They give with one hand then they take with another. It's good to see Warwickshire back in the team's title but I note that the home Blast fixtures are listed on the BBC website as being played at EdgBLASTon (sic). I don't know whose idea this was.
Maybe this appeals to the younger folk but I'd be much happier if they just listed the fixtures simply without trying to be clever.

I don't mind finding another word for it but I still think it is valid to question whether a short-term import with no real "investment" in the club is as effective as one might like to think. If we can get a galactico like Maxwell or McCullum then I get it, but Sams? Good, yes but stellar, no.

On the plus side, Sams is a strong player and I'm not going to criticise the club for showing ambition.
On the minus side, I'd have to ask (again) how much we can expect from a mercenary who is probably going to bowl no more than about 40 overs for us before disappearing never to return. Would he even be contracted for the knock-out stages or would he be off to another franchise tournament? We've recruited rather a lot of seam bowlers to the permanent squad now and I might think that we would be better advised to spend management and coaching time - not to mention money - on them.
If he's being targetted as part of a considered strategy, fine. If it's just a case of "here's a player, let's have him" then, no.

Perhaps not a lot - he's not in the 12 for the first Test. I notice, though, that he's signed up for the IPL again. I'm really not sure this is good for his development.

The guy had talent. I saw him play minor counties cricket for Shropshire only a few years back and he smashed 100 in a low scoring game against Devon. One spectator said to me that they might like some of whatever he was taking. I couldn't comment.

Back in the day, there were many enclaves and enclaves of counties but it seems very unlikely that the former Colts Ground was ever in Worcestershire.
The Rea does rise in Worcs so it's possible that it forms the county boundary somewhere upstream, which could give rise to this confusion.

So, Woakes and Barker opening the bowling. Do you think Jeetan Patel fancies a comeback?

Is Chris Martin on that list as well?

Callum MacLeod is another MacCricketer.
And Alex Loudon played one ODI but no Tests.

Very good.
I'll add Dan Mousley for Q1.
Scarborough and Tunbridge Wells are the outgrounds.
Is No 7 Deryck Murray?
As for Scotsmen, I'll start with Jim Allan, Andy Umeed, Freddie Coleman and Dougie Brown.

That's very promising. We have quite a few young and/or mid-career seam bowlers who could learn a lot from Pop. I'm suddenly quite optimistic about next year.

Somewhat one-eyed responses from the PCA: "You won't agree with us so you don't care about player welfare"; and I'm never convinced by those who argue that the way to save cricket is to stop playing it.
We're in transit to a world where franchise cricket is entirely separate from domestic competitions. They could then be played simultaneously with the franchise players having no County affiliations and the domestic players perhaps actually playing some cricket in June, July and August rather than sitting on their backsides and occasionally bowling a few overs in a white ball game. We just have to keep the County Championship going long enough for this split to become clear. Now that vulture capitalists are running The Hundred, I don't think it will be long.

If England want Bethell to prepare for his role in the Ashes, perhaps we should make him 12th man?

Clone Ed Barnard.

He was very much a fixture in the Warwickshire sides I remember from my youth. He also gave a lot back to cricket after his playing career ended, as umpire, pitch inspector and administrator. Sadly missed.

But Chesterfield....

Huge sigh of relief. I was getting scared that his captaincy debut against Ireland could be gruesome, coming off the back of no form. Now he should be full of confidence. Good!

Bad day at the office for England yesterday. It can happen in limited overs cricket but there are, as often, some matters arising in respect of the strategy of England's management.
First, the wicket keeper. Notwithstanding his strong batting, Buttler is, by international standards, a poor keeper. Smith, on the other hand, showed signs that he might become quite decent with the gloves during the India Test series. What he lacks is experience. So, whatever colour the ball might be, why don't you give the bloke you are trying to develop (who is already better than the alternative) a chance to learn a bit more? Why go with yesterday's man?
Then second, I don't mind them having a look at Sonny Baker, who is promising. But was it wise to pitch him in with a captain who is a batter and nobody amongst the bowlers who could mentor him when things started to go wrong? The choices might be limited with Woakes injured and Stokes avoiding 50 over games but maybe in that case you hold Baker back until a wise old head is available.
Neither of these points would have made any difference to yesterday's result, of course. They just add to my worries about England's ability to think strategically.

paulbear wrote:

Well, we need a strong side and as we will have our players back from The Hundread so we should be alright to put out a full strength side.

I'd have Sam Hain and Danny Briggs back but Bethell will be with England and I'm not sure that Mousley merits a place ahead of, say, Shaikh. Who's available from the Overseas players?

ExiledBrummie wrote:

They're all determined to win this game in less than 30 overs, ridiculous.

Maybe they've got their eye on the Net Run Rate - could be crucial. Still need to win the game, of course.