other batsmen, there is no viable reason to restore him to the side.

Just a matter of interest, how close are the members to having enough signatures to force a SGM?

Despite our grumbling earlier, I think we're actually well-placed now. On the assumption we don't fall apart and lose here we'll gain ground on Somerset ahead and Durham and Hampshire should be further away below. This morning is a demonstration of why not to the Kook in UK though. Lose any time to the weather and it's a draw. There could have been more results today with full days across the country.

England aren't releasing either Bethell or Archer now. But as comms yesterday put it, there was a named player they had to come in for, in our case it was Malik.

Anyone watching - have Sussex looked in any danger, were they giving any chances?

Mikkyk wrote:

Highveld wrote:

Rushworth needs to be added to the list taking a paid holiday at the clubs expense.

Unchanged test team announced, but non selected players are not being released.
Makes the decision to omit Mousely even more of a mistake.

Agreed, I'd already stated on a different thread that I would expect him to leave at the end of the season - I am now 100% convinced he won't be playing next year. Sadly it seems his body gave up on him over a year ago.

Edit - have we already nominated who Bethell will come in for and if so, can that change for Rushworth?

England aren't releasing either Bethell or Archer now. But as comms yesterday put it, there was a named player they had to come in for, in our case it was Malik.

Anyone watching - have Sussex looked in any danger, were they giving any chances?

Mikkyk wrote:

Highveld wrote:

Rushworth needs to be added to the list taking a paid holiday at the clubs expense.

Unchanged test team announced, but non selected players are not being released.
Makes the decision to omit Mousely even more of a mistake.

Agreed, I'd already stated on a different thread that I would expect him to leave at the end of the season - I am now 100% convinced he won't be playing next year. Sadly it seems his body gave up on him over a year ago.

Edit - have we already nominated who Bethell will come in for and if so, can that change for Rushworth?

Yup,

I was thinking that yesterday. For left arm spin purposes as well. Malik did hit one beautiful off drive but I'm not sure he's really got the temperament for this level. It was him I mainly had in mind when I made the comment about lack of confidence.

(Revisiting this confidence point, I think it totally doesn't apply to Barnard and Hain, who looked very at-ease when batting together).

Highveld wrote:

Commentators have just stated that Malik will be withdrawn if Bethell is released from the test squad.

That will significantly improve the team.

The commentators were talking up Garton and attempting to get him on comms. Didn't speculate, as far as I could hear, about whether he would play in cc though.

Andy wrote:

Didn't notice that. Garton was about though.

Not sure how to reconcile the fact both openers were caught in the deep with the fact they collectively seem very short on confidence.

I give Yates more of an allowance than Davies. Davies clearly had no time to think there but says something about his mindset he instinctively went for that shot. Malik never looked set, neither did Latham but credit to Sussex they have been relentless and have kept adapting. Something I hear we didn't in the last game.

meashambear wrote:

We have gone from 174-1 to 190-4

RR was up at 4.5 ish now plummeting to 3.5 ish

Once again we have allowed the opposition to dictate the pace and tempo of the game

Barnard 6, Kai 7, Bamber 8 isn't it?

Having the rare pleasure of watching this on the stream. Good start in terms of numbers. I haven't watched a lot of these bat this season so far but they do look quite skittish. Do they tend to settle down?

paulbear wrote:

Bamber at 7 and it looks very weak on that front. I would put Roccchi at 7, he didn't look too bad last game. At least, it seems we have made a move that reflects us trying to bowl Sussex out but hope the long tail won't be something we regret.

Good luck starting this off guys. Alas I haven't been a member since early 2000s but would have supported this SGM push.

Agree with all the points above. Mousley and Bethell would make sense to switch, but I can't help feeling Sussex get the better of the deal with a wound-up Archer to come in for half a game, off the leash.

I wonder if the Derby would be outside of pool play?? Something similar in Major League Baseball...

LeicesterExile wrote:

In the Blast a pool of 6 teams would result 10 games not 12.

To make the County Championship meaningful with a better chance of resulting in improved Test side the matches should be played in every month of the season.

Hi Terry, nice coverage. The CC one I find quite interesting, and this "all-in" play-off model I think is a good one to create increasing jeopardy while also ensuring all teams are playing. I make that 13 games for the season - with the potential, I guess, for a 14th game final or relegation / promotion decider which I think might well be the best compromise given the alternative was 12 or even fewer CC games.

OD have explicitly said now is in a holding pattern, I hope this is some step into going further and mandating the involvement of academy players or paradoxically full internationals of county capped players, etc.