Yes it's Stuart Broad. Longevity counts - but not enough for Jimmy Anderson.
I agree about his commentary, he's fitted in very well.

It also shows the rarity - and value - of genuine all-rounders. Jacob Bethell would be well advised to ensure his bowling develops as well as his ability to hit sixes.

Moeen is correct.
Swann has the wickets but not the runs.

It would be asking a lot of him to get there this week but Chris Woakes needs just nine wickets to become only the sixth England player to score 2000 runs and take 200 wickets in Test matches.
The others are guessable (three dead obvious) but interesting how few there have been. So, who are they?

No specialist spinner and 9 of the 11 having first class centuries to their name: I think we're playing for a draw.
Opportunities for Bethell to make his mark there.

Let's not forget that Davies was one of the leading run scorers in the country last year. I've seen him play some daft shots but I've also seen some mature innings. I guess it's a mental thing that probably isn't helped by him being captain. Perhaps Westwood could sell a change of captaincy to Davies on the grounds of it being good for his batting.

KingofSpain wrote:

Rumours that Ben Foakes is leaving Surrey. He would be ideal to fill the gap left by Burgess. Smith is our long term prospect but it's unfair to expect him to continue learning his trade in the spotlight.

Difficult to imagine anyone who would strengthen the squad more. An exceptionally talented glove man; strong county level batter; and available all year as England don't want him and he doesn't get franchise gigs.
Any county would want him so, if he is leaving Surrey, I expect he's already got something lined up.

A little underwhelming. I usually watch at least one Kent game a year (my daughter lives in Canterbury) and he's never registered with me. His stats are less than stellar too.
But at least it shows some effort to refresh our aging seam attack. Let's hope we can develop him - and that he stays fit!

OHD seems like a decent and straightforward bloke but I wonder if the PCA have thought about the players like him who will be getting a nice long rest from Mid-may to end-August every year while the various slogging competitions are on. How long will counties be willing to offer salaries to classical cricketers who are only going to be used for 9 or 10 weeks a year?

white-lightning wrote:

... why couldn't England release Bethell last night to play for us as he's not selected for England at Lords today? He hasn't played for about two weeks now - isn't there a danger of him being a bit rusty if called upon? The ECB prevent our players from playing for the Bears too much!

Yes, this bothers me. Since coming back from injury, Bethell has spent a lot of time not playing for RCB, not playing for England and not playing for Warwickshire. He's lost half a year's development which could be very damaging. England should be desperate to find him a game somewhere.

GerryShedd wrote:

According to the BBC, the 328 balls Rocchiccioli sent down was the most in an innings by a Warwickshire bowler since Ashley Giles bowled 68.3 overs against Yorkshire at Headingley in 1996.

Can I applaud you for spelling the Aussie lad's name correctly and in full? Were you using cut and paste?

Given that Bethell and Archer are expected to be key men in Australia, might it not have made sense to release them to play in a game with a kookaburra ball?

Hose 253 balls. Sibley 301.
Takes all sorts.

I expect Bethell will bat 3 on England orders but I'm not sure that's wise. He hasn't faced a red ball this year and Somerset always have a good crop of seamers, reinforced at the moment by Matt Henry. I'd slot him in at 5.
Somerset's batting is a bit flaky, full of batters who promise more than they deliver. Just as well, given our attack.

I ran out of optimism regarding the County Championship some time ago. Framing the debate in terms of the structure of the CC is a red herring as the real problem is that there is too much hit-and-giggle. The cuckoo in the nest that is The Hundred is continuing its work of eviscerating competition. The proposals for the CC pay little or no attention to any competitive integrity, they are just a way to open up space for more donkey slog.
It's too late now - Money is in control and I pity anyone who thinks they can stand in the way of Money. Might as well be grateful for the few crumbs we are still being fed whilst they are available.

I was wondering whether he had a "p" in his name and was reminded of Tintin where Thompson came with a p "as in psychology" whereas Thomson came without a p "as in Venezuela". This guy follows the psychology route.

He's a class act in limited overs cricket but he's never looked at all impressive with a red ball in his hand. He may well bounce around the franchise circuits for a while and good luck to him.
It leaves a gap - or an opportunity - for a slow bowler who can keep things tight. Are we talking an upskilled Mousley or is it time for Taz Ali?

I'm not a fan of play-offs as a means of determining end of season positions. Presumably the ECB looked at the crowds drawn to Wembley finals in the EFL and thought "Ooh, money!" but I'm not sure that it would translate to cricket well. Whilst the last few Septembers feel like they've had good weather (any thoughts, Exiled Bear?), it is not unknown for the early autumn to be wet leading to drawn games and the need for some artificial way of deciding who "won". A league is a league and the team that has the best record over the year should win it.

Brookes was coming through at the same time as Bethell and Mousley. If you need to ration salaries, you could understand focusing on the latter pair. Only then do you find that they'll hardly ever play for you because England/IPL/Undead keep pinching them. Perhaps we shouldn't be developing the best players?!

I watched the Zimbabwe Test on TV and, for the first time, thought I could see what Stokes and Co see in him. His variation of flight was good and, when he put some action on the ball, it turned sharply.
The problem is that he's raw. Control is lacking so his wickets have tended to be expensive. He's still got a lot to learn and doing that at Test level isn't ideal. So he's in a bit of a bind - any county that takes him on will know that he'll leak runs in limited overs and be whisked off by England at the drop of a hat. Not a great proposition right now.